Comparative Characterization in the Sermon on the Mount: Characterization of the Ideal Disciple

By Arren Bennet Lawrence

The Sermon on the Mount contains many comparisons. In this book, the functions of these comparisons are studied by the methodology called comparative characterization. Characterization is the way a character is characterized in a narrative. Comparative characterization is the characterization of a character using comparisons. In comparative characterization, another character is used as a foil to bring out a characteristic trait of a concerned character. Jesus characterized the ideal disciple in the Sermon on the Mount with many descriptions and imperatives. To characterize the ideal disciple Jesus used many comparisons and highlighted the characteristic features that embody the ideal disciple.

The many comparisons used in the Sermon on the Mount are identified in this study through comparative characterization. In addition, the teleological purpose of the comparisons, which is to play as foil to the characterization of the ideal disciple, is identified and highlighted. Thus, this study identifies Jesus' characterization of the ideal disciple and his complex portrayal of the ideal disciple with the many uses of comparisons in the descriptions and imperatives of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Release date: Mar 24, 2017
• ISBN: 9781532613524

Book preview

9781532613517.kindle.jpg

Comparative Characterization in the Sermon on the Mount

Characterization of the Ideal Disciple

Arren Bennet Lawrence

28653.png

Comparative Characterization in the Sermon on the Mount

Characterization of the Ideal Disciple

Copyright ©

2017

Arren Bennet Lawrence. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permissions, Wipf and Stock Publishers,

199

W.

8

th Ave., Suite

3

, Eugene, OR

97401

.

Wipf & Stock

An Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers

199

W.

8

th Ave., Suite

3

Eugene, OR

97401

www.wipfandstock.com

paperback isbn: 978-1-5326-1351-7

hardcover isbn: 978-1-5326-1353-1

ebook isbn: 978-1-5326-1352-4

Manufactured in the U.S.A.

April 10, 2017

Table of Contents

Title Page

Preface

Acknowledgments

Abbreviations

Chapter 1: Comparative Characterization as a Methodology to Interpret the Comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount

1.1 The Role of Comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount

1.2 The Importance of Comparison in the Study of the Sermon on the Mount

1.3 Comparative Characterization: A Methodology

1.4 Definition of Terms

1.4.1 Characterization

1.4.2 Foil

1.4.3 Comparative Characterization

1.4.4 Ideal Disciple

1.5 The Use of Comparative Characterization

1.6 The Significance of Comparative Characterization

Chapter 2: Sermon on the Mount in Literature

2.1 Justin Martyr

2.2 Irenaeus

2.3 Tertullian

2.4 Augustine of Hippo

2.5 John Chrysostom

2.6 Thomas Aquinas

2.7 Martin Luther

2.8 John Calvin

2.9 Anabaptists

2.10 Robert Barclay

2.11 Leo Tolstoy

2.12 Mahatma Gandhi

2.13 Johannes Weiss

2.14 Albert Schweitzer

2.15 Martin Dibelius

2.16 C. H. Dodd

2.17 W. D. Davies

2.18 Stephen Westerholm

2.19 Conclusion

Chapter 3: Narrative Criticism in New Testament

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Literary Criticism

3.3 Narrative Criticism

3.3.1 Narrator

3.3.2 Point of View

3.3.3 Narrative and Dialogue

3.3.4 Repetition

3.3.5 Leitwort

3.3.6 Allusions

3.3.7 Characters

3.3.8 Characterization

3.4 Conclusion

Chapter 4: Comparative Characterization as a Methodology to Interpret Matthew 5–7

4.1 Introduction

4.2 Characters

4.3 Characterization

4.3.1 Use of Foil Characters in Literature

4.3.2 Comparative Characterization in the Hebrew Bible

4.3.3 Comparisons in Greco-Roman Literature

4.3.4 Comparison in Rhetoric

4.4 Synkrisis

4.5 Conclusion

4.5.1 Comparative Characterization in Praxis

Chapter 5: Characterization of the Ideal Disciple in Matthew 5:1–16

5.1. Introduction

5.2 Sermon on the Mount as Characterizing the Ideal Disciple

5.3 Beatitudes as Characterizing the Ideal Disciple

5.3.1. Blessed are the Poor in Spirit

5.3.2. Blessed are the Mourners

5.3.3 Blessed are the Meek

5.3.4 Blessed are the Hungry and Thirsty for Righteousness

5.3.5. Blessed are the Merciful

5.3.6. Blessed are the Pure in Heart

5.3.7 Blessed are the Peacemakers

5.3.8 Blessed are the Persecuted

5.4 Salt and Light

5.4.1 You are the Salt of the Earth

5.4.2 You are the Light of the World

5.5 Conclusion

Chapter 6: Comparative Characterization in Matthew 5:17–48

6.1 Introduction

6.2 Characterizations in Matt 5:17–20

6.2.1 The Interpretation of πληρῶσαι

6.2.2 Law Abiding Ideal Disciple (5:18–20)

6.2.3 The Law and the Ideal Disciple (5:19–20)

6.3 Jesus, the Law and the Antitheses (5:21–48 )

6.3.1 Are the Antitheses Anti-theses?

6.3.2 Jesus’ Interpretation vs. Pharisaic and Scribal Interpretation

6.3.3 Murder vs. Anger

6.3.4 Adultery vs. Lust

6.3.5 Divorce vs. No Divorce

6.3.6 Vows and Oaths

6.3.7 Eye for an Eye vs. Do not Resist

6.3.8 Love your Neighbors vs. Love your Enemies

6.4 Jesus vs. Teachers of Judaisms of His Time

6.4.1 Teacher of Righteousness and the Law

6.4.2 Rabbi Hillel and the Law

6.4.3 Building Fence Around the Torah

6.5 Conclusion

Chapter 7: Comparative Characterization in Matthew 6:1—7:29

7.1 Introduction

7.2 Beware of Practicing Righteousness (6:1–34)

7.2.1 Not Giving Alms before Men like the Hypocrites (6:1–4)

7.2.2 Not Praying before People like the Hypocrites (6:5–6)

7.2.3 Not Praying with Meaningless Words like the Gentiles (6:7–15)

7.2.4 Not Fasting before Men like the Pharisees (6:16–18)

7.2.5 Not Storing on Earth but in Heaven (6:19–23)

7.2.6 Not Serving Money like Gentiles but God (6:24–34)

7.3 Comparisons and Their Function in Matthew 7 (7:1–29)

7.3.1 Not Judging Others like the Hypocrites (7:1–6)

7.3.2 Asking like a Child to Receive (7:7–12)

7.3.3 Final Comparisons and Entering the Narrow Gates (7:12–27)

7.4 Conclusion

Chapter 8: Comparative Characterization of the Ideal Disciple in the Sermon on the Mount and Its Implications

8.1 Introduction

8.2 Significance of Comparative Characterization in the Sermon on the Mount

8.2.1 Comparative Characterization in the Beatitudes (5:1–16)

8.2.2 Comparative Characterization in the Antitheses (5:17–48)

8.2.3 Comparative Characterization in Matt 6–7

8.3 Conclusion

Bibliography

To my wife, Joyce, for her many sacrifices

And to my daughter, Netanya

Preface

My interest in writing this book began with my interest in literary criticism, narrative criticism, and the topic of the Law in the New Testament. Primarily I was working on Jesus’ teaching on the Law in the Sermon on the Mount. Further, I began my research in identifying why the author was writing about the Law. Later, I moved to study on how the author was writing about it. Through this I identified that the author keeps the teaching on the Law (5:17–48) in a broader framework where he characterizes the ideal disciple in Matt 5–7. The idea of chratacterization of the ideal disciple fascinated me. As I was already interested in narrative criticism I began to work on characterization in the Sermon on the Mount. I realized that there are many comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount. Comparisons were not widely used in the study on characterization. Thus, I wanted to do a research on the function of the comparisons in the characterization of the ideal disciple in the Sermon on the Mount.

The Sermon on the Mount contains many comparisons. In this study, the functions of these comparisons are identified by the methodology called comparative characterization. Characterization is nothing but the way a character is characterized in a narrative. Comparative characterization is the characterization of a character using comparisons. In comparative characterization, another character is used as a foil to bring out a characteristic trait of a concerned character. Thus, comparative characterization identifies the functions of the comparisons in the characterization.

Jesus characterized the ideal disciple in the Sermon on the Mount with many descriptions and imperatives. To characterize the ideal disciple Jesus used many comparisons and highlighted the characteristic features that embody the ideal disciple. Jesus described who this ideal disciple is in the beatitudes by descriptions such as the one who is poor in the spirit, and also as the one who possesses the kingdom of heaven, etc. (5:3 & 10). Interestingly here, Jesus used comparisons of who this ideal disciple is in the present world and also who this ideal disciple is in the light of the kingdom of heaven. Thus, the present state of the ideal disciple is compared with the blessedness of the ideal disciple in the kingdom perspective. This brings a complex portrayal of the ideal disciple. Therefore, comparative characterization yields in understanding the characterization of the ideal disciple in the Sermon on the Mount.

While the comparisons such as You have heard that . . . But I say to you . . . in 5:17–48 were considered as antitheses by many a closer look at the comparisons show that Jesus was not giving a new law in 5:17–48 and thus, he was not portraying the ideal disciple as an antinomian. Jesus used the comparisons as foils to highlight how the ideal disciple should obey the Law in 5:21–48. Similarly, in Matt 6, Jesus characterized the ideal disciple as the one who practices the acts of righteousness such as giving alms, praying, and fasting sincerely unlike the hypocrites and gentiles who do them ostentatiously to please men. The comparisons with the hypocrites and gentiles function as foils to characterize the ideal disciple. In addition, through the many comparisons in Matt 7, Jesus shows how the ideal disciple should live using comparisons as the one who does not worry about the essentials of life, such as what to eat, what to drink and what to wear but as the one who lives with trust and dependency in God (as in 6:33).

The many comparisons used in the Sermon on the Mount are identified in this study through comparative characterization. In addition, the teleological purpose of the comparisons which is to play as foil to the characterization of the ideal disciple is identified and highlighted in this study of the comparisons and their functions in the Sermon on the Mount. Thus, this study of comparative characterization in the Sermon on the Mount identifies Jesus’ characterization of the ideal disciple and his complex portrayal of the ideal disciple with the many uses of comparisons in the descriptions and imperatives of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount.

Acknowledgments

This book is an updated version of my Ph.D dissertation called, Comparative Characterization as a Methodology to Interpret the Comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount. First of all, I am deeply indebted to thank Dr. Joseph Shao for his immense encouragement to complete my Ph.D. I must thank Biblical Seminary of the Philippines, Asia Graduate School of Theology and Dr. Theresa Lua for their helps rendered during my study. My heartfelt gratitude is also due to Paulien, Anton and Boaz friends for their continual support. I also must thank Dr. Charles and Sherry Quinley. Without their initiative I wouldn’t have started my Ph.D program. I must also express my gratitude to Uncle David West who encouraged me to go for higher studies in theology. I must also thank Ptr. Sungwon for his continual support which helped me continue my Ph.D studies. I am grateful to Uncle Bhagi Mirpuri who was a great support while I was doing this research. I am indebted to Dr. Edwin Perona, who constantly encouraged me during my research. In addition, I am also thankful to Dr. Kenneth Fox and Dr. Edgar Ebojo for their valuable suggestions which made this manuscript a better one.

I would like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to Dr. Michael Malessa for his valuable suggestions. I must thank Revathi Bout for reading the whole manuscript and copyediting it which obviously made it better in many ways. In spite of all these I take full responsibilities for any mistakes still found. I must also thank Wipf and Stock for their willgness to publish this book. Especially I am indebted to Matthew Wimer and Brian Palmer for their continual help in making this manuscript ready for print. They patiently answered my many queries and helped me in making this book come to reality.

Special thanks are due to my loving wife, Joyce for the many contributions she made towards the completion of my research; may it be by giving me the time and freedom to work on the manuscript or by typing the many pages of this book. My gratitude is due also to my parents, M. S. Lawrence and Selvamani Lawrence for their constant love and encouragements. In addition, I am thankful to my daughter, Netanya for giving me the space and time to complete my requirements, and for understanding that even the grownup-dad needs to finish his homework. Soli Deo Gloria!

Abbreviations

Old Testament

Gen Genesis

Exod Exodus

Lev Leviticus

Num Numbers

Deut Deuteronomy

Josh Joshua

Judg Judges

Ruth Ruth

1–2 Sam 1–2 Samuel

1–2 Kgs 1–2 Kings

1–2 Chr 1–2 Chronicles

Ezra Ezra

Neh Nehemiah

Esth Esther

Job Job

Ps/Pss Psalms

Prov Proverbs

Eccl Ecclesiastes

Song Song of Songs

Isa Isaiah

Jer Jeremiah

Lam Lamentations

Ezek Ezekiel

Dan Daniel

Hos Hosea

Joel Joel

Amos Amos

Obad Obadiah

Jonah Jonah

Mic Micah

Nah Nahum

Hab Habakkuk

Zeph Zephaniah

Hag Haggai

Zech Zechariah

Mal Malachi

New Testament

Matt Matthew

Mark Mark

Luke Luke

John John

Acts Acts

Rom Romans

1–2 Cor Corinthians

Gal Galatians

Eph Ephesians

Phil Philippians

Col Colossians

1–2 Thess 1–2 Thessalonians

1–2 Tim 1–2 Timothy

Titus Titus

Phlm Philemon

Heb Hebrews

Jas James

1–2 Pet 1–2 Peter

1–3 John 1–3 John

Jude Jude

Revelation Revelation

Other Books

1 Apol. Justin Martyr, First Apology

1QM War Scroll

1QpMic Pesher Micah

1QpPs Pesher Psalms

1QpZeph Pesher Zephaniah

1QH Thanksgiving Hymns

1QS Rule of the Congregation

1–2 Macc 1–2 Maccabees

3–4 Macc 3–4 Maccabees

3QpIsa Pesher Isaiah

4QpHos Pesher Hosea

4QpNah Pesher Nehamiah

A.J. Josephus, Antiquitates Judaicae

CD The Damascus Document,

Ep. Seneca, Epistulae Morales

Haer. Irenaeus, Against Heresies

Hom. Matt. Chrysostom, Homiliae Matthaeum

Inst. Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria

Inv. Cicero, de Inventione rhetorica

J.W. Josephus, Jewish Wars

JSOT Journal of the Study of the Old Testament

JSOPTSup Journal of the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series

LXX Septuagint

m. Šabb. Mishnah Shabbat

Marc. Tertullian, Against Marcion

Metam. Apuleius, Metamorphoses

Mor. Plutarch, Moralia

NAU New American Standard Bible Updated (1996)

NIV New International Version

Part. or. Cicero, Partitiones oratoria

QpHab Pesher Habakkuk

Rhet. Aristotle, Rhetoric

Serm. Dom. Augustine, De Sermone Domini in Monte

Sir Sirach

Sifre Deut Sifre Deuteronomy

T. Iss Testament of Issachar

Tob. Tobit

Top. Aristotle, Topica

’Avot R. Nat. Avot of Rabbi Nathan

Chapter 1

Comparative Characterization as a Methodology to Interpret the Comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount

The Sermon on the Mount has been an important document in the history of Christianity. Luke Timothy Johnson says, In the history of Christian thought—indeed in the history of those observing Christianity—the Sermon on the Mount has been considered an epitome of the teaching of Jesus and therefore, for many, the essence of Christianity.¹ In addition, W. D. Davies highlights the importance of the Sermon on the Mount in these words: some have seen in it the finest statement of the highest ethic that mankind has known.² The Sermon on the Mount gives the essence of Jesus’ teaching in three chapters, Matt 5, 6 and 7. However, though it is an important document of Christianity, it was not accepted and understood by all in the same way. Claurence Bauman says, The Sermon on the Mount is the most important and most controversial biblical text.³ John Stott adds, The Sermon on the Mount is probably the best known part of the teaching of Jesus, though arguably it is the least understood, and certainly it is the least obeyed.⁴ One of the reasons for the complexities of the Sermon on the Mount is its comparisons.

Many comparisons are found in the Sermon on the Mount. While some are explicit others are subtle. The following are some of the verses where the comparisons come to the fore in Matt 5–7:

Many questions arise with the number of comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount: Why did Matthean Jesus use so many comparisons in this Sermon? Why did Matthean Jesus use the comparisons while he was teaching about the way in which the disciples should live? These questions are highlighted when we see how the interpreters of the Sermon on the Mount interpret this literature.

For John Stott, comparisons are an essential part of the Sermon on the Mount. He says, To me the key text in the Sermon on the Mount is Matt 6:8: ‘Do not be like them.’⁵ Comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount call for difference in the disciples from the others. Comparisons call for repentance and to be different from the others. John Stott shows the importance of comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount in these words: There is no single paragraph of the Sermon on the Mount where this contrast between Christian and non-Christian standards is not drawn. It is the underlying and uniting theme of the sermon; everything else is a variation of it. Sometimes it is the Gentiles or pagan nations with which Jesus contrasts his followers. At other times he contrasts them with Jews.⁶ One must take note of these words: comparisons are the underlying and uniting theme of the Sermon on the Mount. This is how comparisons are important in the Sermon on the Mount. Therefore, this study is about comparisons and their function in the Sermon on the Mount.

1.1 The Role of Comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount

Comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount could function as a key in understanding Jesus’ characterization of the ideal disciple. The research question of this study is this: what is the function of the comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount? Could the comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount function as a key to understand Jesus’ characterization of the ideal disciple? Jesus uses many comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount. In addition, Jesus also portrays how a disciple should live. This portrayal is done in several ways. In the first part, in 5:1–16, Jesus describes who his disciple is. Jesus describes the disciple as the one who is blessed. In addition, this blessed disciple is the one who is poor in spirit (v.3), the one who mourns (v.4), who is gentle (v.5), who hungers and thirsts for righteousness (v.6), who is merciful (v.7), who is pure in heart (v.8), and the one who is a peacemaker (v.9). Through these descriptions Jesus describes who this ideal disciple is in 5:1–16.

Moreover, from 5:17–48, Jesus compares his teachings with the Old Testament Law and teaches how the disciple must obey the Law in a better way. The comparisons are obvious in his formula such as, you have heard the ancients were told, Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις, but "I tell you . . . ," ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν (5:21, 22). These comparisons were considered by many to be contrasting comparisons as Jesus is considered giving antithetical teachings to the Old Testament. However, a closer look into the function of these comparisons shows that Jesus’ teaching concentrates on how the ideal disciple should obey the Law better than the ones who obey the Law as ‘they have heard from the ancients.’ Apart from this, Jesus includes several other comparisons which indicates how the disciple should greet (5:47); give alms (6:2); pray (6:5, 7); fast (6:16); and handle money (6:19), etc.

Through these comparisons, Jesus wants to show how the ideal disciple should behave in particular situations. In addition, in these teachings Jesus compares this ideal disciple with how the hypocrites, Pharisees, and Gentiles and tax collectors behave. Thus, comparisons in Sermon on the Mount have an important function in the characterization of the ideal disciple..

Comparisons are common in literature and especially in characterization. Foil characters are used to illuminate the characteristic traits of a desired character in a narrative. Saul in the books of Samuels functions as a foil to David, as he brings out the good characteristic traits of David. While Saul frequently tries to kill David, David spares King Saul, though God handed Saul over to David in Engedi (1 Sam 24) and Hachilah (1Sam 26). Saul is then compared with David to bring out the good characteristic traits of David as the merciful king. This method of characterization is called as comparative characterization in this study. As Jesus uses comparisons to elucidate how an ideal disciple should live in the Sermon on the Mount could comparative characterization be used as a method to interpret the Sermon on the Mount? This will be the enquiry of this study.

1.2 The Importance of Comparison in the Study of the Sermon on the Mount

The comparisons in 5:21–48, You have heard that the ancients were told, . . . But I say to you, Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις . . . ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν are called as antitheses. Antithesis is contrast, or an opposition. Matt 5:21–48 are called antitheses because of the assumption that Jesus contrasts his teaching with the teachings of the Pharisees.⁷ Daniel Harrington says, Christians often overemphasize the difference between the Old Testament teachings quoted in the first part of the antithesis and Jesus’ instruction in the second part. They talk about the opposition between the Law and the gospel, or refer to the ‘new law’ promulgated by Jesus.⁸ This indeed is true in the many interpretations of the Sermon on the Mount.

The teachings or antitheses in 5:21–48 are identified as Jesus undoing the old law and giving his disciples new laws to follow. To this extent, many scholars have penned. It is good to draw on a few of their conclusions found in Jules Isaac’s Jesus and Israel.⁹ Isaac quotes a few of them, which are important to understand the perspective of this school of thought. Ernest Renan says:

. . . all these old Jewish institutions . . . An idea . . . that henceforth seemed rooted in his mind was that there was no possible pact with the old Jewish cult. The abolition of the sacrifices that had caused him such disgust, the suppression of an impious and haughty priesthood, and in general the abrogation of the Law appeared to be of absolute necessity to him. From this moment on, his chosen role was no longer as a Jewish reformer but as a destroyer of Judaism . . . In other words, Jesus was no longer Jewish . . . The Law would be abolished, and he would be the one to abolish it.¹⁰ [Emphasis mine]

In addition, Edmond Stapfer says: "Up till now, [Jesus] had been a Jewish reformer; henceforth he would be the destroyer of Judaism . . . He was convinced that he would abolish the Law of Moses . . . Mosaism was dead, it had only to disappear."¹¹ Maurice Goguel says: "Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem ended in a break with Judaism . . . It was the accomplishment of the Law . . . which led Jesus to discover that the role of the Law and the prophets . . . had been outlived, and that a new era had opened in the history of religion.¹² Father Albert Vincent says: There was . . . an abrogation of everything that constituted the specificity of Judaism and gave it an essentially transitory character. This is what Christianity teaches: Jesus Christ abrogated the Law"¹³ [emphasis mine].

Notice the last statement of Vincent: This is what Christianity teaches: Jesus Christ abrogated the Law. How could he derive such a statement when Jesus himself in 5:17 mentioned that he did not come "to abolish the Law or the Prophets"? This shows the complications involved in the interpretation of the Sermon on the Mount. If the comparisons in Matt 5:21–48 are understood as antithetical then one could also assume that Jesus abrogated the Law. However, if the comparisons are not antithetical then Jesus would not have abrogated the law. Thus, the main concern of this study is this, how do comparisons function in the Sermon on the Mount.

Therefore, in this study, comparative characterization is used to identify how these comparisons function in the Sermon on the Mount. If comparisons in 5:21–48 are taken out of the context, without taking 5:1—7:29 in to considerations, or even without 5:17–20, one could come up with the statement that Jesus abrogated the Law. However, when these comparisons in 5:21–48 are studied with the other comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount in their overall function of the characterization of the ideal disciple, a different canvas appears and the caricatures of the antithetical teachings of Jesus fade out but the imperatives on how an ideal disciple should live unlike the Pharisees and gentiles are stressed. The question then lies in the understanding of the functions of these comparisons. If these comparisons are considered as antitheses then they must be seen as contrasting comparisons. However, if these comparisons are not antithetical then they must have other functions. This is an important query of this study. In literary techniques, comparisons function as foil to highlight the characteristic traits of a concerned character. Thus, the query of this study is this: Do the comparisons function as contrasting comparisons, antithetical or as foils in the Sermon on the Mount, Matt 5:3—7:27?

The purpose of this study is to interpret Matt 5:3 to 7:27 in the light of comparative characterization to elucidate Jesus’ characterization of the ideal disciple over and against the characterization of the Pharisees, Scribes and the Gentiles. This study will concentrate only on Matt 5:3—7:27 and will look at the comparisons made by Jesus and identify their functions in the comparative characterization in an endeavor to highlight the portrayal of the ideal disciple. In order to do this, the methodology will be explained first, which is called as comparative characterization. Thus, in explaining the comparative characterization narrative criticism and literary criticism will be explained in chapters 3 & 4. After this, the methodology of comparative characterization will be applied in the text of Matt in 5:3 to 7:27 in chapters 5, 6 & 7. Using comparative characterization, the text in concern will be studied to bring out the functions of the comparisons in the characterization of the ideal disciple.

1.3 Comparative Characterization: A Methodology

This study as a whole is about the usage of the new methodology called comparative characterization to interpret the Sermon on the Mount. Comparative characterization is part of narrative criticism, which in turn is a part of literary criticism. One of the important presuppositions and contributions of the literary criticism is its emphasis on treating the literature as a whole. Literary criticism stressed that the Bible is literature and thus the methodologies used to read other literature must also be applied in the studying of Scripture.¹⁴ This involved studying letters as letters (as Greco-Roman letters), narratives as narratives, historical writings as historical writings, etc. This stress on the treatment of the Bible as literature brought forth several other methodologies such as narrative criticism, which treats narratives in the Bible as narratives, and rhetorical criticism, which reads the New Testament writings in light of the Greco-Roman rhetoric, etc. Though narrative criticism was widely used in the interpretation of the Old Testament it gained momentum in the interpretation of the New Testament in recent decades.¹⁵ Narrative portions of the New Testament were read as narratives using narrative elements such as plots, conventions, Lietwort (keyword), motif, dialogues and speeches, repetitions, and characterization, etc.¹⁶ In these elements of narrative criticism this study is more concerned with characterization.

Characterization is nothing but an element in narrative criticism which identifies how a character in a narrative is characterized.¹⁷ To characterize a character sometimes another character or a group was used and compared to bring out certain characteristic traits of the concerned character.¹⁸ This character is called a foil. In most cases, foils are used as antagonist to the protagonist to bring out concerned characteristic traits of the protagonist. This kind of characterization is done by the use of comparisons. This method of characterization is called as comparative characterization in this study. While characterization could be done by the description of the character or through the descriptions of the actions of the character or by the direct speech of the character or through the speech by others, in comparative characterization, characterization is done by the use of comparisons.

One important aspect of comparative characterization is its teleological purpose. Why is a particular character kept as a foil to the concerned character? Why is a particular incident kept as a foil? Why is a particular characteristic trait kept as a foil to the characteristic trait of the concerned character? These questions bring the teleological purpose of the presence of the foil to fore. The mere presence of a longer line adjacent to a shorter line makes the shorter line shorter. Without the presence of the longer line the shorter line would not be considered shorter. Thus, comparisons bring out certain characteristic features of the thing it is compared with. A particular foil is used in a particular setting concerning a particular characteristic trait so that this foil would bring out the particular characteristic trait of the concerned character. For example, Saul is kept as a foil against David, who tried to kill David frequently, to bring out the merciful characteristic traits of David, who in fact withdrew himself from killing Saul in Engedi (1 Sam 24) and in Hachilah (1 Sam 26). Thus, the comparative characterization identifies the teleological purpose of the use of comparisons to identify the characteristic trait(s) that the comparisons bring forth from the characterization of the concerned character. Thus, this comparative characterization is used to interpret the function of the comparisons in the Sermon on the Mount and its teleological purpose(s). In this study, the teleological purpose of the comparisons will be studied with the concentration on their function in characterizing the ideal disciple to highlight several characteristic traits.

1.4 Definition of Terms

Few terms are important to this study and thus must be defined. They are characterization, foil, comparative characterization and ideal disciple. The definitions are as follows:

1.4.1 Characterization

Characterization is nothing but the art of presenting a character in a narrative.¹⁹ It is a process by which a character is revealed by the narrator in a narration. Adele Berlin says, that the reader gets to know a character from the information provided to him [or her] in the discourse: he [or she] is told by the statements and evaluations of the narrator and other characters, and he [or she] infers from the speech and action of the character himself.²⁰ The author characterizes a character by giving enough information and thus the character gets life in the story. For example, Jesus is characterized as a compassionate person in Mark 1:41, as he, it was told, was moved with compassion looking at the leper and healed him. He was characterized as a good friend who would cry when he lost his friend, Lazarus in John 11:35. Jesus was characterized as zealous and devout Temple-lover in John 2:14–17. Thus, a character is characterized in a story by the depictions portrayed by the author. In this study, in the direct speech of the Sermon on the Mount: 5:3—7:27, Jesus is the one who characterizes how the ideal disciple is to live. Thus, Jesus characterizes the ideal disciple in the Sermon on the Mount. This would be one of the major concentrations of this study.

1.4.2 Foil

Foil is a category of character in a narrative. A foil’s main purpose is to stand in contrast to another character or group to bring out certain qualities of that particular character or group. Thus, A character in a work who, by sharp contrast, serves to stress and highlight the distinctive temperament of the protagonist is termed a foil.²¹ Foil is technically a thin sheet of bright metal placed under a jewel to bring out the qualities of the jewel.²² Howard Suber says, Foil characters exist to fulfill a particular need of the story, which is usually to reveal something about, not about the foil but about the central character.²³ James L. Resseguie adds, A foil may also illuminate the deficient qualities of groups of characters.²⁴ By this he means that a certain character could stand as a foil or contrast to a group to show certain characteristic traits of the group. For example, the poor widow who gave all that she had in a self-less act was a foil against the many, who had more money but did not have that selfless trait (Mk 12:42–44). The women who were present at the cross were kept as foil in contrast to the coward men disciples who were in hiding (Lk 23:27).²⁵ The definition of the terms, characterization and foil, leads to the next term called comparative characterization.

1.4.3 Comparative Characterization

Comparative Characterization is nothing but the method of characterization which involves using foil character(s) to characterize a character or a group. In many instances, to identify a character as good the author would introduce a bad or worse character to be compared with it, so that the character in concern would be portrayed as being better. Evidences for this can be seen in many literary works. In Les Miserables, the goodness of Jean Valjean is seen by his comparison with the strict Inspector Javert.²⁶ In the Bible, the kindness of Joseph is seen by his comparison with his cruel brothers who sold him to slavery in Egypt (Gen 45). The mercifulness of David is seen by his comparisons with the cruelty of Saul. The godliness of Elisha is shown by his comparisons with the ungodliness of Ahaz and Jezebel (1 Kgs 16–18). Thus, comparison is an effective tool in characterization. Therefore, comparative characterization is nothing but a characterization that involves comparisons to portray or show certain characteristic traits of the concerned character.

1.4.4 Ideal