8/3/2019 pesce6

1/2

Mauro Pesce and Adrianna Desto,Encounters with Jesus: The Man in His Place and Time.Fortress Press, 2011.

Chapter Six

If the aim of Jesus was to encounter people where they were and to minister to them then it

only stands to reason that his physical presence was extremely important. But what kind ofpresence was it? Thats the question addressed here.

First, though, they have to debunk some general misunderstandings. Namely,

we must not project onto him the mind-body dualism that is typical of one

tendency in ancient and modern philosophy In the Synoptic Gospels, the

Greek noun psyche (soul) does not indicate the soul as a spiritual and immortal

substance separate from the body, but the life of the person in its entirety. And with regard to life beyond this earth, we should not forget that resurrection

concerns not the immortality of the soul but the revivification of the body (p.

130).

That last sentence is very important indeed. Regardless of what many moderns may wish to

think about the subject of the resurrection there is simply no doubt that for Jesus and his

contemporaries resurrection meant revivification.

P. and D. go on to discuss the family lineage of Jesus as described in Matthew and his fourteen

generation schema and insist that

According to calculations that were widespread in various religious groups at that

time, this meant that Jesus was situated at the beginning of the final period ofhuman history (p. 133).

The fact that the Gospel writers never describe Jesus physical appearance stems from the fact

that none of them had ever seen him and that they simply would have seen him as similar toeveryone else.

The chapter also discusses Jesus relationship to the crowds (who strive to touch him).

The aim of the crowds was contact with Jesus (p. 145).

But why? Fascinatingly, P. and D. suggest that the crowd wanted physical contact with himbecause

Jesus body possessed healing power (p. 151).

8/3/2019 pesce6

2/2

And

The power that dwells in the body of the thaumaturge is transmitted to the weak

and imperfect body and cancels its imperfection (p. 152).

Which is exactly why parents brought their young children to Jesus. Not because they were

sick, but as a means of ensuring the protective power which contact with Jesus meant.

However P. and D. make a mistake when, in connection with the story of Jesus transfiguration

(Mt 17:1-9) they write

Taken together, the changed face and the splendid garments bestow an

unequivocal individuality on his entire person

This is not actually correct and their interpretation fails to take into account the fact that Matthewis here portraying Jesus as the New Moses who in a sense- receives at the transfiguration the

mantles of both Moses and Elijah. Like Moses, Jesus face is transformed by his encounter with

God on a mountain and like Elijah was to be heeded the people of God (the disciples) are to hearand heed what Jesus says. Hence the transfiguration isnt a demonstration of Jesus

unequivocal individuality it is a demonstration of his completion of the work of Moses and

Elijah.

It seems, then, that P. and D. have forgotten the Old Testament here and so misread Matthew s

intention.

There remains yet one chapter to review: Chapter 7, Jesus and Emotion. Thats next.

Jim West

Quartz Hill School of Theology