Corpus-Paul

[George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>]

On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 19:17:40 EST LeeEdgarTyler AT aol.com writes:

In a message dated 2/6/2005 1:51:40 P.M. Central Standard Time, jdemail AT charter.net writes:

Apologies for a low-brow question: I have regarded the explanations such as
the following basically as homiletical "urban legends." Would someone kindly
correct me if I'm wrong.

Thanks

James Ernest
jdemail AT charter.net

--------------------------------------------------
begin quote from a website that cites Light through an Easter Window by
Bishop K. C. Pillai:

Romans 12: 20 -- Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst,
give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.

To us this verse sounds like it might be some sort of revenge to take on
your enemies. Dumping hot coals on someone's head sounds pretty serious, but
in Eastern life it meant something quite different. In the village, not all
households were equipped to start a fire in the morning. A woman who had a
flint would start a fire, and she would place hot coals on a shard of
pottery. Her young son would take the pottery and place it on his head, then
go from house to house in the village, sharing the coals so everyone could
have a fire. On those cold mornings, the boy was warmed by the coals he
carried on his head. This verse is telling us that our actions towards our
enemies should 'warm them' and is stressed more clearly in the next verse.

Hello, James,

 

I found this interesting and brought it up with my wife, who's a specialist in the role of women in antiquity.  The fact is that households did not start fires in the morning but rather kept embers alive overnight and then placed kindling on them, gave them a few puffs to get a flame, and then added whatever fuel was appropriate.  Of course if your embers went out during the night you'd have to bum a light from your neighbor, but the notion of people relying a kid running around town every morning like a paperboy is right out the window.

 

As a matter of common sense, carrying coals on a potshard on top of your head would not warm you, what with heat rising as it does and all.  It would, however, burn off your hair and then start on the skin on the bit of your scalp that came into contact with the hot pottery. 

 

I refrain from theological speculation as to Paul's meaning, but Bishop Pillai's explanation has to be consigned to the urban legend heap.

 

best,

 

Ed Tyler

 

_______________

 

20 ἀλλὰ ἐὰν πεινᾷ ὁ ἐχθρός σου, ψώμιζε αὐτόν· ἐὰν διψᾷ, πότιζε αὐτόν· τοῦτο γὰρ ποιῶν ἄνθρακας πυρὸς σωρεύσεις ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ “but ‘If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him to drink; for in so doing you will heap coals of fire on his head.’” The quotation follows the LXX of Prov 25:21–22 almost exactly (Ramaroson’s suggested emendation of the Hebrew leaves the Greek unaltered—and unexplained), with ἀλλά as introduction and the more or less synonymous translation ψώμιζε in place of the LXX’s τρέφε (both = “feed”); the B reading of ψώμιζε at Prov 25:21 is almost certainly derived from Romans. The force of the ἀλλά is disputed. The most obvious way to take it is as adversative to v 19b–c rather than to v 19a (Zeller; against Wilckens). But that still leaves it unclear as to exactly how Paul intended the quotation from Prov 25:21–22 to qualify v 19b–c: either as envisaging some act of vengeance which Prov 25 allows; or, more likely, as inculcating a positive response to hostility (as against an attitude of resignation which “leaves it all to God”). The question is bound up with the tricky issue of how the last part of the Prov 25 quotation should be understood: what did Paul understand by “heaping coals of fire on his head”? The dispute is ancient: eschatological judgment (Chrysostom; and in this century Spicq, Agape 2:155–56; Stendahl, “Hate,” 348; and particularly Piper, 115–19); a burning shame leading to repentance (Augustine, Jerome; the majority view today, e.g., Cranfield, Wilckens). The former is certainly supported by the obvious imagery portrayed (Pss 18:8, 12; 140:10 [LXX 11]; Amos 3:4, 7; Obad 15; 2 Esdr = 6 Ezra 16:53; cf. Prov 6:27–29 and Sir 8:10; 11:32). But a more positive sense is probable. (1) Such a negative tone (do good to your enemy so that his punishment will be all the more severe) fits ill with the context: the spirit of the Sermon on the Mount breathes through these verses (cf. Dodd, Schmidt) with a consistent call to open-handed goodness and generous response unmotivated by malice—vv 14, 17, 19, 21. In particular the ἀλλά sets v 20 in some contrast to the idea of leaving the enemy to God’s judgment; to read the contrast as “Leave your enemy to God, but try to increase his guilt by your acts of kindness” strikes a jarring note. And it hardly fits comfortably either with the positive thrust of v 20a–b (cf. 2 Kgs 6:22) or with the final call to “overcome evil by good” (Furnish, Love Command, 108). As already noted, therefore, the ἀλλά is best taken as calling for a positive response to hostility (by meeting it with acts of kindness) and not simply as a passive response (leave it to God). (2) The suggestion of Morenz that the original imagery of Prov 25:22 can gain illumination from an Egyptian repentance ritual, in which carrying coals of fire (in a dish) on the head was evidence of the genuineness of repentance, has gained a good deal of support in recent years (see particularly Käsemann, Michel, Cranfield). It is of course not necessary to suppose that Paul knew of such a ceremony. Since so much of Proverbs is derived from or shared with Egyptian wisdom (see, e.g., W. McKane, Proverbs [London: SCM, 1970] 51–150) it may be sufficient that the original awareness that something positive was meant by the metaphor was transmitted with the metaphor itself (otherwise, Stendahl, “Hate,” 352). (3) Here too the Targum of Prov 25:21–22 is probably important since it adds: “… on his head and God will hand him over to you” or “will make him your friend” (Str-B, 3:302), that is, “you will win him” in a missionary sense (TDNT 7:1095 n.5). This seems to confirm that this particular metaphor (“put coals of fire on someone’s head”) was recognized as a positive and beneficial act. It also calls in question whether the metaphor should be allegorized (burning shame, remorse), since that is simply a more refined form of revenge (Ortkemper, 122, citing A. Juncker), and we may be dealing simply with a very vivid metaphor for a sharp change of mind brought about by an act of love (Klassen, 349). (4) Finally, we may note that Paul’s omission of the final line of the proverb (Prov

Dunn, J. D. G. (2002).

 

Vol. 38B: Word Biblical Commentary : Romans 9-16. Word Biblical Commentary (Page 750). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.

george
gfsomsel
___________