footnotes.

# In the parable of the persistent widow Martin Collins begins to speak of another parable that Jesus teaches called, the parable of the persistent friend. After analyzing both there comes a conclusion more based from what is just written in the text that it is trying to teach the reader the power of prayer. It shows that no matter how a widow or friend may be in a bad spot they will always be protected by god. Now this seems of course ridiculous but sometimes we must find even the simple teachings that Jesus tried to convey rather than over analyzing. We find that prayer could be a simple answer. We see both low on the social ladder battling the hierarchy and proving themselves a true adversary.# According to Reverend Dr. Sam Cappleman we find that this parable is not to convey that we need to nag on God to have him answer our prayers but we need to be opened minded. We also are explained that this is told when the Jewish people are asking when the Kingdom of God will come and this is replied that the Kingdom is already here in each and every single one of us. We are the ones that show compassion to the ones that pray. We are the people that answer the prayers and prayers help us help others. We find people in need so we need to help those people in need to keep the Kingdom of God here on earth.# Herzog preaches that people who are consumed by power have finally given up the ability to care for one another. The judge is of the higherarchy so he has found no compassion for others who cannot influence the amount of power that he can have. The widow has been persistent to the judge which is unlike the common outcast of society. People have grown to allow themselves to hear the cries of the outcast of society and begin to have compassion for them.# Widow is feisty and frustrated. She can up set his selfish and vain world. Judge possibly scared to get black eye because he then would be taken as a joke. She is outside the system and he is a slave to it. Widow free while the judge is always paranoid about falling off his pedestal. People outside the system are in the Kingdom of God while judge is oppressed by it.# The corruption of the court made it the place or last resort to seek justice. Resolves disputes by meetings. Strongest are the best able to help themselves, weak defenseless are disadvantaged. Systems must work to reinforce the rights of those who are most powerful. Widow that she has no regard at all for social rules that would keep her invisible. Blow to the face to convey the metaphor for life’s sudden assaults and suffering. The widow could blacken the judges face by spreading rumors about him, namely that he could not hear her case as he was obliged to her adversary. Judge fears what may happen as widow comes in to him, not when she leaves.

# Martin G. Collins, “Parable of the Persistent Widow
(From Forerunner Commentary).”Jan. 2007. Bible Tools.


# The Reverend Dr. Sam Cappleman, “Sermon”. Oct. 27 1998. Church Online.


# Herzog..
# Herzog…
# Herzog….

Parable documentation

1) Read the parable once, then carefully read each verse


2) Analyze each action, object, and person while thinking of how these images would be interpreted by Jesus’ followers. This is reading in between the lines and will expand the meaning of the story. It also will require some research.

3) What is the problem and how do the characters respond (or instigate) it? Pay close attention to the rich and powerful and how they abuse their power and expect too much out of the lower people.

4) Identify what the parable is about. What prompted Jesus to tell the story? What is Jesus saying about society and/or KoG and how does the problem need to be solved? How does it relate to our lives today (this isn’t yet the actual modern situation, but I think it helps to understand if you replace ancient images with modern ones. This might later help with identifying a modern situation though) apply the parable to a current event.

5) Identify a modern situation with similar characters and actions (learn a lot about it). What is the problem? How is/was it solved? What are its parallels? According to what Jesus’ message in the parable is, how should this problem be solved?

6) Study the behaviors or commonly accepted behaviors of the characters in the story. Also identify the core values/central idea of the parable.

7) Know your shit, make a killer presentation with costumes and props and videos, get A’s. But most importantly MAKE SURE YOU LEARNED SOMETHING!!!!!!!!

2)The earliest interpretation of a judge is found in the saying attached to the parable where he is called "a judge of unrighteousness/injustice." The judge's problem is "his inability to sense the evil of his actions in the presence of the one ego should make him ashamed." The parable depicts a widow who has avoided the customary Torah courts and has gone straight to Hellenistic judge, because she thinks that she can expedite her case in the administrative court. Property means, disputes arise out of loans, inheritances, sales and the like. Because the claimant is identified as a widow, it makes sense to infer that her case concerns her inheritance rights. Scott takes the description seriously because it marks the judge as one of the urban elite. A widow was in a particularly vulnerable situation, and for that very reason, she was a target for exploitation. We think that Jesus is talking to the people who don't have good faith and the ones who are inpatient when praying to God.

3) The problem Jesus is trying to state is that people in power will think they will always stay in power but the people in power are so arrogant that even if the spotlight is upon them they still won't concede to people beneath them.

4) Then He told His disciples the story of the persistent widow. His point was that if even a corrupt judge could eventually be persuaded by the persistence of a widow, someone without standing or influence in their day, how much more likely would the Lord be to respond to the persistent prayers of his followers. The background for this parable is found in chapter 17. "When will the Kingdom come?" some had asked. In response the Lord told them that one day soon they would long to see one of His days (days like this one when He was with them) but would not see it. First He had to suffer and die. Then there would be a succession of false Messiahs and still it wouldn't be time. But when He finally did come it would be suddenly and it would catch many people off guard. They would have given up and stopped praying. Jesus is saying that society. The judge prefers to favor her adversary (either the adversary is influential or he has paid bribes). The parable poses a dilemma. A desperate widow is caught in the usual power play accompanying her husband's death, and she is further enmeshed in the complexities of a Torah court. At first glance she appears hopeless. Everyone knows that the court will decide in favor of the party offering the most appropriate emolument that is bribe. Her reward is justice at the gate. She was able to analyze her limit situation and design a limit action that broke the spell of inevitability cast by the ruling elites. You have to be persistent in your faith and not just

5) Homeless people have always been there but their numbers are starting to grow so now it's starting to be a problem that the wealthy can't ignore any longer. Now the wealthy have had to deal with the situation by paying taxes since the problem is too large to ignore. And just like the parable homeless people are always asking or are in need of help and are persistent when wanting help.

6) People who are consumed by power have finally given up the ability to care for one another. The judge is of the higherarchy so he has found no compassion for others who cannot influence the amount of power that he can have. The widow has been persistent to the judge which is unlike the common outcast of society. People have grown to allow themselves to hear the cries of the outcast of society and begin to have compassion for them.

"Herzog"

The parable of the widow and the judge presents two characters and at least two intertwined social systems that bring the characters together. The earliest interpretation of a judge is found in the saying attached to the parable where he is called "a judge of unrighteousness/injustice." The judge is beyond shame; neither son spell to God's justice nor an appeal to human need can evoke a sense of shame. AS Bailey sees it, the judge's problem is "his inability to sense the evil of his actions in the presence of the one ego should make him ashamed." These uniformly censorious descriptions do raise questions about what setting is imagined in the parable that the judge is and how he got to be a judge in the first place. Derrett believes that the parable depicts a widow who has avoided the customary Torah courts and has gone straight to Hellenistic judge, because she thinks that she can expedite her case in the administrative court. Therefore, this reading of the parable takes the judge t obeys a Torah judge in the customary courts. Scott takes the description seriously because it marks the judge as one of the urban elite. While it is inherently more probable that Torah adjudicators would have been located in urban areas rather than in the nucleated villages, it is not clear that they were found only in major cities. Herbert Danby interprets property to mean, "disputes arise out of loans, inheritances, sales and the like.” Because the claimant is identified as a widow, it makes sense to infer that her case concerns her inheritance rights. A widow was in a particularly vulnerable situation, and for that very reason, she was a target for exploitation. This may explain why the widow was the subject of such a concern in the Torah and Prophets. God promises to hear the voices of the widows and orphans as surely as God heard the cry of the people in Slavery in Egypt. In light of the material on the role of law in agrarian societies, the hiatus between the justice of the Torah and t he practical workings of everyday injustice may be clearer. Bailey believed that the parable makes the following three assumptions: 1. the widow is in the right (and being denied justice) 2. For some reason the judge does not want to serve her (she has paid no bribes?)3. The judge prefers to favor her adversary (either the adversary is influential or he has paid bribes). The parable poses a dilemma. A desperate widow is caught in the usual power play accompanying her husband's death, and she is further enmeshed in the complexities of a Torah court. At first glance she appears hopeless. Everyone knows that the court will decide in favor of the party offering the most appropriate emolument that is bribe. Her reward is justice at the gate. She was able to analyze her limit situation and design a limit action that broke the spell of inevitability cast by the ruling elites.


The problem is that the core does not seem to have any meaning w/o them(characters). The judge is giving into a pestering widow who has worn him down is hardly deep or novel.
SECONDARY PARABLE CORE:
3 structures of sorts to the attached applications...exclamation: "listen to what the unjust Judge says!"....2 rhetorical ?'s: "and will not God grant justice to his chosen ones who cry out to him day and night?" "will he delay long in helping them?".....emphatic pronouncement: "I tell you, he will quickly grant justice to them."
The prospects of her visits makes the judge finally give in. If the parable gives the lesson that God answers prayers swiftly, why would the judge ever give the widow what she wants. Joseph Fitzmyer's character analysis: the judge is irresponsible and dangerous person. The author of the parable expected the listeners to percieve the judge in a completely negative way as devoid of both pretas and humanitas. are believed to have been jealous or greedy people in a previous life. ... Pretas dwell in the waste and desert places of the earth. Humanitas includes humanism and humanitarianism.
Judicial system was closed circle of ambitious elites whose attentions were trained on amassing greater wealth and increasing personal pretige. Judges corruption went w/o public dennciation. Ambition motivated judges especially lower level judges. Lowly judges needed powerful friends. Non elites (widows) outside wealthy/prestigious circle. Widows > justice often denied > VULNERABLE. the widow is shameless. Her continual coming brings about indication-not the justice of her cause or the judges humor. Womens "Natural Condition" belonged in the domestic private sphere of the home, not in the public male domain of the courts. Roman culture > intolerant in womens involvement in the courts. Widow=BOLD.
The corruption of the court made it the place or last resort to seek justice. Resolves disputes by meatings. Strongest are the best able to help themselves, weak defenseless are disadvantaged. Systems must work to reinforce the rights of those who are most powerful. Widow that she has no regard at all for social rules that would keep her invisible. Blow to the face to convey the metaphor for lifes sudden assults and suffering. The widow could blacken the judges face by spreading rumours about him, namely that he could not hear her case as he was obliged to her adversary. Judge fears what may happen as widow comes in to him, not when she leaves.
Widow meek and humble. Treatment of widow is conventional. Widow is socially weak. Judge fears acts of violence by woman. Really he just deals with her so she stops whining to him. Widow actions startling, boldly facing the judge. Judge not scared, he simple wants to rid her.
Widow is fiesty and frustrated. She can up set his selfish and vain world. Judge possibly scared to get black eye b/c he then would be taken as a joke. She is outside the system and he is a slave to it. Widow free while the judge is always paranoid about falling off his pedistool. People outside the system are in the Kingdom of God while judge is oppressed by it.