Did Jesus sin or insult by “calling” the woman a dog? Was the woman offended by Jesus’s use of the metaphor?
Jesus INITIALLY refuses her request by saying, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs” (Matthew 15:26). Taken out of context, and especially in English, it’s easy to mistake this for an insult. In the flow of the story, however, it’s clear Jesus is creating a metaphor meant to explain the priorities of His ministry (at THAT time his duty was to the people of Israel, not to the Gentiles)
Jews in Jesus’ day sometimes referred to Gentiles as “dogs.” In Greek, this word is KUON, meaning “wild cur” (Matthew 7:6) Non-Jews were considered so unspiritual that even being in their presence could make a person ceremonially unclean (John 18:28).
However, the exact word Jesus used for ‘dog’ in Mathew 15:26, in Greek, was “KUNARION“, meaning “small dog” or “pet dog.” This is a completely different word from the term “KUON“, used to refer to unspiritual people or to an “unclean” animal.
It’s no surprise that the woman was not offended but rather showed her faith and determination by intelligently throwing the metaphor back at Jesus.
The woman’s response [And she said, “Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs eat the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.”
The crumbs is a metaphor for salvation which was intended for God’s chosen nation first but would be made available to the Gentile nations eventually:
He [Jesus] told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to ALL NATIONS, BEGINNING at JERUSALEM. Luke 24:46-47
The metaphor of the crumbs which the woman (not Jesus) introduces is therefore consistent with old testament scripture of the Messiah becoming a light to the Gentiles, other than to the Jews only. Do not take the metaphor of the crumbs literally!
Rather than being offensive (as Muslim Dawagandists would like to deceive others) this is an intellectually engaging conversations the woman has with Jesus.
Matthew 15:27 proves that she understood fully what Jesus was saying, yet had enough conviction to ask anyway (Matthew 15:27). Jesus acknowledged her faith—calling it “great”—and granted her request (Matthew 15:28).
Did Jesus SIN or INSULT by “calling” the Samaritan WOMAN a DOG? Was the woman offended by Jesus’s use of the metaphor?
Jesus INITIALLY refuses her request by saying, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs” (Matthew 15:26). Taken out of context, and especially in English, it’s easy to mistake this for an insult. In the flow of the story, however, it’s clear Jesus is creating a metaphor meant to explain the priorities of His ministry (at THAT time his duty was to the people of Israel, not to the Gentiles)
Jews in Jesus’ day sometimes referred to Gentiles as “dogs.” In Greek, this word is KUON, meaning “wild cur” (Matthew 7:6) Non-Jews were considered so unspiritual that even being in their presence could make a person ceremonially unclean (John 18:28).
However, the exact word Jesus used for ‘dog’ in Mathew 15:26, in Greek, was KUNARION, meaning “small dog” or “pet dog.” This is a completely different word from the term KUON, used to refer to unspiritual people or to an “unclean” animal.
It’s no surprise that the woman was not offended but rather showed her faith and determination by intelligently throwing the metaphor back at Jesus.
The woman’s response [And she said, “Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs eat the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.”
The crumbs is a metaphor for salvation which was intended for God’s chosen nation first but would be made available to the Gentile nations eventually:
He [Jesus] told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to ALL NATIONS, BEGINNING at JERUSALEM. Luke 24:46-47
The metaphor of the crumbs which the woman (not Jesus) introduces is therefore consistent with old testament scripture of the Messiah becoming a light to the Gentiles, other than to the Jews only. Do not take the metaphor of the crumbs literally!
Rather than being offensive (as Muslim Dawagandists would like to deceive others) this is an intellectual and respectful conversation the woman has with Jesus.
Matthew 15:27 proves that she understood fully what Jesus was saying, yet had enough conviction to ask anyway (Matthew 15:27). Jesus acknowledged her faith—calling it “great”—and granted her request (Matthew 15:28).
So how did Muhammad treat women? Imagine if Jesus Christ of the Gospels had married a 6 year old infant and entered her at 9? Without a doubt I would not be a Christian. It would be an abomination and a disgrace to be a Christian!
In your defence of Muhammad you say, “back then 9 year olds were really big!”. Really? This would still be IMMORAL, even if it were 3000 years ago. Beloved, you will perish. Jesus Christ loved little children and said if any one causes a child to stumble it would be better for them to be tied to a heavy stone and drowned in the sea (Matthew 18:6).
The following Muhammad-Jesus Christ comparisons are obviously unjust to Jesus Christ: Jesus never received verses allowing him and his disciples to have sex with married slave women even if their husbands were still alive (a form of rape and adultery really) (Surah 4:24). Have you not ever heard of the adulterous story of Muhammad and Maria al-Qibtiyya his (sex) slave whom Muhammad had sex with [to the fury of his wife(Hafsah)] in his wife’s house and bed (thankfully Muslims can breathe a sigh of relief and be proud of Muhammad because conveniently a verse (QS 33:51) “came down” from his god which cleared Muhammad of his guilt and glorified Muhammad’s adultery. What dark religion is this which allows it’s prophet to keep a sex slave?
Muhammad sinned by lusting (Matthew 5:28) after Zaynab bint Jahsh (his then daughter-in-law) BEFORE her divorce after he had seen her naked on his visit to his son-in-law (then Zaid bin Muhammad). At seeing her naked, Al-Tabari narrates that Muhammad uttered these words, which Zaynab (who then told Zaid) got to hear: “Glory be to God the Almighty! Glory be to God, who causes the hearts to turn!” [The History of al-Tabari, vol. 8, pg. 1-3]. Muhammad’s words triggered a series of events which led to Zaynab’s divorce, her marriage to Muhammad and, conveniently, a verse (QS 33:37) from his god supporting the marriage. Muhammad’s pattern of behavior tells this truth: what is HORRIBLE to Christianity is HONORABLE to Islam.
Remember Safiya Bint Huyai bin Akhtag? She’s the Jewess and newly married at that time who then went on to “happily marry” Muhammad (Muhammad had purchased her with 7 slaves) shortly after Muhammad’s army butchered her husband, father and brother? Does this not disgust or offend you? If Jesus Christ had done any ONE of these wicked and sadistic actions, I would not be a Christian today. Why are Muslims drawn to the DARKNESS?
Beloved, you have no excuse on the day of the true judgment (NOT the pagan, fictional and abominable judgement day when a black stone currently broken into 8 pebbles will be given a mouth and eyes to testify) because you have known the deeds of your prophet, the deeds of darkness but you choose to hold your nose and look the other way. You are heaping judgment upon yourself.