 |
|
     |
|
|
|
The Glory of Kings: A Festschrift for James B. Jordan
Fyodor Dostoevsky
(Christian Encounters Series)
Athanasius
(Foundations of Theological Exegesis and Christian Spirituality)
The Four: A Survey of the Gospels
Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom
From Behind the Veil: The Epistles of John
Deep Exegesis:The Mystery of Reading Scripture
1 & 2 Kings
Brazos Theological Commentary
The Promise Of His Appearing: An Exposition Of Second Peter
A Great Mystery: Fourteen Wedding Sermons
Deep Comedy: Trinity, Tragedy, And Hope In Western Literature
Miniatures & Morals: The Christian Novels of Jane Austen
The Priesthood of the Plebs: A Theology of Baptism
A Son To Me: An Exposition of 1 & 2 Samuel
From Silence to Song: The Davidic Liturgical Revolution
Ascent to Love: A Guide to Dante's Divine Comedy
Blessed Are the Hungry: Meditations on the Lord's Supper
A House For My Name: A Survey of the Old Testament
Heroes of the City of Man: A Christian Guide to Select Ancient Literature
Brightest Heaven of Invention: A Christian Guide To Six Shakespeare Plays
Wise Words: Family Stories That Bring the Proverbs to Life
The Kingdom and the Power: Rediscovering the Centrality of the Church
Victor M. Wilson’s book, Divine Symmetries, studies literary and numerological patterns in the Bible. He has a chapter on Luke-Acts, and includes some fairly standard material about the structural parallels between the two books, but draws some interesting conclusions. Here is a reproduction of his page summarizing the parallel plot of Luke and Acts:
Luke Introduction and Preparation Acts
1:1-4 preface, with dedication to Theophilus 1:1-5
1:5-3:21 time of preparation 1:6-26
3:22 baptism with HS 2:1-4
4:16-30 inaugural sermon 2:14-40
Local Ministry
4:31-8:56 Galilee/Jerusalem 2:41-8:3
5:17-25 Lame man healed 3:1-10
5:29-6:11 conflicts with leaders 4:1-8:3
9:9 martyr: John and Stephen 7:54-8:1
7:1-10 centurion sends for Jesus/apostle 10:1-48
7:11-17 widow?s son and resurrection 9:36-43
Journey
9:51-53 resolve to journey to Jerusalem 19:21
9:51-19:27 missionary journey 13:1
9:31, 51; 12:50 passion journey 20:3, 22-24
9:45; 18:34 friends and disciples 21:4, 12-13
13:22 ready to die in Jerusalem 21:13
Jerusalem, Arrest, Trial
19:37 joyously received in Jerusalem 21:17-21
19:45-48 visit to the temple 21:26
20:27-39 dispute re resurrection 23:6-9
22:14-38 farewell address 20:17-38
22:14-20 last meal 27:33-38
22:47-54 seizure by a mob 21:30
22:63-64 slap before high priest 23:2
22-23 four trials bfore 3 courts 24-26
23:4, 14, 22 declarations of innocence 23:9; 25:25; 26:31
23:6-12 sent to Herod for questioning 25:13-26:32
23:16, 22 opportunity for release 26:32
23:18 ?away with this man?E 21:36
23:47 centurion with a favorable opinion 27:3, 43
24 fulfillment of Scripture 28
24:46-49 to nations/Gentiles 28:28
The most interesting thing that Wilson makes of this structure comes out in his interpretation of the shipwreck in Acts 27. He raises the question that many commentators on Acts have raised: Why does the book end before Paul’s trial and death, when the whole narrative trajectory is leading in that direction? He suggests that the shipwreck of Paul, parallel to the passion of Jesus, is in fact a death and resurrection experience, a Jonah experience. Paul “dies” in the water (Rom 6) and is raised up to eat a meal on the shore of Malta on the next day. As Wilson says, ?With this interpretation, for which the text offers some intriguing support, the troublesome ending of Acts is stripped of many of the problems that have plagued it. The parallel events of Luke?s Gospel and Acts and the interpretation thus laid upon the storm scene tell us that Paul?s ?death?Ehas already passed. The early morning gathering on the Maltese shore has the feel of a resurrection morning. The old has passed away; the new has come.?E
Another section of this chapter provides a chiastic outline of the Lukan journey narrative, chapters 9-19.
Structure of Luke?s Journey Narrative
A. 9:51-56: Departure/rejection
B. 9:57-10:24: following Jesus
C. 10:25-42: way to eternal life
D. 11:1-13: Prayer
E. 11:14-28: Signs of kingdom
F. 11:29-36: faith among foreigners
G. 11:37-12:3: stumbling blocks
H. 12:4-34: True riches, the Spirit
I. 12:35-39: Master returns
J. 13:1-9: cost of discipleship
K. 13:10-30: exiled home
L. 13:31-35: Jerusalem, Jerusalem
K?E 14:1-24: exiled home
J?E 14:25-35: cost of discipleship
I?E 15:1-32: Lost returned
H?E 16:1-31: false riches
G?E 17:1-10: stumbling blocks
F?E 17:11-19: faith among foreigners
E?E 17:20-37: signs of kingdom
D?E 18:1-14: Prayer
C?E 18:15-34: way to eternal life
B’. 18:35-19:27: following Jesus
A?E 19:28-40: arrival and acceptance
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, April 12, 2004 at 1:27 pm
The Word, the Bread, and the Nations, Luke 24:1-53
INTRODUCTION
Jesus was condemned to death, but throughout Luke?s account various people declare that Jesus is innocent. Seven times, someone states that he is righteous or treats Him as not guilty (Luke 23:4, 14, 15, 22, 41, 47, 51). On the day after the Sabbath, the first day of the week, the ?eighth day,?EJesus receives an eighth verdict, the most important of all: God the Father declares Jesus ?righteous?Eby raising Him from the dead.
THE TEXT
?Now on the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they, and certain other women with them, came to the tomb bringing the spices which they had prepared. But they found the stone rolled away from the tomb. . . .?E(Luke 24:1-53).
HE IS RISEN
Easter is a surprise. It was a surprise for the first witnesses to the resurrection, but not because they thought resurrections were impossible. Jews were hoping for resurrection, which would mean the full restoration of Israel. At the resurrection, all Israel from every time would be joined in fellowship: Abraham would sit with Nehemiah at table, a happy Jeremiah would be chatting with Noah in another corner of the room, while David and Ehud would be laughing over war stories. What was surprising for the women who came to the tomb was the fact that resurrection had already happened. They did not understand that the resurrection would come in two stages ?Efirst the head, and then the body. They were surprised that one Man would be raised, while everything else remained the same and everyone else stayed in their tombs.
Many modern Christians speak the language of resurrection, but don?t believe that Jesus?Ebody was actually raised. ?The resurrection was not a conjuring trick with bones,?Esaid a former Anglican Bishop of Durham. But Luke is at pains to show that Jesus?Ebody was raised. The women do not find a body in the tomb (v. 3), and later Jesus eats broiled fish with His disciples to demonstrate that He is not a spirit (vv. 38-42). Jesus is transformed, for sure; He has a body that is equally at home in heaven and on earth. But He has a body, and it is, in an important way, the same body that died on the cross (v. 40). Luke shows that the Christian hope is not ?life after death.?E The Christian hope is ?life after life after death.?E
ROAD TO EMMAEUS
The bulk of Luke?s resurrection story is taken up with Jesus?Eappearance to two disciples who are fleeing from Jerusalem toward Emmaus. In this story, Luke shows us some fundamental aspects of the life of the early church.
They seem to have good reason to flee. Not uncommonly, the Romans suppressed troublesome movements by slaughtering both the leader and all the followers. Then Jesus joins them. When He asks them about their conversation, they explain that their expectations about Jesus have been destroyed. He was a great prophet, and they were hoping that Jesus was in fact the greater Moses, the promised prophet who would redeem Israel in a new exodus (vv. 18-21; Deuteronomy 18:17-19). In response to their puzzlement, Jesus leads a Bible study, explaining the things concerning Himself in the Scriptures (vv. 26-27). This incident dramatically illustrates how important the Old Testament is for Christians, and how important it is to understand the Old Testament typologically. The two disciples know the entire story of Jesus, His miraculous life, His crucifixion, even His resurrection (vv. 18-24), but they know nothing until they see that these events form the climax to the story of the Old Testament. Is it any wonder that the contemporary church, with its colossal ignorance of the Old Testament, is as confused as the two disciples? We must see Jesus?Erebuke addressed to us: ?O foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!?E(v. 25). Typological interpretation may seem quaint or even pointless; in fact, it is essential to the well-being of the church because it is essential if we are to know Jesus.
But Word by itself is not enough. Even after Jesus has explained everything about Himself in the Scriptures, the two disciples still don?t recognize Him. That occurs only when He breaks bread with them (vv. 30-31). It is the same for the church throughout the ages: The Word without the Bread is merely intellectual, detached from the things of real life; the Bread without the Word turns into a magic act. When the Scriptures are taught and the Bread is broken, then Jesus can be known.
Once the disciples recognize Jesus at the table, they immediately return to Jerusalem. They had been fleeing from danger; now they return to danger. They had been confused about the reports of the women; now they become witnesses of the resurrection. Their encounter with Jesus in Word and Bread equips them for mission.
ASCENDING TO THE FATHER
Luke describes Jesus?Ejourney toward Jerusalem as an ?ascension?E(9:51), since the ultimate goal of the journey is for Jesus to return to His Father (24:50-51). His ascension is the prerequisite for the coming of the Spirit, the ?power from on high?E(24:49). Through the Spirit, the disciples will carry on the mission that had been prophesied in the Scriptures, to proclaim ?repentance for forgiveness of sins?Eto the nations (v. 47).
?Repentance?Eis of course a personal obligation. Every sinner, confronted by the claims of Jesus, must turn from sin and unbelief toward God in faith and obedience. But we should not lose the political dimension of what Jesus says. Through Jesus, God is fulfilling the promise to Abraham that his seed would bring blessing to all nations. And part of that blessing is the proclamation of national and international repentance and reconciliation. In a world where nations are locked in seemingly interminable conflict, the only hope is through their union in Christ.
As the Church knows the Jesus the Risen Lord in the Word and Bread, she is prepared for the mission of preaching repentance and forgiveness of sins to the nations.
CLOSING THE CIRCLE
Luke?s gospel is a large circle. It begins in the temple, with the angel?s announcement to Zecharias that he would be the father of John the Baptist, and it ends in the temple, with the disciples of Jesus continually praising God. The gospel begins with the songs of Mary and Zecharias, and ends with the great joy of the disciples. Near the beginning of the gospel, Jesus is lost for three days and is found by his parents; he explains by saying ?Did you not know that I had to be in My Father?s house??E(2:49). Here at the end Jesus is found on the third day, and has to explain again that He had to be about His Father?s business.
But the circle that Luke closes here is actually much bigger. At the beginning of human history, man fell into sin by eating fruit from a forbidden tree. Once Adam and Eve had eaten the fruit, ?the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked?E(Genesis 3:7). Luke gives us a similar scene: Jesus breaks bread with the two disciples ?and their eyes were opened and they recognized Him?E(Luke 24:31). It is the first day of a new creation, a renewal accomplished in the resurrection of Jesus. On the first Easter, the Father not only says ?This is My Son, the Righteous One.?E He also declares, ?Behold I make all things new.?E
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Wednesday, April 7, 2004 at 9:07 am
Robert C. Tannehill points out that the resurrection narrative in Luke 24 has a generally chiastic structure. First, there is an inclusio with the idea of “return” (23:56; 24:52), and the emphasis on the fact that Jesus’ disciples are observant Jews (23:56b; 24:53). Second, within that, there is a chiastic structure:
A. Angels announce that Jesus is risen
B. Jesus instructs the two disciples on the road to Emmaeus
C. Jesus breaks bread with the two disciples
D. The disciples return to Jerusalem and announce that Jesus is risen
C’. Jesus eats a meal with the 11
B’. Jesus instructs the 11
A’. Jesus departs from the 11
This is a classic case of what John Breck calls a rhetorical helix. The chiasm is not so much a “balanced” structure, as a dynamic one, with an important turning point at the center. Note especially the DIFFERENCE between Jesus’ instruction to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus and His teaching of the 11: The first time, He explains that the OT teaches about Christ’s suffering and glory; the second period of instruction has added a key feature: “repentance for release of sins should be procalimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.” These two additional points (mission to the nations; Jerusalem’s centrality) are the key themes of the central D section of the passage: The two disciples return to Jerusalem, and they become witnesses of the things they have seen (cf. v 48). The text moves from B to B’ by collecting the thematic content of the D section.
Practically, of course, the point of the structure is to highlight the mission that the disciples are being given. Through an encounter with the Risen Jesus in Word and Meal, the two disciples go back to the base of operations in Jerusalem and are transformed into witnesses.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Wednesday, April 7, 2004 at 9:06 am
As I’ve suggested in several recent posts, the turning point of Luke’s crucifixion narrative is the “conversion” of the criminal on the cross, and Jesus’ acceptance of Him into His kingdom. Jews and Romans had joined in mockery of Jesus’ claims to be “savior” and “king,” but the criminal entrusts himself to Jesus for his salvation and Jesus promises to bring him into His “kingdom,” His royal “Paradise.”
In Luke’s account, this exchange is immediately followed by a description of the darkening of the sky, the eclipse of the sun, and the rending of the temple veil. Within Luke 23, these events surrounding the crucifixion are structurally parallel to Jesus’ warning to the women about the coming destruction of the city, and thus have an “apocalyptic” character to them; darkness and the rending of the veil are proleptic signs of the coming destruction. And these occur after Jesus has accepted the criminal into His kingdom.
How are we to understand this sequence? Here are some possibilities: 1) Jesus’ acceptance of the criminal foreshadows the open acceptance of Gentiles and other “outcasts” into the church, and that is a prelude to the destruction of the temple. 2) When Jesus accepts the criminal, the temple is somehow rendered redundant or unusable. 3) Jesus’ acceptance of the criminal is a sign against the Jews, who have refused to accept the outcasts that Jesus has been dining with throughout His life. Thus, it is followed by signs of the doom of Israel. 4) Jesus’ acceptance of the criminal is a kind of “provocation to jealousy” of the Jews and Romans.
I’m sure there are other, more plausible explanations.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, April 5, 2004 at 8:39 am
This is repetitive, but here goes:
Luke?s account of Jesus?Ecrucifixion ends on a note of triumph. After Jesus breathes His last breath, the Roman centurion confesses that Jesus was ?righteous?Eand begins to praise God. The crowds of people who had come out for the spectacle go home beating their breasts in repentance. And suddenly a man emerges from the faceless mass of the Jewish Sanhedrin, is given a name, Joseph, and is ensuring that Jesus?Ebody is honorably buried. Jesus is no sooner dead than Gentiles and Jews are acknowledging Jesus as Savior.
Though not everyone changes their attitude toward Jesus, the shift is remarkable and profound. During Jesus?Ecrucifixion, the Jewish rulers, apparently operating as a homogenous unit, were mocking Jesus, and the Roman soldiers had done the same. Even one of the criminals dying with Jesus joined in on the fun, asking Jesus with thick sarcasm to save himself ?and us.?E In Luke, the story of the cross moves from mockery to praise, from scoffing to honor, from rejection to acceptance.
What has happened? Why does everyone suddenly begin to confess Jesus? Why does at least one Roman begin to praise God for Jesus? What changes the crowd?s mockery to penitence? How does it happen that one of the Sanhedrin offers his tomb to Jesus? The passage highlights two things in particular: Jesus?E?martyrdom?Eand Jesus?Ereception of the criminal.
The word ?martyr?Ecomes from a Greek word that originally meant ?witness.?E It is the word Jesus used when He said that everything should be established by ?two or three witnesses?E(Mat 18), and the word the Jewish leaders used when they decided they needed no more witnesses to decide that Jesus was guilty (Mk 14). A witness is one who testifies to the truth of something. But when a witness becomes a martyr, he does not stop being a witness. Martyrs are martyrs in order to testify. For a martyr, testimony is not so much in word as in action. Jesus is silent before the scoffers, and speaks only to ask forgiveness for the ones who murder Him and to reassure the repentant thief that he is forgiven and will enter the Paradise of God. Jesus doesn?t ?evangelize?Ethe Roman centurion; His patient endurance, His martyrdom, is an act of witness, and an effective one.
And so it is today. When arguments fail and reason can?t make a dent, how can we get through to unbelievers? How can we penetrate their defenses? Not with a better argument; not even with more reliable testimony, as important as that is. The evangelism and witness that Jesus leaves us is always martyrdom. It always means giving ourselves in service, pouring out our lives for Jesus and for one another: When we do that, we can expect the Gentiles to praise God.
The other thing that turns mockery to praise occurs in Jesus?Eexchange with the second criminal. Up to that point, everyone is mocking and rejecting Jesus. But then the second criminal begins to speak, rebukes the first criminal, defends Jesus?Einnocence, and appeals to Jesus for salvation. And Jesus receives him, and promises him a place in his kingdom.
Jesus?Ereception of an outcast into His paradise, His kingdom, begins to undo the opposition. Jesus reception of the criminal, and the confession of the Gentile centurion are ?provocations to jealousy?Eof the Jews and their rulers. Jesus?Ereception of the criminal replicate His actions in the whole course of His ministry: He has been receiving outcasts and Gentiles from the beginning, while the Jews have been slow to receive Him.
The pattern holds for the church as well. What undoes opposition to the gospel is not apologetics, political activism, or good organization. Mockery turns to martyrdom when the church embraces the outcast.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Sunday, April 4, 2004 at 8:03 am
There is another chiastic pattern running in Luke’s account of the crucifixion. If we focus attention on the people mocking Jesus, we have this pattern:
Jewish rulers (v 35)
Roman soldiers (vv 36-37)
Criminal (v 39)
But when the second criminal addresses Jesus, things begin to reverse and unravel. Someone in each of the three categories that hurled mockery at Jesus now confesses Jesus in some fashion:
Criminal (vv 40-43)
Centurion (v 47)
Jewish ruler ?EJoseph of Arimethea (vv 50-53).
Jesus reception of an outcast into His paradise, His kingdom, begins to undo the opposition. Then the sequence of confession is: Gentile, Jewish crowds, Jewish ruler. Jesus reception of the criminal, and the confession of the Gentile centurion are “provocations to jealousy” of the Jews and their rulers. Moreover, Jesus’ actions on the cross exactly replicate His actions in the whole course of His ministry: He has been receiving outcasts and Gentiles from the beginning, while the Jews have been slow to receive Him. This will continue into the book of Acts.
Rich Bledsoe, pastor of Tree of Life Presbyterian Church in Boulder, Colorado, would say that the pattern holds for the church as well. What begins to unravel opposition to the gospel is not apologetics, political activism, or good organization. Mockers within and outside the covenant are turned inside out when the church embraces the outcast.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, April 3, 2004 at 2:46 pm
Luke’s account of the crucifixion is organized in a neatly chiastic form:
A. Simon of Cyrene carries Jesus’ cross, 23:26
B. Women follow Jesus, beating their breasts, 23:27-31
C. Criminals crucified with Jesus, 23:32-33
D. Jesus forgives mockery and abuse, 23:34-38
C’. One criminal mocks Jesus, the other believes, 23:39-43
B’. Events of Jesus’ death lead crowd to beat their breasts; women stand at a distance, 23:44-49
A’. Joseph of Arimethea puts Jesus in his own tomb, 23:50-56
Several things emerge from the parallels here. First, the whole scene is framed by brief views of two men who do not go along with the people who have agreed to put Jesus to death. Simon and Joseph are both from outside Jerusalem, and both display a remarkable degree of devotion to Jesus. Simon’s devotion is more symbolic than intentional; there is no sign that he’s a real disciple, but he’s the only one in the book of Luke who actually does what Jesus exhorts His disciples to do ?Etaking up the cross. Joseph is a pious Jew, like Elizabeth, Zecharias, Simeon, and Anna in the “infancy narratives,” one who is waiting for the kingdom and apparently associates Jesus with the coming of the kingdom.
Second, the B sections help to frame the account with references to people mourning over what is happening to Jesus. The women’s mourning in vv 27-31 foreshadows the mourning of the people after the death of Jesus, and both together forshadow the great act of repentance at Pentecost in Acts 2. The parallel between Jesus’ warning about the coming destruction of the city (v 29) and the circumstances surrounding the crucifixion (vv 44ff) suggest that the darkness and veil-rending at the time of the crucifixion is a foreshadowing of AD 70, or that the death of Jesus is in fact the destruction of the true temple -
“destroy this temple.”
Finally, the center of the whole passage focuses on Jesus’ forgiveness and the mockery of Jesus by the Jews and Romans. Intriguingly, Jesus extends forgiveness for “what they do” before we KNOW “what they do.” The mockery is recorded after the forgiveness. This sets the mockery in the context of a kind of pre-emptive divine forgiveness. Within the context of the whole passage, the forgiveness points to two things: first, a delay in the final destruction of the city (the B sections) and, second, the reality of a remnant of faithful Jews (the A sections). These are the results of the forgiveness extended by Jesus, results that become more evident in Acts.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, April 3, 2004 at 4:39 am
Luke 23:26-56
INTRODUCTION
When Christians think of Jesus?Ecrucifixion, we often focus attention on the intense physical suffering that Jesus endured. There is no doubt that He was in anguish. During crucifixion, the victim would have his body torn with nails and his limbs stretched and contorted, as he slowly suffocated. But the text of Scripture pays very little attention to the physical pain of the cross. Luke in particular draws our attention to Jesus?Ewords, the mockery of the Jewish leaders, and the effects of Jesus?Edeath.
THE TEXT
?Now as they led Him away, they laid hold of a certain man, Simon a Cyrenian, who was coming from the country, and on him they laid the cross that he might bear it after Jesus?E(Luke 23:26-56).
JUDGMENT TO COME
As Jesus is lead away to the place of crucifixion, the Romans enlist Simon of Cyrene to carry His cross. This reenacts a scene that has occurred frequently in the gospel: People following behind Jesus. It is a picture of discipleship. Finally, someone does what Jesus has told all His disciples to do. This hitherto unknown man has become a model disciple, one who has ?taken up his cross?Eand ?followed Jesus?E(Luke 9:23).
Women have played a very prominent role in Luke?s gospel. As Jesus goes to the cross, the women are still with Him (cf. 8:1-3), wailing and beating their breasts. In response, Jesus reiterates the prophecy of doom he has been preaching throughout His ministry. He addresses the women as ?Daughters of Jerusalem,?Ea phrase that is reminiscent of the prophets?Edescription of ?Daughter Jerusalem?Eand ?Daughter Zion?E(e.g., Micah 1:13). Daughter Jerusalem will one day have greater reason to mourn, when Roman armies come to destroy the city that destroyed Jesus. In that day, everything will be turned upside down: Barren women, usually considered cursed, will be considered blessed because they don?t have to see their children slaughtered (v. 29). The inhabitants of Jerusalem will long to be buried alive (v. 30; cf. Hosea 10:8; Revelation 6:16). Jesus is a green tree. He is not a revolutionary, and it takes a great deal of doing to start a fire with Him. But the Jews produce lots of tinder, and eventually they will go up in flames.
For the time being, though, Israel?s sin in killing Jesus is forgiven. Jesus asks His Father to forgive them because of their ignorance (Luke 23:34), and the apostles repeat this assessment (Acts 3:17). When the Jews turn against the church, however, their sin is not forgiven; blasphemy against the Son of Man is forgiven, but not blasphemy of the Spirit who inhabits the church.
ISRAEL DIVIDED
Luke?s account of the crucifixion highlights the continuing mockery on the part of the Jewish leaders and Roman soldiers. They mock Him for His inability to save Himself (v. 35). The Romans sneer at Jesus?Eroyal claims. If He is a king, he should be able to save Himself (v. 37). Like servants at a king?s table, they pretend to be cup-bearers, but offer Jesus the sour wine of the poor rather than the sweet wine of kings (v. 36). Pilate puts an inscription over His head, like a royal banner (v. 38). Pilate surely means it as mockery, and perhaps also as a warning to anyone who might want to become king of the Jews in the future. Meanwhile, the people ?stood by, looking on?E(v. 35). Though the Jewish leaders had been able to stir them up to seek Jesus?Edeath (23:13), they are no longer active participants, but only observers.
The division within Israel is neatly symbolized by the response of the two criminals who are crucified with Jesus. One joins in the mockery, repeating the Jewish leaders?Ecomplaint that Jesus has done nothing to save Himself (v. 39). The other, however, recognizes his own guilt and Jesus?Einnocence (v. 41). Jesus promises that this repentant criminal will join Jesus in ?Paradise,?Ea word that normally refers to Eden (cf. Revelation 2:7; Septuagint of Genesis 13:10; Number 24:6) and which could be applied to restored Israel (cf. Septuagint of Isaiah 51:3; Ezekiel 31:8-9). The Jewish leaders who reject Jesus have no place in the restored people of God; but criminals who confess and seek the mercy of Jesus enter the Kingdom.
THE EFFECTS OF JESUS?EDEATH
Jesus had predicted during the last days of His life that there would soon be great signs and disturbances in the heavens (21:25-26). In anticipation of that, an eclipse blocks the sun during three hours of His crucifixion (23:44-45). Already, Israel?s lights are going out. Further, as Jesus dies at the ninth hour (3 PM), the veil of the temple is torn, just at the time of the afternoon/evening sacrifice. The destruction of the temple has already begun, and the temple has been rendered redundant by the final sacrifice.
In quick succession, Luke shows us four vignettes of the effects of Jesus?Edeath. First, the centurion, following Pilate?s lead, declares Jesus ?righteous,?Eand glorifies God (v. 47). Though the Jewish leaders don?t respond in praise for Jesus, Gentiles do. Second, the crowd, having seen the spectacle of Jesus?Edeath, goes home repentant. They ?turn back?Efrom their earlier hostility to Jesus, and ?beat their breasts?Elike the publican in Jesus?Eparable. These same people will later be baptized at Pentecost, so that many in Israel too are saved by the Messiah who did not save Himself. Third, the women who have been following Jesus continue to stay close, and act as witnesses of all that had happened, as well as preparing Jesus for burial. Finally, even a member of the Sanhedrin, Joseph of Arimethea, shows his devotion to Jesus by offering his tomb.
Catechism for Little Saints
What does Simon of Cyrene teach us?
That Jesus?Edisciples must take up their crosses and follow Jesus.
What did the Jews and Romans do while Jesus died on the cross?
They mocked Him.
What happened when Jesus died?
Many of the people were sorry for their sins, the veil of the temple was torn, and some Gentiles believed in Jesus.
For Further Study
1.When Jesus warns the women of the coming destruction of Jerusalem, he quotes from Hosea 10:8. How does this prophecy of Hosea shed light on the situation of Jerusalem?
2. Read Luke 23:37 and Luke 4:3, 9. Are they similar? What does this tell you?
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, April 3, 2004 at 4:25 am
Some thoughts inspired by Joel Green’s commentary on Luke 22-23:
Luke stuffs his account of Jesus’ trials with understated ironies. The soldiers mock Jesus’ prophetic claims by blindfolding and beating Him; but this is just what Jesus said was going to happen to Him. Jesus tells the Jewish leaders that they won’t believe He’s the Christ even if he tells them, and when He tells them ?Esurprise! ?Ethey don’t believe Him. They hear Jesus condemn Himself from His own mouth; but they have condemned themselves, because their unbelief confirms that Jesus is the Christ, since it is necessary for the Christ to suffer and enter into His glory.
The ironies continue in the trial before Pilate. The Jews accuse Jesus of stirring up the people, and to make sure their point sticks they stir up the people into a riotous frenzy that pushes Pilate over the edge. They claim that Jesus threatens to cause insurrection, but they accept Barabbas, a convicted revolutionary, back into their community.
Herod’s actions are similarly ironic. He mocks Jesus, as the Jews and Pilate have done, and adds one key element: He “dressed Him in a gorgeous robe and sent Him back to Pilate” (23:11). The “brilliant” robe (sometimes a textual variant is accepted that makes the translation “robes of light”) reminds us of the flashing robes of Jesus at the mount of transfiguration. The transfiguration is a proleptic revelation of the future glory of the Son of Man, and Jesus has just told the Sanhedrin that He will one day come into that glory. Herod confirms Jesus’ prediction, giving Him the robe of exaltation in the midst of His humiliation.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, March 27, 2004 at 5:31 pm
Jesus on Trial, Luke 22:63?E3:25
INTRODUCTION
Jesus?Etrial takes place in four stages: He is first brought before the Jewish Sanhedrin, who send Him to the Roman governor Pilate, who sends Him to Herod, who sends Him back to Pilate for a final verdict and sentence. At each stage, Jesus is rejected, mocked, and beaten. Yet, throughout His trials, the courts find Him innocent (23:4, 14-15). He goes to His death as the spotless, innocent Passover Lamb, substituting for robbers and murderers.
THE TEXT
?Now the men who held Jesus mocked Him and beat Him. And having blindfolded Him, they struck Him on the face and asked Him, saying, ?Prophesy! Who is the one who struck you??E(Luke 22:63?E3:25).
PROPHESY
In the first stage of His trial, Jesus stands before the Sanhedrin, the court of Jewish elders, also called the ?Presbytery?E(22:66). Two issues dominate this part of the trial. First, the ?men who were holding Jesus in custody?E(v. 63), that is, the chief priests, officers of the temple, and elders (v. 52), mock his claim to be a prophet. Though Jesus does not answer their mocking questions, their conduct in fact proves that Jesus is a prophet, since He had earlier predicted that this would happen (cf. 18:32).
Second, the Sanhedrin proper focuses on Jesus?Eclaims to be Messiah or Christ, the Anointed One (v. 67). This is not really an investigation, since the council has already made up its mind that Jesus is not the Christ. They are trying to catch Jesus saying something that will make him seem dangerous to the Romans (cf. 20:19-26). Since ?Christ?Eand ?Son of God?Eare royal titles, if Jesus admits that He is Christ they can bring Him before Pilate.
Jesus?Eanswers are evasive (vv. 67-68, 70), or else He remains completely silent. What else can we expect? Jesus has been seeking to persuade and debate with the Jewish leaders for several years, and they have grown increasingly hostile. They have been beating Him and mocking His claim to be a prophet. Can there be any reasonable discussion now? Jesus knows that there is no possibility of persuasion. But there is another thing going on as well: Jesus is the Lamb who is being led dumb to the shearers (Isaiah 53:7). Instead of offering an extended speech before the courts, as many Hellenistic heroes did and as Paul does in Acts, Jesus says almost nothing and makes no defense. He knows there is a Judge beyond the judges He faces, and He trusts that Judge to vindicate Him.
KING OF THE JEWS
When the priests take Jesus before Pilate, they focus on the political dimensions of Jesus?EMessianic claims. Jesus, they tell Pilate, has claimed to be a Jewish king, and he is encouraging a tax revolt among the Jews (23:2). Several times, they accuse Jesus of stirring up the people (vv. 2, 5, 14), positioning themselves as the defenders of the misled sheep.
Pilate, however, repeatedly declares Jesus innocent (vv. 4, 14-15, 22). This has several implications. First, that Jesus?Edeath is the result of a gross miscarriage of justice. Pilate knows Jesus to be innocent, but buckles to the pressure of the Jewish mob and kills Jesus anyway. Jesus is again ?exposing hearts,?Ebringing to light the injustice at the heart of the vaunted Roman legal and judicial system. In this sense, Pilate (and with him Rome) is more the one on trial than Jesus. Second, Pilate is inadvertently pronouncing God?s own verdict on Jesus, a verdict that God will promulgate when He raises Jesus from the dead. Third, this leaves the Jews primarily responsible for the death of Jesus, who is ultimately ?delivered . . . to their will?E(v. 25). The elect people are the leaders in rejecting Jesus.
The Jews know what makes Pilate tick. As a Roman prefect, he is especially concerned with public order, and anyone stirring up the people ?Eregardless of whether or not he claims to be a king ?Eis a threat to public order (v. 5), especially during a major festival. Pilate discovers a potential out when he learns that Jesus is a Galilean. Herod can take care of the problem.
BEFORE THE FOX
Herod has been wanting to see Jesus for a long time, suspecting that Jesus is some reborn prophet (9:7-9). Later, Jesus was warned before that Herod was out to kill Him (13:31), just as he had killed John the Baptist. Jesus described Herod as a ?fox?Ewho was loose in the henhouse; Jesus wanted to act as a mother hen, and protect Jerusalem, but Jerusalem was unwilling (13:32-35). Now, Jesus, the chicks bring the protective hen before the fox himself, which leaves them wholly without protection from the coming wrath. Yet, this is no obstacle to Jesus. When warned about Herod?s plans, He sent a response back to Herod: ?Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the next day I reach my goal?E(13:32). Herod?s threats were no obstacle to Jesus; Herod would be part of the means to Jesus reaching that goal, ?for it cannot be that a prophet should perish outside Jerusalem?E(13:33).
Herod gets into the spirit of the trial. He and his soldiers, following the lead of the Sanhedrin, mock Jesus, especially His royal claims. Herod shows that he shares Pilate?s contempt for Jewish kings, and they unite in their hostility to Jesus. When Pilate sent Jesus to Herod, he recognized Herod?s authority (v. 7), and this sign of honor from Pilate was a basis for an alliance. At another level, however, the reconciliation of Pilate and Herod points to the real purpose of Jesus?Edeath, to undo the division of Roman and Jew, and to unite them in friendship. This is an infernal parody of Christian communion, but it points to the true communion.
BARABBAS OR JESUS?
Finally, the chief priests and rulers go before Pilate one last time, this time accompanied by the ?people?E(v. 13). Apparently, some of the people at least have been convinced that Jesus was misleading them, and have turned on Him. When Pilate offers to punish Jesus and set Him free, the Jews demand that Jesus be crucified and Barabbas released (v. 18). The irony is sharp: The Jewish leaders have been accusing Jesus of being a political threat, and yet they are willing that Barabbas be released, who has actually been leading rebellions (v. 19). The Jewish leaders have selective indignation at rebels.
Here again, there is far more going on than Pilate or the Jews realize. The choice of Barabbas over Jesus is the choice of insurrection over peace, and the Jews will pay dearly for that choice within a generation. Further, this episode dramatically highlights what is really going on in Jesus?Etrial: He is standing trial as a substitute, being put to death for sins that He did not commit, sins that were endorsed by many of the Jews. Even more, we are all Barabbas, rebels against God and participants in the murder of Jesus. Yet, Jesus takes our place and bears the punishment of our sins in Himself. We are sons of Adam, who was a rebellious Bar-Abba (?son of the father?E; but the Son of the Father, the eternal Bar-Abba, takes our place.
CONCLUSION
Jesus is indeed ?despised and rejected of men?E(Isaiah 53:3). Through all this, we should not forget who Jesus is: He is ?the Lord?E(22:61), Yahweh incarnate. Yahweh is rejected by the Jews, His own people; by the Romans; by Herod. God the Son, the Lord, enters human history, and is greeted with the full fury of human resentment and sin and envy. We, all of us, mock Him, spit at Him, beat Him, kill Him. He receives it, absorbs it Himself, and thereby redeems us. This is the strange justice of God: The Judge is judged in our place, accepting condemnation from those who should be on trial.
Behold your God.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 at 5:14 pm
When Jesus was but an infant, Simeon saw Him in the temple and prophesied: ?This one is appointed for the fall and rise of many within Israel, and for a sign to be opposed, to the end that thoughts from many hearts may be revealed.?E Throughout His life, this is exactly what Jesus did: He divided Israel, in order to reveal hearts. And this division and revelation comes to a climax, as everything else does, in the passion narratives at the end of Luke.
There are divisions everywhere: Jesus has been in conflict with the Jewish leaders, the chief priests and the scribes, and they are now actively plotting to have Him arrested and killed. There is division among the 12: Judas betrays Jesus, Satan is seeking to sift the 12 like wheat, to separate them from one another and from Jesus, the disciples quarrel about which one is the greatest, and Peter denies that he ever knew Jesus. And this situation of division and conflict reveals hearts: It reveals the hardened hearts of the Jewish leaders, the treacherous heart of Judas, the vacillating heart of Peter.
Division and crisis reveal hearts by forcing people to make choices. In a crisis situation like the one that Jesus?Eministry created, the key demand is to choose sides. Joshua proclaimed to Israel as they entered the land, choose this day whom you will serve, and the greater Joshua brings the same imperative. There is no way to avoid a choice; we are always on one side or another, either with Jesus or against Him.
Peter provides a convicting and powerful glimpse of a genuine disciple of Jesus who makes a series of false choices. Peter professes that he is willing to follow Jesus anywhere, even to death or prison, but when Jesus is arrested and taken before the court, Peter follows ?at a distance?E(Lk 22:54). This is not the kind of ?following,?Ethe kind of discipleship that Jesus has demanded. Jesus has been warning His disciples about the dangers they will face in Jerusalem, telling them that they need to be prepared to take up crosses. In the end, none do follow Jesus this closely. The pressure is too much. Peter, with all the others, avoids the cross and has only enough courage to follow ?at a distance.?E
Things get worse once Peter has decided not to stay close to Jesus in His trial. In the court of the high priest, a fire burns, and a group huddles around the fire. Peter is among them, warming himself alongside the enemies of Jesus in the court of the high priest, the leading enemy of Jesus. Pressed to reveal himself, Peter denies everything that he should affirm about himself: He denies that he knows Jesus; then he denies any association with the disciples of Jesus, for renouncing Jesus involves renouncing Jesus?Echurch; and finally Peter denies himself, insisting that he is not a Galilean who was with Jesus. He said he would stick with Jesus through everything; now he denies he was ever with Jesus in the first place. While Jesus is saying ?I am?Ebefore the Sanhedrin, Peter is saying ?I am not.?E
Surrounded by the enemies of Jesus, Peter?s instinct for survival kicks into high gear, and rather than risk the danger of confession, he puts even more distance between himself and Jesus. But the instinct for survival is SATANIC: Whoever wants to SAVE His life will lose it, and whoever risks losing His life, by standing with Jesus and following Him close behind, will save it.
How do we avoid this threefold denial in the midst of pressure and trial? Ultimately, Peter is saved because Jesus has prayed for him. But Jesus also tells us what we must do in the midst of trial, testing, persecutions, temptation. When he goes to Gethsemane, He warns His disciples to ?pray that you may not enter into temptation?Eand at the end of the scene he repeats the same instruction. In between, He gives us an example of the kind of prayer that enables us to stand in the midst of trial: Luke compares Him to an athlete, who throws Himself into a combat in passionate prayer.
And, importantly, when we do fail, Jesus calls us to repent and return, so that we may strengthen our brothers. When the Lord looked at Peter, he was convicted, went OUT of the court, abandoned the enemies of Jesus, and cried tears of repentance. And so too, Jesus calls us to repent of our many betrayals of Him, whether they are trivial or major.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Sunday, March 21, 2004 at 7:58 am
My Body Given For You, Luke 22:1-62
INTRODUCTION
Jesus has been in Jerusalem making a big scene in the temple ?Edriving out the money changers, teaching as if it were His own house, debating with the scribes and chief priests. The Jewish leaders, already angry with Jesus, are further provoked by His sermon against the temple, just as the priests were provoked by Jeremiah?s preaching. Assisted by Judas, they make firm plans to have Jesus arrested and killed.
THE TEXT
?Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread drew near, which is called Passover. And the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might kill Him, for they feared the people. . . .?E(Luke 22:1-71).
PASSOVER
Luke begins the story of Jesus?Earrest and trial by referring to the Passover (v. 1), and recording that the chief priests and scribes sought to kill Jesus during this festival season. The priests who were preparing to slaughter the Passover lambs were unwittingly preparing to slaughter the Passover Lamb.
Satan has not been mentioned in Luke?s gospel since the temptation in the wilderness (Luke 4:1-13), after which he left ?until an opportune time.?E That time has come, and Satan reenters the story, inspiring Judas to offer his help to Jesus?Eenemies. Given his name (Judas/Judah), this symbolizes the betrayal of the Messiah by the whole Jewish people. Given Judas?s status as a disciple, this symbolizes the failure of even the disciples to remain with Jesus in His passion.
LAST SUPPER
While the chief priests and scribes are preparing to slaughter Jesus, Jesus is preparing to eat His final meal with His disciples. He has been eating and drinking throughout the gospels, and all those meals culminate in this one. Just as the original Passover celebrated an exodus, so this meal celebrates the ?exodus?Ethat Jesus is accomplishing at Jerusalem (Luke 9:31). Jesus has prophesied destruction against the temple, where the Jews are celebrating their Passover; here, Jesus establishes the feast of a new temple, which celebrates a new and final sacrifice.
Luke?s record of the Last Supper differs from other accounts in the NT. He records that the order was cup-bread-cup. This matches early descriptions of the Jewish Passover, where there were several cups distributed during the meal.
In all the gospels, the Lord?s Supper provides the main interpretation of the crucifixion. Several aspects of the atonement come out in Luke?s account. First, Jesus associates the meal, and hence His death, with the coming of the kingdom (v. 18). Those who sit with Him at the table, and serve as He serves, are granted a kingdom and dominion over Israel (vv. 17-30). Second, He says that His body is ?given for you,?Epointing to the fact that Jesus is going to offer Himself as a substitute and that He is offered Himself to be life and food to His people (v. 19). Finally, He says that His blood will bring in a new covenant. The Supper is a covenant-sealing meal, which includes a ?grant?Eto the covenant partners, the grant of a kingdom.
Of course, Jesus self-giving is the model for the disciples, but the disciples are still blind and dense, preferring debates about who will gain the greatest fame as a disciple. Jesus sets the pattern for proper lordship and leadership in the church, the greatest leader being the most humble servant (vv. 24-26).
BETRAYED
Jesus goes out to the Mount of Olives to pray. He is true man, in anguish at the ?cup?Ethat He has to drink, the cup of God?s wrath that causes the nations to reel and topple (cf. Jeremiah 25). Jesus will drink that cup to its dregs.
Judas leads the multitude to Jesus, and identifies Jesus with a kiss (cf. 2 Samuel 3:27). After Jesus brings an end to the scuffle, He asks the chief priests and officers whether they consider Him a ?brigand?Eor ?robber?E(v. 52). He uses the same word that He has already used to describe the Jews who worship in the temple. Jesus is not the brigand; they are. And after murdering Jesus, they will retreat to the temple again and make it even more a ?den of robbers.?E
Judas is not the only one who betrays Jesus. Jesus has warned Peter that he will betray Him (vv. 31-34). In the high priest?s court, Peter seeks to join the circle of people sitting around the fire (v. 55). He has forsaken the company of Jesus and the disciples, and is seeking to join another ?community.?E The price of admission is denial of Jesus, which Peter is willing to pay (vv. 56-60).
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, March 20, 2004 at 11:15 am
In Luke’s account of the transfiguration, Jesus discusses with Moses and Elijah the “exodus” that he is going to accomplish in Jerusalem (9:31). That surely refers to His sufferings, death, and resurrection, which have just recently been a subject of discussion with Jesus and the apostles (9:18-27, esp. v 22). Yet the context in Luke 9 also suggests a connection with the “coming of the Son of Man” and the coming of the “kingdom of God.”
What is the “exodus” that Jesus will accomplish for His people at His coming? In a number of ways, Luke 21 indicates that the events surrounding AD 70 was an exodus event. Prior to the catastrophe itself, Jesus predicts that there will be “plagues and famines” (21:11), and “plague” is always reminiscent of Egypt. Further, the end will be preceded by “terrors and great signs from heaven” (v. 11), which recalls the language of Deuteronomy about the signs and wonders that were performed in Egypt (Dt 4:34 and 26:8 actually use the word “terror(s)”; cf also Dt 6:22; 7:19). Further, the Jews, Jesus predicts, will persecute His disciples and cast them out of the synagogues, which is perhaps analogous to the Egyptian attacks on Israel. The references to flight, moreover, recall exhortations in Jeremiah and other prophets to “flee” from Babylon. Finally, the events that Jesus describes are signs that “your redemption is drawing nigh” (v. 28). “Redemption,” of course, originally referred to the liberation of slaves.
In this scenario, of course, Jerusalem and Judah fill the slot of Egypt, and the “exodus” is out of Judaism into a “wilderness” and ultimately into a “promised land” of the new heavens and new earth. Followers of Christ, “enslaved” to Egyptian-like Israel, will be redeemed in the days of their “vindication,” the days of vengeance.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, February 28, 2004 at 9:40 am
Days of Vengeance, Luke 20:45-21:38
INTRODUCTION
It is always important to remember that Luke wrote two books about Jesus and the early church, and that the two books work together. In the first book, the gospel of Luke, Jesus the Beloved Son comes to the vineyard and is killed by the vinedressers (20:9-18). The owner of the vineyard plans to take vengeance on the vine dressers, and hand the vineyard to others, but this doesn?t take place immediately. Jesus, as it were, comes a second time to Israel in the book of Acts, this time working through His Spirit-filled apostles. When the vine dressers reject Jesus for the second time, He takes vengeance against them. Jesus forgives the Jews?Eattacks on Him, but He does not tolerate an attack on His bride.
THE TEXT
?Then, in the hearing of all the people, He said to His disciples, ?Beware of the scribes, who desire to go around in long robes, love greetings in the marketplaces, the best seats in the synagogues, and the best places at feasts, who devour widows?Ehouses. . . .?? (Luke 20:45-21:38).
DEVOURING WIDOWS?EHOUSES
Here we have a very bad chapter break. Most of chapter 20 is taken up with debates with the scribes and chief priests, but in verse 45 Jesus begins talking with the disciples. He is still talking with His disciples in 21:3-4. The condemnation of the scribes and the scene of the poor widow go together.
Jesus condemns the scribes mainly for their pride and hypocrisy. They make a big show of their piety, taking the most prominent seats in the synagogues and making long prayers. At the same time, they prey on widows, which are the object of God?s special care. They use their piety to mask their oppression of the helpless. The widow in 21:1-4 is an example. She is pious and generous, putting her last coins into the temple treasury. But in context, she is among the oppressed; instead of taking care of her, the temple authorities receive all that she has to live on.
It is natural for Jesus to move from observations about the scribe?s oppression of the weak and helpless to a lengthy prophecy about the destruction of the temple. According to Jeremiah 34, Judah was overthrown by Nebuchadnezzar for a similar sin, for refusing to release slaves. The officials and people of Judah at first obeyed the Lord?s command to release fellow-Jews they had taken as slaves, but then ?each man took back his male servant and each man his female servant . . . Therefore, thus says Yahweh . . . I am proclaiming a release to you . . . to the sword, to the pestilence, and to the famine, and I will make you a terror to all the kingdoms of the earth?E(Jeremiah 34:16-17).
NOT ONE STONE ON ANOTHER
When some of the people comment on the beauty of the temple, Jesus warns that someday the temple will be completely destroyed (Luke 21:6). It is clear throughout the passage that Jesus is referring to an imminent event. The sign of desolation will be ?when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies?E(v. 20), and then the disciples ?who are in Judea should flee to the mountains?Eand ?those who are in the midst of the city?Eshould depart (v. 21). The disciples are not to remain in the city out of a sense of nationalist loyalty, but treat Jerusalem as Babylon: ?Flee from the midst of Babylon, and each of you save his life! . . . For this is Yahweh?s time of vengeance?E(Jeremiah 51:6). As a result of this invasion, ?Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles?E(v. 24). At the end of the chapter, he announces explicitly that ?this generation will not pass away until all things take place?E(v. 32).
Jesus warns that there will be a period of waiting before the final catastrophe, and prophesies several things that will happen during that time. First, some will come saying that they are Jesus returned (v. 8). Second, there will be international turmoil, with nation rising against nation (vv 10-11). Third, Jesus?Edisciples will suffer persecution (vv. 12-19). It is clear that the persecution is coming from Jews. The ?they?Ewho will ?deliver you to the synagogues?Eare clearly Jews (v. 12), and the same ?they?Ewill ?bring you before kings and governors?E(v. 12). As Romans increase the pressure on Israel, the Jews will make the Christians the scapegoats. This is consistent with the history recorded in Acts, where the main persecutors of the early church were Jews. Finally, the disciples should expect to be betrayed by their own families. No wonder Jesus has been teaching that a disciple has to ?hate?Ehis father and mother to follow Him.
Jesus tells His disciples that they should not prepare a defense ahead of time. Through the Spirit, they will be given wisdom that will defeat their opponents (v. 14-15; cf. Acts 6:8-15).
SIGNS IN THE HEAVENS
Jesus?Edescription of the collapsing heavens leads many Christians to think that Jesus is talking about the end of the physical universe. How can the events Jesus describes in verses 25-28 take place before ?this generation passes away?E The answer is that Jesus is using standard prophetic imagery to describe the collapse of a world-system. Sun and moon are set in the heavens to ?rule?E(Genesis 1:16-18), and throughout Scripture the sun and moon represent rulers (Isaiah 13:9-10; Ezekiel 32:7-8; Joel 2:2, 31; 3:15; etc.). the sun and moon going dark is a sign that some ruler has been cast down.
The reference to the sea in verse 25 also draws on prophetic imagery from the OT. Through much of the OT, Israel is pictured as land in the midst of the Gentile sea (e.g., Psalm 46). The ?roaring of the sea and its waves?Edescribes the turmoil of the Gentile world at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem. Nero committed suicide in 68 A.D., and four emperors followed in quick succession. The famed pax Romana crumbled. This verse shows that the events surrounding A.D. 70 were not limited to Palestine. The whole world-order set up at the time of the Babylonian exile was being brought down.
The coming of the ?Son of Man in a cloud?Eis also perplexing to some. Jesus, however, is quoting from Daniel 7, where the Son of Man ascends to the Ancient of Days on a cloud to receive all the dominion and authority and power that had belonged to the Gentile empires of the ancient world. This will be ?seen?Ein the sense of being perceived: When Jerusalem is destroyed as Jesus predicts, then all will know that He is David?s Lord who has been seated at the right hand of the Father in heaven.
FIG TREE
Jesus tells a parable to illustrate the point of the signs that He has enumerated. Just as a fig tree?s leaves signifies the approach of summer, so the events He describes show that the kingdom is close at hand.
With this crisis on the horizon, it is particularly important that the disciples avoid drunkenness, dissipation, and being weighed down with worries of life. Again, we see that Jesus?Ewarnings against riches are especially relevant to the disciples in His time. If they are too attached to their property and possessions, they could well end up being destroyed in the destruction of the city.
Though Jesus is prophesying about events in the generation of the apostles, His warnings apply to every generation of Christians. Jesus comes to judge the earth in many times and many ways, and we should always be ready when He comes.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, February 28, 2004 at 9:19 am
There’s a neat little chiasm in Luke 21:25-26:
A. Signs in sun, moon stars
B. on earth dismay among nations
C. in perplexity at roaring of the sea and waves
B. men fainting with fear and expectations of things coming upon the oikoumene
A. powers of heavens shaken.
A couple of things are clear about this. First, we are completely in the realm of Gentile imagery. You’ve got the explicit mention of the “nations” and the “oikoumene” in the B/B’ sections, the sea at the center. That means, second, that the sun, moon, stars/powers of heaven imagery in the outer frame is referring to Gentile powers. Judgment falls on Jerusalem, and then on the Gentile world (as always in the OT). This leads right into the fulfillment of Dan 7, the “Son of Man coming in a cloud,” to receive the power and dominion that had belonged to the “powers of the heavens” that have now been shaken.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, February 24, 2004 at 7:20 pm
The sermon text this morning will be eerily familiar to some of you. Jesus has cleared out the temple, dramatizing its future destruction, and now He has set up shop at the heart of Judaism, teaching in the temple courts. The leaders of Israel, the chief priests and scribes, want to take Him down, and they come to Him with one challenge after another in an attempt to discredit Him with the people and regain control of the temple. All this is done before a crowd of people, and that is certainly part of the strategy: They want to humiliate Jesus in public, so that the crowds who are hanging on His words will lose their faith in Him and perhaps even turn against Him.
The challenges come at several specific points. First, the chief priests and scribes and elders question Jesus?Ecredentials for teaching in the temple. Priests and scribes are the teachers of Israel, and part of their task was to evaluate teachers who arise in Israel. Jesus is no priest, and He has no formal training, no PhD in Torah. What gives Him the right to take His stand in the temple and act like an authority? He is unaccredited, so why should anyone listen to what He has to say?
Another line of attack was the effort to make Jesus out to be a political revolutionary. This is a method used very effectively throughout the centuries: When the apostles go throughout Asia Minor preaching the gospel, they are charged with treason because ?They say there is another king?Eand ?they do not conform to our customs.?EIn the centuries that followed, Christians were persecuted for refusing to sacrifice to Caesar, an act that was construed as revolutionary. Long before that, Haman incited the Persian king against the Jews by claiming they were not loyal subjects, as did the persecutors of Daniel. The scribes and chief priests use the same tactic against Jesus, attempting to catch in His words so that they can ?deliver Him to the rule and the authority of the governor.?E
Finally, the Sadducees resort to ridicule. By proposing a complex scenario about a series of sons marrying the same woman, they are trying to show that Jesus?Eteaching on resurrection is an absurdity.
These all, as I say, have the ring of familiarity to them, and that is no accident. Jesus?Ework is unique and once-for-all, but especially in Luke and Acts, the life and sufferings of Jesus provide the pattern for the lives and sufferings of His disciples. Stephen, Peter, James, Paul ?Ethe major characters in Acts live out the life and suffering of Jesus in their lives; their lives are conformed by the Spirit to the pattern of Jesus?E
And we can expect the same kinds of strategies to be used against the church, against our churches in Moscow in particular, and we can expect it all to be played out in public. We have come to see this almost daily in the newspaper: Monday there is a challenge to the credentials and accreditation of New St Andrews College; Tuesday there is a letter claiming that we are a dangerous political group within Moscow; on Wednesday and Thursday someone writes in to ridicule us for believing that God created the world in six days, or for believing that the Bible is the word of God. As our sermon text shows, these tactics are nothing new. They are the standard operating procedure of the enemies of the church.
The responses of Jesus give us an idea of how to respond. Jesus rebuts insincere questions with questions of his own, questions that tie His opponents in knots. He gives an answer to the question about taxation that befuddles his opponents. He quotes from Scripture to refute the reduction offered by the Sadducees. What He does NOT do, what He never does, is back off. Our stance should not be apologetic, but aggressive; we should not play defense, and if we are put on defense we should be looking for opportunities to turn it into an opportunity to play offense.
Of course, unlike Jesus, we are not sinless, and not everything we say should be defended. The scribes and Pharisees could bring no true charges against Jesus, but that is not true of us. One of the central features of our response to all challenges and attacks is open confession of sin.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, February 23, 2004 at 5:52 am
Stones, as I’ve said, are all over the place in Luke 19-21. One more indication of this: When the scribes and chief priests debate about how to answer Jesus’ question about John’s baptism, they worry that the people might stone them if they deny John. They “do not know” where John’s baptism came from, just as they “do not know” the time of their visitation. But the stoning they fear from the people is what awaits them precisely because they “do not know” the time of their visitation: They will be broken on the stone of stumbling, or crushed beneath the chief cornerstone of the new temple. Seeking to avoid a stoning, they lay aside the chief stone, and therefore will be stoned after all.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, February 23, 2004 at 5:52 am
The debates in Luke 20 are focused on the issue of leadership and authority. The basic question is, Who is going to set the direction for the future of Israel — Jesus and His followers, or the establishment. A number of things follow from this:
1) Jesus’ parable of the vineyard is directed against the leaders, not the people as a whole. In contrast to Isaiah 5, as Joel Green points out, the vineyard itself is not destroyed in Luke 20. It is intact, and handed over to other managers (the 12 initially — Jesus bequeaths a kingdom to them in Lk 22). This fulfills prophecy (eg Ezek 34), which foretells of a future when Israel will be governed by faithful shepherds. Also, it helps to explain how God keeps faith with Israel while at the same time destroying the temple. “All Israel” is saved in the first century, but the leadership of Israel is taken over by Jesus and His apostles. This needs to be qualified in all kinds of ways, but it’s a key part of the picture.
2) Practically, the debates help to clarify some of the things going on in the Reformed world these days, in relation to debates about, say, the Auburn Four or the New Perspective on Paul. I don’t mean to equate anyone in the Reformed world with the opponents of Jesus in the sense that I believe they are hypocrites or impious. That is far from the truth. But the struggle today is similar to the gospel debate over the future and direction of Israel, because it is a struggle over the future direction of the Reformed churches. And it is a struggle about who’s going to decide that future. This helps to explain why the debate can become nasty, why there is so much misunderstanding and innuendo, why apparently “minor” issues trigger major reactions. Perhaps we can’t all just get along and live together.
The other analogy that I see is this: On the one side, you have most of the big names in the Reformed world and the major seminaries, while on the other side you have a ragtag collection of autodidacts from places like Grande Prairie, Alberta, Moscow, Idaho, and Monroe, Louisiana. Again, with no implication at all about the sincerity of those who oppose the Auburn Four, it is simply the case that they hold the stronger position institutionally than the Auburn Avenue group. And if the struggle really is about the direction of the Reformed churches, it is a struggle about the direction of those institutions. In short, there is a whole lot at stake.
This is as much a challenge to those (like me) who support the Auburn Avenue side of the debate as it is to our opponents; we need to realize the stakes, admit to ourselves and our opponents what’s really going on, and not be surprised when our opponents come out with the big guns.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, February 23, 2004 at 5:51 am
1) There’s a new symmetry to the story of the challenge to Jesus’ authority in verses 1-8. On the one hand, there’s a clear chiastic structure:
A. Authority: Question
B. John’s baptism: Question
B. John’s baptism: No answer
A. Authority: No answer
There’s also the pattern of alternative speakers:
A. Priests ask question
B. Jesus answers with a question
A. Priests reason and don’t answer
B. Jesus refuses to answer a question
2) There’s yet another stone reference in v 17: Jesus is the cornerstone that has been rejected by the (temple) builders, but who is going to become the chief stone of a new temple. The cryptic warning in v 18 is clarified by recognizing that Jesus’ references to stones throughout this section of Luke have to do with the temple. Those who fall on the stone are those who become worshipers of the new temple, but others will be crushed underneath the falling stones of the temple. Jesus’ warning here, then, is similar to His warning in chapter 13, that those who do not repent will “likewise” perish ?Ei.e., their blood will be mingled with the blood of the sacrifices, and they will be crushed under falling masonry (as NT Wright puts it).
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Wednesday, February 18, 2004 at 7:56 am
INTRODUCTION
Once Jesus has cleared out the buyers and sellers in the temple, he turns the temple into a house of teaching (19:47-48). Furious at his attacks on them and the provocative action in the temple, and envious of the crowds, the chief priests, scribes, and other leaders look for ways to get rid of Him. The order of the chapter is important: Jesus reminds His enemies of John’s baptism (vv. 3-8), claims to be the Son who is rejected by the vineyard tenants from whom He has come to collect the tribute (vv. 13-16), and His enemies try to catch Him so they can hand Him over to the Romans (v. 19). A discussion about the resurrection naturally follows (vv. 27-40), ending with the announcement that David’s Messianic Son is David’s Lord (vv. 41-44) and moving into a lengthy description of the destruction of the temple (ch. 21). The chapter is an overview of the whole gospel.
BY WHAT AUTHORITY?
By His actions in the temple, Jesus has gained a brand new set of enemies: the chief priests, who do not appear earlier in Luke (19:47; 20:1). Well-connected and holding positions of ancient respect and authority, the chief priests are formidable enemies. Jesus is playing with the big boys now. They are among the delegation that issues the first challenge to Jesus. As priests, they had the authority and duty of teaching the Law (Deuteronomy 33:10), and demand to know who authorized Jesus to toss things around and teach in the temple. They believe that Jesus is an unaccredited teacher. Worse, He acts as if He owns the place (cf. Luke 2:49).
Jesus’ response has sometimes been seen as a kind of red herring: Instead of answering the question, He changes the subject. But the question about John’s baptism is an answer to the question. Jesus was designated as Messianic “Son of God” by His baptism (Luke 3:21-22), and it is as Son that He has authority in the house of His Father. Jesus’ own baptism, which was accompanied by a heavenly voice, confirms that John’s baptism was from heaven. Jesus’ question stymies his enemies. Since they have already rejected John’s ministry (Luke 7:29-30), they can hardly affirm it now without losing face. Being man-pleasers, however, they don’t want to say anything that will upset the crowds, and criticizing John will upset the crowds. Jesus answers their demand, and silences them in a single question.
CARETAKERS OF THE VINEYARD
Jesus was designated as Son by His baptism, and the parable of the vineyard that follows assumes that He has that status (v. 13; cf. “beloved son” in 3:22; also 9:35). Jesus’ parable is about Israel’s history. The “vineyard” was a common way of describing Israel, and Israel’s entire history could be told as the story of a vineyard (cf. Psalm 80:8-13; Isaiah 5:1-7). The vineyard could refer to the nation of Israel, but here it refers more specifically to the blessings that God bestowed on Israel that Israel could forfeit.
Jesus’ parable, like the vine story in Isaiah 5, tells the story of Israel as a story of unfaithfulness, with Israel’s reaction to Jesus’ ministry as the climax. Yahweh gave Israel the privilege of caring for His vineyard, but Israel refused to pay proper tribute to Him as the vineyard owner. Yahweh sent servant after servant, prophet after prophet, calling for Israel to repent and produce the fruit of repentance (cf. Luke 3:7-9), but they refused. Finally, the owner sends His Son, who is now only mistreated but killed. As a result, the vineyard will be taken from Israel and given to a new nation, the new Israel of Jesus’ disciples.
When His listeners object to the story, Jesus quotes Psalm 118:22 as the punch line of the parable. That verse uses an architectural rather than an agricultural image. Israel’s history is a story of house-building, the erection of a temple. Jesus is the cornerstone rejected by the builders (Israel), but made the chief cornerstone of a new Temple by the Master of the house. Verse 18 describes two possible outcomes of an encounter with this stone: Those who fall on the stone in submission and worship will be broken unto salvation, but those who are underneath the stone will be crushed.
RENDER TO CAESAR
Jesus’ enemies have failed in their challenge to His teaching credentials, and they are unable to seize Him without arousing the anger of the people. So they attempt to trap Him into saying something that could be construed as politically subversive. After all, He has just caused a public stir in the temple, and this could be taken as a prelude to a nationalist resistance movement against Rome. To a Roman governor, this would be a plausible interpretation of Jesus’ actions. Israel was then (as now) a political volcano, ready to erupt at the least provocation. Over and over, there had been violent clashes between Romans and Jews, and the various parties within Judaism were like the various parties within Islam today. There were even terrorists, known as the sicarii or “dagger-men,” and a number of revolutionary movements. Given that the temple was so central to Israel’s sense of national identity, anyone doing provocative things in the temple must not unwatched go. If the priests could connect Jesus with these, they would have ammunition to take Him to Pilate (v. 20). They ask a question about taxation: Should faithful Jews be supporting the Gentile Romans who were occupying the country? Wouldn’t that be a kind of cooperation with paganism? Besides, Caesar’s coins are inherently idolatrous, since they bear Caesar’s image and proclaim him as a son of a god.
Jesus’ answer is multi-layered: First, His answer implies that taxes should be paid to Caesar, a point that Paul reiterates (Romans 13:6-7). Jesus leaves no room for tax revolt.
Second, the second part of His answer (“Render to God”) is a challenge to the spies who ask the question. Because Caesar’s image is on the denarius, it should be paid to Caesar; something stamped with Caesar’s image is Caesar’s and should be rendered to him. But what are the things that should be rendered to God? By the logic of Jesus’ argument, things stamped with God’s image belong to God and should be rendered to Him. Scribes and priests, knowing Torah, would see a reference to Genesis 1:26-28, the creation of man in God’s image. By His question, then, Jesus is challenging the scribes and priests to give themselves to God, and implicitly accusing them of rendering God’s things to another ?Ethat is, accusing them of idolatry. Specifically, He is accusing revolutionary Jews of idolatrously adopting pagan methods for resisting paganism. Finally, His answer is also a challenge to the divine pretensions of Caesar. So, Jesus’ teaching is subversive of Rome after all, but also subverts the Jewish way of subverting Rome.
GOD OF THE LIVING
Finally, the Sadducees come to challenge Jesus. They were another of the “sects” of first-century Judaism. Socially, they tended to be members of the aristocracy, and many of the priests were in this party. Theologically, their most notable teaching, as Luke mentions, is a denial of the resurrection of the dead (v. 27). Their question is an effort to make a mockery of resurrection faith by showing what they consider its absurd consequences.
Jesus answers in two ways: First, He points out that resurrection life is not the same as life prior to the resurrection. In particular, marriage and sex and procreation will not be part of human life in the resurrection. Second, He proves from Scripture that the patriarchs are alive before God, awaiting the final resurrection. Jesus does not say that the patriarchs are already raised, but that they are alive after death until the time they are raised from the dust in glorified bodies.
The question Jesus poses in verses 41-44 is part of the same conversation (cf. “them” in v. 41). It is another response to the question about the resurrection. Jesus has shown that the resurrection is true in general, but the quotation from Psalm 110 is about one particular resurrection, His own, which will demonstrate that He is the One at the right hand of Yahweh. “Messiah” means much more than the Jews realize; the Messiah is not merely another human king in the line of David, but one who shares rule with Yahweh as David’s Lord. The Psalm quotation ends with a warning to the Jews: The Messiah will vindicate Himself against His enemies.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Wednesday, February 18, 2004 at 7:41 am
Permission is given to use material on this site, provided the source is cited, blog entries are republished in full, and the author is notified in advance.
