Luke 5:17-26
By J.D. Myers | June 5, 2010
This passage is often used to prove that Jesus claimed to be God. Though Luke makes this point later in his account, such a reading is not the best understanding of this text. Rather, in this passage Jesus reveals four other significant truths. First, He is teaching His disciples how to fish for men. As they will learn, they also can announce the forgiveness of sins to others. Though people face many burdens, the burden of guilt and the lack of certainty about the love and forgiveness of God are some of the hardest to bear. There is great power in the truth that a person’s sins are forgiven and God is not angry.
The second point that Jesus makes is that He has come to raise Israel from paralysis. The man is portrayed in this text as an illustration of Israel. Throughout Luke and the other Gospels, the Jewish people are described as being unwilling and unable to move toward Jesus in faith. In this very context, the religious leaders reveal an almost complete paralysis of faith. By announcing the forgiveness of sins to this man, based on the faith of his friends, Jesus is showing that He also forgives the sins of the religious leaders and will also raise them to new life if they respond to the forgiveness they have received.
Third, Jesus shows that physical and spiritual restoration are connected. The Rabbis taught that “A sick man does not recover from his sickness until all his sins are forgiven him, as it is written, ‘Who forgives all your iniquities; who heals all your diseases’” (Evans 2003:187). Though many come to Jesus seeking only physical deliverance, He knows that many of the problems they face actually require a spiritual cure. The spiritual problem must be taken care of before the physical can be addressed. This was not necessarily the case with the paralyzed man, but it is definitely the case with the nation of Israel. They wanted physical deliverance from Rome and a restoration of their land and inheritance, but such blessings cannot be granted until the sin of the nation was removed.
This leads to the fourth truth. In announcing forgiveness, and then healing the man, Jesus was not proving Himself to be God, but was proving Himself to be the Messiah. More of this will be explained below, but ultimately, Jesus was showing that part of His ministry was to remove the religious barriers between God and man. Through His life and ministry, He would do away with the religious priesthood, temple, and sacrificial system. Jesus was revolting against the rules and regulations of religion as a means of approaching God for the forgiveness of sins. Through Jesus, people can approach God directly, having already received forgiveness without condition.
5:17. As Jesus continued to travel and teach, news about Him spread, and questions began to be asked. The religious leaders of the day, the Pharisees and teachers of the law, were the ones who decided whether a person was teaching correctly or not. So they came from all over, out of every town of Galilee, Judea, and Jerusalem, to listen to Jesus teach. The title Pharisee comes from the Hebrew word meaning “to divide, to separate” and the Pharisees were known for their strict separation from the world, and for their exactness in making decisions and laws about what was allowed and not allowed in Jewish law and teaching. They were here to make such a decision. They had heard reports of what Jesus was teaching, and desired to hear Him for themselves in order to determine whether they should accept and encourage Him, or accuse and condemn Him.
Luke writes that the religious leaders were sitting. In Jewish culture of the time, teachers sat and taught while students stood. Probably Jesus was sitting as well, but the Pharisees wanted to be seen as equals to Jesus, as ones who did not need to learn anything from Him, but as those who would listen to what He taught in order to judge its validity.
The parallel account in Mark 2 tells us that there were not just Pharisees and teachers of the law present, but also a large crowd of people who had gathered to hear Jesus teach the Word of God (Mark 2:2). And Luke records that the power of the Lord was present to heal them. Luke, because he is a physician, emphasizes the healing ministry of Jesus, whereas Mark emphasizes the teaching ministry of Jesus. Jesus often did both. He taught the Word, and then He proved that what He was saying was true by performing miracles. In that time, this was how prophets showed that what they were teaching was true. So from this alone, the Pharisees and teachers of the law, and the surrounding crowd should have recognized that Jesus was a prophet of God, as many of them did (John 7:40).
However, many others were skeptical, and were probably getting ready to question and challenge the teachings of Jesus when something strange happened.
5:18. There were some men present who had brought on a bed a man who was paralyzed. In Jewish culture, paralysis was viewed as the judgment of God due to serious sin. As such, people who were paralyzed were banned from the priesthood, and in some areas, excluded from full participation in the community (Green 1997:239). This man was outcast by men, and viewed as judged by God.
The friends of this man had heard of the healing power of Jesus, and wanted to bring in and lay the paralyzed man before Jesus. The house was crowded to overflowing, and in Mark 2, it says that there was no room at the door. Trying to get a makeshift bed through a standing-room only crowd would cause quite a disturbance. In the story, the crowd of people, which includes religious leaders, represents a barrier that is keeping the man from Jesus (Green 1997:240). This is what the man has experienced in life as a result of his paralysis. People, led by the religious leaders, kept him from experiencing God and receiving any blessing from God.
5:19. The men could not find how they might bring him in, because of the crowd. The men were persistent, however, and decided to go upon the [/b]housetop and let him down with his bed through the tiling into the midst before Jesus.[/b] Jewish homes generally had flat roofs which stairs going up the side of the house. On summer nights, families might go up there to sleep where they could catch the cool evening breeze. They were constructed with wood beams covered with thatching, which were then laid over with mud, clay, and stone tile (Barclay 1975:62; Bock 1994:480). To lower the man through the roof, they would have torn up the rock tile, dug a hole through the clay and mud, and ripped out the thatching. These roofs could have been as much as three feet thick, making it nearly impossible to dig through, and if done so, would essentially destroy the house (Pentecost 1981:152). So it is more likely that Jesus was in a covered gallery, or side room, of the main house. The roofs on such rooms had similar construction, but were much thinner (Edersheim 1988:503). All of this would have created quite a stir in the room below, both from the noise and with the falling pieces of mud and dirt. The owner of the house may have been alarmed as well.
Finally, when the gaping hole is large enough, the men lower the paralyzed man on the pallet down to the floor in front of Jesus.
5:20. Jesus saw their faith and was impressed. This is the first mention of faith (Gk. pistis) in Luke. The content of what they believed is not explained. But the fact that Jesus saw their faith probably refers to how they took every step possible to bring the paralyzed man before Jesus. In this case, their faith is not a metaphysical persuasion within the mind, but an outward, visible, act of faith. They were not believing in Jesus for eternal life, believing that He was God, or placing faith in Him as the Messiah. They believed the words which Jesus taught, which was probably that since Jesus had power to heal, the Kingdom of God was at hand (Evans 2003:186; cf. Luke 4:18). As a result of this belief, they acted on it, and did what was necessary.
When the main had been laid before Jesus, He said to him, “Man, your sins are forgiven you.” Many get confused by this verse because they think that Jesus has just given eternal life to the paralyzed man based the faith of his friends. But this is not the case.
Jesus is not giving the man eternal life. He is simply announcing that his sins are forgiven. Through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is provided to the entire world without condition (1 John 2:2). This does not mean that all have eternal life, however, since faith in Jesus is required for that (John 3:16; 5:24; 6:47).
These men certainly had faith, and they believed in Jesus for healing. But they did not believe in Jesus for eternal life, at least not according to anything written in the text. So this passage is not about receiving eternal life. It is about how Jesus offers forgiveness of sins, which in a Jewish context, is related to the Messianic actions of bringing physical deliverance from sickness, bondage, and judgment (cf. 1:77; 3:3; 24:47). “Jesus’ offer is not to be construed, as it has been so often, as an attempt to play at ‘being god’… Forgiveness was an eschatological blessing; if Israel went into exile because of her sins, then forgiveness consists in her returning: returning to YHWH, returning from exile” (Wright 2006:434).
The men, including the paralyzed man, were probably not expecting to hear that the man’s sins were forgiven. They just wanted the man to be healed. But Jesus is showing that sometimes spiritual deliverance is a prerequisite to physical restoration. Plus, Jesus wants to prove that He is destroying the religious walls that have been erected between God and man. The religious leaders question Jesus about this in the following verses.
5:21. As a result of Jesus declaring that the man’s sins are forgiven, the scribes and the Pharisees began to reason among themselves about what Jesus meant. They make the accusation that Jesus speaks blasphemies for ”Who can forgive sins but God alone?”
Due to what the Pharisees say, many believe that in telling the man that his sins are forgiven, Jesus is making a claim to being divine (cf. Edersheim 1988:505; Pentecost 1981:153; GNTC I:249). On the surface, it does seem this is what the Pharisees understand Jesus to be claiming. After all, what other form of blasphemy is there except someone claiming to be God when they are not? This understanding is supported by verses like Psalm 103:12 which says that only God can forgive sins.
But there at least three other reasons why Jesus could have been accused of blasphemy. This accusation could have leveled against Jesus for speaking against the Torah, engaging in idolatry, or bringing shame on Yahweh’s name (Bock 1994:483).
So Jesus is probably not making a claim about His deity. The religious leaders thought Jesus was speaking against the Torah, or at least, their understanding of it. This is especially true when the forgiveness of sins is understood within Roman culture and the Jewish religion. Culturally, the Roman emperor claimed to have the power to forgiven sins, not for “eternal life” but so that the rains would come and crops would grow (Evans 2003:187). Forgiveness of sins was related to physical restoration and healing.
It is the same in Judaism. Forgiveness of sins, as has already been pointed out (cf. 1:77; 3:3), is related to the release and restoration of persons and individuals from the temporal consequences of sin, such as physical sickness or death, temporal judgment, and bondage to other nations. It is not how to gain entrance into heaven or eternal life, but is a prerequisite to the arrival of the Kingdom of God. In Judaism, the primary means by which this forgiveness was obtained was through the sacrificial system at the temple as administered by the priests. When a guilty person when to the temple, and offered their sacrifice to the priests in the prescribed way, the priest would pronounce that their sins were forgiven (Lev 4:20, 26, 31, 35; 5:10, 13, 16, 18, etc.). This was the method prescribed by God.
So it was not uncommon for a priest to announce to a person that their sins were forgiven. Sometimes even prophets did this (2 Sam 12:13). Yet nobody believed that when a priest said this, the priest was claiming to be God. They were simply following the regulations laid out by God for the forgiveness of sins. Everybody understood that when a priest said, “Your sins are forgiven,” they meant, “Your sins are forgiven by God.” That is how Jesus would have been understood. When Jesus announced that the man’s sins were forgiven, nobody thought He was making a claim to be God. If He had wanted to claim He was God, He would have said, “I forgive your sins.” But He doesn’t. He speaks in the passive voice (“Your sins are forgiven”), just as a priest would, implying that it was God who forgave the man his sins.
So the issue was not what Jesus said, but rather the context in which He said it. Only the priests could offer forgiveness of sins, and even then, only to people who were in the temple, and after they had made the proper sacrifices. By telling the man, “Your sins are forgiven” Jesus was bypassing the temple, the priests, and the sacrificial system. Though not claiming to be God, Jesus was claiming to speak for God as a prophet (Wright 2004:60).
A few quotes from N. T. Wright explain in more detail:
[quote]The point is that Jesus was offering the return from exile, the renewed covenant, the eschatological ‘forgiveness of sins’—in other words, the kingdom of god. And he was offering the final eschatological blessing outside the official structures, to all the wrong people, and on his own authority. That was his real offense (Wright 1996:272).[/quote]
[quote]’My child, your sins are forgiven’: that sentence has the effect of a private individual approaching you on the street and offering to issue you with a passport or a driving license—or, perhaps more appropriately in this case, a private individual approaching a prisoner in jail and offering him a royal pardon, signed by himself. From the twentieth-century, late-deist, western-individual perception, it looks simply as if Jesus is behaving as ‘god’, dispensing forgiveness from a great metaphysical height. That gives a spurious perception of why such symbolic behavior was shocking. In first-century Jewish reality, the way YHWH forgave sins, as we saw, was ultimately through the officially established and authorized channels of Temple and priesthood (Wright 2006:435).[/quote]
It was this that the religious leaders could not stand. Jesus was doing away with their religious system, and allowing humans to approach God without the temple, without the priests, and without a sacrifice. It was unthinkable! These were things God had ordained, so in the thinking of the religious leaders, Jesus was speaking blasphemy. “The objection of the Pharisees…was that Jesus was claiming to offer something he had no right to offer, on conditions he had no right to set, to people who had no right to receive it” (Wright 2006:436).
5:22. Though He did not hear what they said, Jesus perceived their thoughts, or understood what they accusing Him of, and told them so. Again, this would not prove His divinity, as if He had omniscience. At most, it proves that Jesus is a prophet (Green 1997:242). They have questioned Him in their hearts, and so now He sets out to question them.
5:23. Jesus sets out to prove that He has authority to forgive sins without the temple, the priesthood, or the sacrificial system. He asks, ”Which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven you,’ or to say, ‘Rise up and walk’?” Clearly, the former is easier to say since there is no outward evidence that actual forgiveness has taken place. But if someone says “Rise up and walk” all would be able to see whether the paralyzed man actually walks or not. The first statement cannot be demonstrated, but the second can.
5:24. According to Jewish thinking, a Prophet’s words can only be trusted if he has the accompanying signs to back him up. Jesus is going to provide a sign to prove that He has the authority to forgiven sins without religious rituals or intermediaries. If the man is healed, this proves that Jesus is not a blasphemer, but that the power of God is with Him.
Jesus refers to Himself as the Son of Man. This is the first time this title is used of Jesus in Luke’s account, and the only time it is used in connection to a miraculous healing. In the Hebrew Scriptures, this title (Heb. ben Adam) is most often used of the Prophet Ezekiel. A major theme in Ezekiel is that God will take the dead nation of Israel and restore her to new life. This is especially seen in the famous vision of the Valley of Dry Bones (Ezekiel 37). Since Jesus is about to restore life to a paralyzed man as a picture of how He can restore life to a paralyzed nation, it is fitting that this is the first place where Jesus refers to Himself as the Son of Man.
The title has further significance, however. It does not indicate divinity, but rather, humanity, or anyone who is son of Adam (Heb. ben Adam). The usage in Daniel 7:13 (cf. 8:17) contrasts the Son of Man with the four beasts. They are spiritual; the Son of Man is human (Bock 1994:486). When Jesus uses this title of Himself, He is hinting that He is the new Adam, the new representative of humanity, the new model for all mankind (cf. Rom 5:12-21). As sons of Adam ourselves, we also are able to announce the forgiveness of sins that is freely given to all through Jesus Christ. We, however, do not need to seek the accompanying miraculous signs, since we do not have to prove that we have the authority to bypass religion. Jesus has already proven this. Nevertheless, we must still seek to bring healing and restoration in the lives of others, even if it is not through “miraculous” means.
After referring to Himself as the Son of Man, He sets out to prove that He has power on earth to forgive sins. He does this by saying to the man who was paralyzed, “I say to you, arise, take up your bed, and go to your house.”
5:25. As a result of the words of Jesus, the paralyzed man rose up before them, took up what he had been lying on, and departed to his own house, glorifying God. The physical transformation would have been visible to the eye as atrophied muscles strengthened and rebuilt. The man did not remain, but picked up his mat, and went home, giving praise to God.
5:26. All the people who witnessed the miraculous healing were amazed, and they glorified God and were filled with fear, saying, “We have seen strange things today!” Not only did they see the roof torn off a house and a bed drop down from the ceiling, but then a showdown between Jesus and the Pharisees followed in which Jesus healed a man of paralysis and proved that forgiveness of sins was available to all without the need of religious rituals.
To comment on this post, please use the forum.
| Please Leave Comments in the Commentary Forum
Luke 5:12-16
By J.D. Myers | April 25, 2010
After calling some fishermen to follow Him, Jesus begins to show them what it means to be a fisher of men. The people that Jesus tried to catch were not the rich, the powerful, and the influential, but primarily the poor, the sick, and the neglected. Tax collectors, prostitutes, Gentiles, and thieves were drawn to Jesus. In Luke 5:12-16, Jesus reaches out to a person from one of the most rejected groups of all—a leper. This account is parallel in many ways to 4:31-37, and continues to show that Jesus is a prophet like Elisha, and maybe more than a prophet. The point, however, is to show the reader how the mission of Jesus was carried out. He did not focus on the rich and powerful. He had no desire to gather multitudes of followers. He wanted to do exactly what He said in 4:18-19, to heal, mend, restore, and set free.
5:12. The event takes place when Jesus was in a certain city. Luke does not specify which city this was, but it was probably a city of Galilee. However, in this city, Jesus encounters someone who should not be there: a man who was full of leprosy. To be full of leprosy means that he had an advanced case of leprosy. It covered his body (Evans 2003:165).
Leprosy is a dreadful disease. Many believe that leprosy causes the skin to rot and fall off the body, but this is not really the case. Leprosy primarily attacks the body’s nervous system so that the leper eventually loses the ability to feel. The infected parts of the body go numb and eventually lose all sensitivity. So technically, having leprosy never actually kills anyone. Instead, what kills a person with leprosy is the damage that is done to the body as a result of it not being able to feel pain. True leprosy, also known as “Hansen’s disease, occurred rarely, if at all, in first-century Palestine; hence the term here probably refers to skin diseases of other sorts (cf. Leviticus 13)” (Malina 203:246). However, medical science of the time had little ability to distinguish between skin diseases, and so all skin diseases were categorized under “leprosy” and treated the same. Other skin diseases that may have been broadly categorized as “leprosy” are psoriasis, lupus, ringworm, and favus (Bock 1994:472).
Lepers were expected to wear torn clothing, live outside the town, and cry “Unclean! Unclean!” if approached by people (Lev 13:45). They were not allowed to have contact with other people, including friends or family. If a leper refused to leave a town, the authorities could enforce it by threatening him with thirty-nine lashes, the most allowable by law (Edersheim 1988:493; cf. Pentecost 1981:149). If a leper touched an animal, the animal had to be killed. If a leper entered a house, the house and all its contents had to be burned. But leprosy wasn’t just a Rabbis viewed leprosy as a type of “living death” and commanded people to avoid lepers, not only for sanitary or health considerations, but also for moral reasons (Edersheim 1988:492). Leprosy was often associated with sin (Bock 1994:473). They truly were “untouchables” in every sense of the word. They were despised, forsaken, forgotten, ignored, judged, and condemned. Some of them felt such shame and rejection, they committed suicide (Barclay 1975:58). This unqualified love and acceptance of those whom society rejects sets the scene for the calling of Matthew in Luke 5:27-32.
If this man was full of leprosy, he probably had not had much human contact for many years (Wright 2004:57). But for some reason, this man had come into the city, which is quite shocking. The crowds would have parted before him like the Red Sea before Moses. Nobody wanted to be near a man with leprosy.
Why did he come into the city? Luke does not say. Maybe he came searching for Jesus. And when he saw Jesus, he fell on his face and implored Him, saying, “Lord, if You are willing, You can make me clean.” How did the leper recognize Jesus? Either he had seen Jesus before, or he had heard descriptions of Him. Or maybe, as the crowds gave way before the leper, Jesus did not move out of the way, but let the leprous man draw near. However it happened, the man prostrated himself before Jesus and begged for cleansing. This request was not conditional upon the ability of Jesus to heal, but rather upon His willingness. The leper knew Jesus could heal, if only He was willing (Bock 1994:474). This request is similar to 2 Kings 5;3 where Naaman is advised to seek a prophet if he would be cleansed of his leprosy.
5:13. Before Jesus answered the man, He put out His hand and touched him. Such an action would have shocked both the leper and the disciples (Malina 2003:246). People were supposed to stay well away from lepers, but Rabbis and Priests in particular would avoid lepers, for touching one would make them ceremonially unclean. One Rabbi would not eat an egg purchased from a street that had a leper. Another Rabbi boasted that he threw stones at lepers in order to keep them well away (Edersheim 1988:495). The actions of Jesus were far different. Though touching the leper made Jesus ceremonially unclean, such an action was necessary for Jesus to show tenderness, acceptance, and compassion to a man who had not received such love in a long time. Jesus shows what is necessary to be a fisher of men.
Beyond just touching him, Jesus said, “I am willing; be cleansed.” He rewarded the man’s request of faith, announced His willingness to cleanse the man, and immediately the leprosy left him. Being healed of the leprosy may have meant more than just the disease leaving the man’s body. It may have been that the man was fully healed, receiving back his fingers, toes, or any limbs that may have been lost. If the people following Jesus had been shocked when Jesus touched the man, they would be more shocked at seeing the man become instantaneously whole again.
5:14. The man’s first instinct was probably to go home to his wife and family. However, Jesus instructed the man to make sure he follows the Mosaic Law, and tell no one but instead, first ”go and show yourself to the priest, and make an offering.” Jesus knew that the man would go home to his family, and also tell his neighbors what had happened. How could he not? But before he did that, Jesus wanted the man to first do what the Law required, and get pronounced clean by the priest, and then also make an offering, just as Moses commanded Such actions would enable the man to go home without fear of infecting his family (I agree with Bock 1994:475 who presents this as the most likely explanation).
In this way, the man would also be a testimony to the priests. Prior to this event, the Bible only records three people who had been cleansed of leprosy, and one of them wasn’t even Jewish (Moses, Miriam, and Naaman). Cleansing from this form of leprosy was always miraculous. When this man presented himself, the priest would have known that something amazing had just taken place. Possibly this was the very priest who had pronounced the man unclean years earlier. Getting declared clean was a week-long process (Lev 14:1-32; cf. Bock 1994:476).
The religious leaders of the day had developed a list of signs which would accompany the coming of the Messiah. One of them was the healing of those with leprosy. When this man appears before the priest claiming to be cleansed from what only two people had ever been cleansed from before, the priest should have recognized that the Messiah had come. When Jesus tells the man to go make the offering, it was to be a testimony to the priests that the Messiah had come.
Earlier, in Luke 4:27, Jesus has said that though there were many lepers in Israel at the time of Elisha, only Naaman was cleansed. So here, Jesus has done something that one of Israel’s greatest prophets had not done—heal a Jewish man of leprosy. This would have been a great testimony to the priests and people of that day, and the natural response should be to accept Him, not only as a prophet, but as the promised Messiah, for the only known cure of leprosy was by miracle (Lightfoot 1989:78).
5:15. After the man did what Jesus asked, the report went around concerning Him all the more (cf. 4:37; cf. Mark 1:4-54). It was not only the man who spread the news, but the people who saw Jesus heal the man. As a result, great multitudes came together to hear, and to be healed by Him. Hearing and healing is a constant theme throughout Luke, but especially in these opening chapters (Hearing, 4:16-30; Healing, 4:31-41; Hearing, 4:42-5:11; Healing, 5:12-26; Hearing, 5:27-6:5; Healing, 6:6-19; Hearing, 6:20-49; Healing, 7:1-17; etc.). If Jesus was trying to keep the report about Him from spreading, teaching and healing the multitudes was not the best way to accomplish that.
5:16. Some have understood verse 16 to say that rather than teach and heal the multitudes when they came to Him, Jesus retreated and went to the wilderness to pray. But this is not the best way to understand this text. Instead, after Jesus had taught and healed the multitudes, he withdrew into the wilderness and prayed. The wilderness was not only the place of Jesus greatest test and temptation, but also the place for being refueled spiritually. It was there, in the wilderness, alone with God and His thoughts, that he prayed to continue in the will of God. Of all the gospel writers, Luke emphasizes the prayer life of Jesus more than any other.
He often withdrew in such a manner, which means that this was not a onetime event. The multitudes often came to hear him teach and be healed. He often met their needs, and afterwards, withdrew to spend time in prayer. For Luke’s purposes, Jesus is shown to be focusing on His relationship with God, rather than fanning the flames of a people’s movement (Bock 1994:478).
To comment on this post, please use the forum.
| Please Leave Comments in the Commentary Forum
Luke 5:1-11
By J.D. Myers | April 11, 2010
One of the primary functions of Jesus during His ministry was preaching and teaching the Word of God. This focus on explaining Scripture allowed Him to reveal what living in light of the Kingdom of God looked like. Such instruction was essential for the disciples of Jesus if they were going to carry on the mission of Jesus, as they begin to do in Acts (cf. Green1997:228).
The events in this section are near the beginning of the second year of ministry, and due to His teaching and miracles, Jesus has gathered quite a large number of followers. However, at the beginning of this second year, Jesus began to focus on teaching several of these followers. Luke 5:1-11 records the selection of three of these.
It is unclear if this event is parallel to or follows after the similar events in Matthew 4:18-22 and Mark 1:16-20. Many believe the events are parallel, but there are enough differences between those accounts and this passage in Luke to lead one to believe the events are different (cf. Bock 1994:450). For example, in Matthew 4 and Mark 1, Jesus is walking along the shore and invites Simon and Andrew to follow Him, and then walking along some more, also invites James and John. But in Luke 5, Jesus is teaching from a boat, and from within the boat, after a great catch of fish, He invites Simon to catch men. If they are all talking about the same account, it seems incredible that neither Matthew nor Mark include the miraculous catch of fish. But then, even if they are different events, this miraculous catch of fish is not recorded at all in Matthew or Luke. It seems best to conclude that they are different events, with the accounts of Matthew and Mark preceding the account of Luke by a few weeks or months. This view is supported by the fact that Simon is already following Jesus (4:38-39).
5:1. The end of chapter four indicated that Jesus intended to teach the Scriptures all over the region of Galilee. On one such day, the multitudes had gathered to hear Jesus teach the word of God. Jesus not only taught the Scriptures in the synagogue on the Sabbath, but whenever and wherever the opportunity presented itself. On this occasion, He taught on the shore of the Lake of Gennesaret, also known as the Sea of Galilee. The lake is about eight miles wide and fourteen miles long and was a popular place for fishing (on fishing, see Edersheim, 1988:473ff).
5:2. As the crowd grew and pressed in on Jesus to hear what He was saying, He found himself backed up against the water, and so, not wanting to stand in the water and teach, He decided to get into a boat and teach a little way out from shore. There were two boats standing by the lake; but the fishermen had gone from them and were washing their nets. Most likely, they were able to listen to Jesus teach while they went about their work. The detail about the fishermen washing their nets is crucial for the development of the tension in this text.
Fishing on the Sea of Galilee was mostly done at night as this is when fish were more active, out of hiding, and had more difficulty seeing the linen nets (Green 1997:232). There were two ways of fishing using nets. The first used a circular net with weights around the circumference of the net, with a long cord coming out of the center. During the night, the fishermen would stand on the boat or shore with the night slung over their shoulder. While holding on to the cord, they would flip the net out over the water so that it twirled and spread out wide. When it hit the water, the weights cause the net to drop to the bottom like a cone, trapping any fish within. Using the cord, the fisherman begins to slowly draw the net back up while the weights on the net draw together along the bottom, keeping the fish inside. Once the net is pulled up, and the fish removed, the whole process is repeated. This type of fishing is probably what is done later in the ministry of Jesus when He tells them to cast their nets on the other side of the boat (John 21:6).
The second type of fishing required two boats, and used a dragnet (cf. Matt 13:47). It was for deep water fishing, generally done at night, and allowed for a larger number of fish to be caught. It was the kind of fishing being done here, since two boats are mentioned. The boats would go a certain way out into the water, and then, with the spread the net between them, drop the lower end of the net to the bottom while the top was secured to the boats. Then the boats would slowly move in toward shore, dragging the net along the bottom as they want. The net acted like a sieve, trapping fish inside until the net was pulled up near shore.
Both methods required long hours of hard, physical labor during the night. But once morning came, the work was not done. The fish not only had to be cleaned and sold, but the nets had to be cleaned and sewn. Dragging the nets along the bottom caused them to pick up sticks, stones, and other debris that had to removed, and small tears had to be mended so they did not become large, gaping holes which allowed the fish to escape. Cleaning the nets was a long, arduous process, and took several hours. After this was complete, the fisherman could go home and sleep, before rising at dusk to repeat the whole process.
5:3. The fisherman had no need of their boats while they cleaned the nets, and so Jesus got into one of the boats, which was Simon’s, and asked him to put out a little from the land. Maybe Simon was finished with cleaning his nets, or maybe the other fisherman agreed to finish so that Jesus could finish teaching. Listening to Him most certainly made the time go faster. So Simon took Jesus a little way out from shore, and from there, Jesus sat down and taught the multitudes from the boat.
This is the not the first time Jesus and Simon had met. About a year earlier, Jesus had invited Simon’s brother, Andrew, to follow Him, and Andrew brought Simon along as well (John 1:35-42). But they hadn’t left their fishing, and it seems that Jesus spent time where Simon and Andrew were so they and the other fisherman could learn from Jesus while He taught without having to leave their jobs. But this is all about to change.
5:4. After Jesus finished speaking He asked Simon to take the boat out into the deep and let down the nets for a catch. This was a strange request on multiple levels. First, Simon was the professional fisherman; Jesus was not. Jesus was a carpenter, and while He probably knew the basics of fishing, He was not as skilled or as knowledgeable as Simon. From Simon’s perspective, the request of Jesus reveals His ignorance. It was probably nearing the middle of the day, which is the worst time of the day to fish, as every fisherman knows. The nets were made for night fishing, and during the day, the nets were visible to the fish, and could be avoided.
Second, Simon and his friends had just finished cleaning their nets and should be going home to bed so they can be well rested for the next night of fishing. If they let down the nets now, they would have be cleaned again, which would take most of the afternoon, leaving little time left for sleep. This, in turn, would make it more difficult for them to fish that night.
5:5. Simon’s answer reflects some of his frustration. Though he refers to Jesus as Master, the title is more equivalent to Rabbi, with the implication that Jesus is a teacher, while Simon is the fisherman (Bock 1994:456). He and the other fisherman have already toiled all night and caught nothing. The word toiled (Gk. kopiasantes) refers to wearisome work, and indicates that Simon and his partners are tired from a long night of fruitless labor (Bock 1994:456). This is a tactful way of saying that if they didn’t catch anything during the night, they wouldn’t catch anything during the day either. And fishing during the day would only make them more tired for fishing during the following night, which may lead to another night of no fish. From a fisherman’s perspective, Jesus was making a foolish request.
Nevertheless, at the word of Jesus, Simon Peter agrees to let down the net. Maybe he does this to humor Jesus, but the text seems to imply he did it out of faithful obedience. Simon Peter did not know what was going to happen, or even if something would happen. Jesus promised nothing for obedience.
5:6. When they had let down the net and started to pull it back in, they discovered that they had caught a great number of fish. So many, in fact, that their net was breaking. Unlike in John 21:11, where they caught 153 fish, it is not recorded how many fish were caught.
5:7. So as not to break the net and lose all the fish, they signaled to their partners in the other boat to come and help them. Even then, there were so many fish, that they filled both the boats and they began to sink.
5:8. The response of Simon Peter to this miracle reveals some of what he may have been thinking when Jesus asked him to let down his nets after he had just finished cleaning them. He is called Simon Peter here, rather than just Simon, because his new apostolic nature starting to emerge. Occasionally in the Gospels, Simon the man is set in contrast to Peter the Apostle. He is more commonly referred to as Peter once Jesus gives him this nickname in Luke 6:14.
The response of Peter to this miracle is surprising. The general response to such a miracle would be amazement, wonder, awe, and a desire for Jesus to stay and perform more miracles (cf. 4:42). But Peter asks Jesus to depart. Peter states that he is a sinful man, implying that he has no right to be in the company of Jesus. But what sin had Peter committed? It was probably not something Peter said or did, but something he thought about Jesus. He may have felt anger, bitterness, or resentment at Jesus for asking Peter to fish in the middle of the day. Peter had just finished cleaning his nets, and to let them down again would require Peter to clean them all over again. This would keep him from going home to his family, and from getting adequate rest to prepare for the next night of fishing. Though it is not recorded, it is quite likely that such thoughts went through Peter’s mind, and now he is confessing them to Jesus, saying that he is not worthy to be in the company of Jesus.
Also, if it is granted that the events here in Luke follow Matthew 4:18-22 and Mark 1:16-20 by a period of a few weeks or months, then Simon has previously been called to follow Jesus and become a fisher of men, but has now gone back to fishing. If so, he may be confessing the sin of turning back from following Jesus. He is confessing his doubt in the ability of Jesus to provide for him.
But now, far from doubting Jesus, Peter declares Jesus is his Lord. This is in contrast to the earlier usage of “Master” (5:5). Simon is not stating that Jesus is God (Green 1997:233), and it is not even certain that Peter believed Jesus was the Messiah (cf. Matt 16:16; contra. Pentecost 1981:143). Instead, Peter now recognizes the authority of Jesus, and submits himself to Jesus as One who is worthy of trust.
5:9. The reason for Peter’s confession of sin is that he and all who were with him were astonished at the catch of fish they had taken. The miracle caused amazement, which led to the recognition that Jesus had not asked them to do something ridiculous after all.
5:10. Among these others were James and John, the sons of Zebedee. John may have been one of the first followers of Jesus (John would be the unnamed second disciple in John 1:45-52). As fishing partners with Simon, they would have shared in the task of cleaning the nets and hauling in the fish, as well as the potential rewards from such a great catch.
Simeon has confessed his sin to Jesus, and might be afraid that Jesus will not allow Simon to follow Him any longer. When Jesus speaks to Simon[/i] directly, He is not talking only Simon, but speaking to him as the spokesperson and leader for the group. [b]Jesus to him, [b/]“Do not be afraid. From now on you will catch men.”[/b] Jesus is not here to judge or condemn Simon, but to challenge and encourage him in discipleship directions. Again, if this event follows the previous earlier calling (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20), then Jesus is reiterating that Simon can trust Jesus to provide for him as he follows Jesus in catching men.
The idea of catching men does not refer primarily to saving souls from hell so they can go to heaven when they die. “The figure is one of rescue from danger, as the OT and Jewish usage of the concepts ‘to let live’ and ‘to save alive’ show” (Bock 1994:461). Though fish are caught to die, people are rescued to live. This call to discipleship, though frequently observed among Jewish Rabbis, was different in many regards. Jesus was not calling them to learn doctrine or to continue more fully in a way of life they were already practicing, but to learn and follow a completely new way of life, a life of mission, ministry, and service among people who, like Simon, saw themselves as sinners (cf. 5:32). Just as Simon had been “caught” by Jesus, so Jesus was calling Simon to catch others.
5:11. Simon had learned to trust Jesus, even when the request seemed foolish. So now, having just made the largest catch of his entire career as a fisherman, and when they had brought their boats to land, they forsook all and followed Him. They left the boats, the nets, and the record number of fish, and followed Jesus, which becomes a common imagery for being a disciple of Jesus. These men recognized that He had called them to a greater and higher purpose than fishing, and has proven that He has the “knowledge and ability to guide” (Bock 1994:454). The night before, Simon had come home empty handed. Now, as a result of doing what Jesus had said, he and his partners had made the biggest catch of their lives. Now Jesus was asking Simon to do something that seemed even more foolish. He was asking Simon to leave it all behind and follow Jesus in pursuit of something even more valuable; to follow Jesus in catching men.
To comment on this post, please use the forum.
| Please Leave Comments in the Commentary Forum
Luke 4:38-44
By J.D. Myers | March 13, 2010
In fulfillment of Luke 4:18-19, Jesus continues to carry out His ministry through preaching the gospel and performing miracles.
4:38. After preaching in the synagogue and casting out the demon (4:33-35), Jesus entered Simon’s house. This is the first time Simon—who later becomes known as Peter— is mentioned in the book of Luke, and he has not yet officially become a disciple of Jesus (cf. Luke 5:1-11). Simon is probably one of those who regularly attended the Capernaum synagogue, and they went there for the Sabbath afternoon meal. But when they arrived, they learned that Simon’s wife’s mother was sick with a high fever. Simon was married and had a wife (cf. 1 Cor 9:5), and his mother-in-law lived there as well, and she was sick. The fact that she is living with her son may indicate that she was a widow (Malina 2003:244; Green 1997:225).
The term Luke uses here for high fever is an actual diagnoses for a well-known fever at that time, also called Eshatha Tsemirta, or the “burning fever” (Gk. puretō megalō; Bock 1994:436). The Jewish Talmud prescribes the following remedy: one must take a knife made of iron and tie it to a thornbush with a braid of hair and then for four days, recite one verse a day from Exodus 3:2-5. On the fourth day, the bush is to be cut down, and a formula should be pronounced (Edersheim 1988:486).
But Jesus did none of this. Instead, they—probably Simon and his wife—made a request to Jesus to see if He would heal her. They did not demand something of Jesus, or expect magical rites and ceremonies, but made a simple request to Him.
4:39. In response to their request, Jesus stood over her and rebuked the fever, and it left her. No ceremony or rite was required. Jesus simply told the fever to depart, and it did. The terminology here is nearly identical to the immediately preceding event when Jesus rebuked the demon (4:35). Some have argued that this indicates that this fever was caused by a demon (cf. Bock 1994:436). Later, Jesus rebukes the wind and waves (8:24), and so some see similar demonic influence there. But such understandings read too much into the text, and give too much credit and power to the devil. It is better to understand these texts as ways of revealing that Jesus has come to reverse all that is wrong with the world, whether it is demonic oppression, disease and sickness, or destructive storms. Furthermore, Luke is a physician and knew the difference between sickness and a demon. He says Simon’s mother-in-law is sick, and we must not read more into it than that. Also, if this sickness was caused by a demon, then the healing that Jesus performs here would only continue to show His power and authority over demons; not His power and authority over regular physical ailments. But Luke is intent on showing that Jesus has power over all areas of life which cause problems to humans.
So after Jesus healed the woman, she arose and served them. She was serving them food on the Sabbath, which was not a violation of the Sabbath. Luke records this to show that not only was she healed of the fever, but she also received all her strength. She did not have to recuperate (Pentecost 1981:146). And once she is healed, she served. Being healed by Jesus resulted in service to Him.
4:40. Near the end of the Sabbath day, as the sun was setting, Jesus went out from Simon’s house to heal all who were sick with various diseases. There are no complaints about Jesus healing on the Sabbath, though this will become an issue later as the religious leaders look to find some fault with Jesus. On this Sabbath, He didn’t heal just a select few, but laid His hands on every one of them and healed them. Jesus was not just a good teacher of spiritual truths, but also sought to alleviate pain and suffering in the people around Him. And He wasn’t concerned only with those who were closest to Him, but for all people who came with their needs.
4:41. Jesus not only healed the sick, but demons also came out of many. As they were case out by Jesus, many tried to proclaim who He was, saying, “You are the Christ, the Son of God!” This is very similar to what the demon in 4:34 said. The demons were intent on proclaiming Jesus as the Messiah. They were not necessarily proclaiming Him to be God, but simply the Anointed One of God.
Why would the demons want to announce Jesus as the Messiah? Some have taught that the demons were trying to make it appear that the power of Jesus was demonic. If they were seen to be His heralds, than it was possible that the people would begin to believe that Jesus was in league with the demons. And in fact, this was an accusation that was later leveled against Jesus (Luke 11:15). However, this view is highly unlikely since the demons were known to be evil, and yet they were proclaiming Jesus to be the Holy One of God. If anything, the demons were trying to make themselves appear to be like God by proclaiming the Messiah, rather than the Messiah more like the demons. This is possible, since the original rebellion of the devil involved him wanting to be like God. But demons and fallen angels are probably two different types of beings, and so this view is unlikely.
Instead, in proclaiming Jesus as “the Son of God” the demons were trying to reinforce the popular opinion that the Jewish Messiah would be a ruling and reigning King who would go to war against Caesar and the Roman Empire, liberating the Jewish people once and for all. As seen in Luke 4:1-13, the devil wanted Jesus to become a kingly, ruling Messiah, and do so through short cuts that circumvented the plan and purposes of God. The testimony of demons would certainly spread this false conception of the Messiah and make the task and purposes of Jesus even more difficult. Proclaiming Jesus as the Son of God when Caesar had claimed this title for himself would be seen to be an act of war and treason against Caesar (cf. Barclay 1975:54; Bock 1994:438).
Jesus knew that a false testimony from demons would only enhance and spread this false impression about what He was going to do. He had come, not to wage war against Caesar, but against the devil. And so Jesus rebuked the demons, and did not allow them to speak.
4:42 It appears that Jesus spent most of the night healing the sick and casting out demons, for the text says that when it was day, He departed and went into a deserted place. The deserted place is similar to the wilderness of 4:1 where Jesus was led by the Spirit to face the temptations of the devil. The wilderness is seen to be a place of both testing and ministry preparation. In this case, the temptation may have been to rest after a long day of ministry filled with teaching, healing, and casting out demons. Instead, Jesus retreated from the crowds to pray (Mark 1:35).
Nevertheless, the crowd sought Him and came to Him, and tried to keep Him from leaving them. Someone who taught as He did, and healed all their sick and cast out demons was someone they wanted to keep around. Though they accepted the teaching of Jesus, “the people at Capernaum also make the mistake of their counterparts in Nazareth: Failing to understand who Jesus is and, therefore, the scale of his mission, they hope to limit his ministry to their own boundaries” (Green 1997:220).
4:43. Jesus understood that He did not come for a select group of people in a select geographical area. So He said to them, “I must preach the kingdom of God to the other cities also, because for this purpose I have been sent.” This is a direct reference back to 4:18 since similar terminology and ideas are used. As the Messiah, the “Anointed One” He has been sent (Gk. apestalēn) to preach the gospel (Gk. euangelisasthai) of the kingdom.
This is the first time Jesus has mentioned the kingdom of God. It refers not to some future reign of God, but to the inbreaking of God’s rule and dominion over all the earth in the present time. It begins to bring light to the promise of the angel about the kingdom without end that the Messiah would bring (1:33), and also show the true form of the false kingdom which had been offered to Jesus by the devil (4:5-6). Jesus had come to declare that the Kingdom of God was being set up in and through His life and ministry, and this Kingdom was clashing with the kingdom of the devil.
What will this Kingdom look like? He has already described it in His preaching (cf. Luke 4:18-19) and in His actions of healing the sick and casting out demons (cf. Luke 11:20). Much of the rest of the ministry of Jesus is spent explaining what this Kingdom looks like, how it is arriving, how it will expand, and what His followers can do to continue the growth of the Kingdom. It is for this reason that Jesus was sent (Gk. apestalēn. Jesus is the first “sent one” or “apostle” and He will soon select others who will join Him in being sent to proclaim the arrival of God’s Kingdom (cf Bock 1994:440).
4:44. So Jesus went out from Capernaum and continued to teach about the Kingdom of God in the synagogues of Galilee. Jesus continued to go to the Jewish people when they gathered in the synagogues to proclaim from the Scriptures what the Kingdom truly was, how it would look, and how He had come to inaugurate the Kingdom of God.
Luke 4:43-44 has pointed the reader back to Luke 4:14-15 as a way of summarizing the entire ministry of Jesus. He was preaching and healing. What was He preaching, and why? He was preaching the good news that He, as the Messiah, had come to usher in the Kingdom of God (Luke 4:18-19; 4:43). Having shown this point, Luke begins to show how Jesus selected disciples who would carry on this mission to the world. The mission of Jesus and His followers “is a ministry to the marginalized of society—to the demonized, to the diseased, to women as well as men. Moreover, as expected, Jesus’ ministry carefully balances word and deed, teaching and healing/exorcism” (Green 1997:220).
To comment on this post, please use the forum.
| Please Leave Comments in the Commentary Forum
Luke 4:31-37
By J.D. Myers | March 7, 2010
Luke wastes no time showing how Jesus fulfilled Luke 4:18-19 (Isa 61:1-2a). While the entire Gospel focuses on how Jesus preached the gospel to the poor, brought healing to the brokenhearted, proclaimed liberty to captives, gave sight to the blind, set free those who were oppressed, and proclaimed the acceptable year of the Lord, Luke 4:31¬–6:11 shows how Jesus fulfilled these things Himself. However, in 6:12 Jesus begins to teach and train disciples to carry on the work He began.
As followers of Jesus ourselves, we can benefit from seeing what Jesus did to carry out His mission, and how He taught and trained His immediate followers to continue this same mission in their own lives. In this first episode, Jesus proclaims the gospel and then sets free a man who was enslaved to a demon. By leading with this event, Luke shows that while the Kingdom of God is for the benefit of this world, it is not primarily against or opposed to the human rulers of this world, but rather the spiritual forces that have this world in bondage (cf. John 18:36; Eph 6:12). This would have been a relief to Luke’s original reader, Theophilus. Though Jesus is the rightful ruler and heir of the world, He did not come to start a revolution against Caesar. While the teachings and miracles of Jesus are a challenge to the claims and aspirations of Caesar, they are not intended to overthrow Caesar or raise a rebellion. Instead, Jesus was here to challenge and overthrow Satan, the temporary ruler of the world (John 12:31; 16:11). The first miracle recorded in Luke’s gospel reveals the fundamental reason Jesus for His ministry: He came to provide freedom from the power of evil (Bock 1994:426).
4:31. After His time in Nazareth, Jesus went northeast to Capernaum, a city on the shore of the sea of Galilee. From what is recorded in the Gospels, Capernaum served as a base of operations for much of the rest of the ministry of Jesus. While Jesus was in Capernaum, He was teaching them on the Sabbaths. Unlike in His hometown of Nazareth, His teaching appears to have been accepted here, since He is not chased out of town, but remains and teaches for multiple Sabbaths.
4:32. And here, unlike in Nazareth, rather than get criticism for speaking graciously about Gentiles and for being the son of a carpenter, they were astonished at His teaching, for His word was with authority. Jesus taught the Bible in ways that the average teacher of that day did not. Rather than simply quote the various Jewish teachers and commentaries as most of the teachers did (Pentecost 1981:144), Jesus taught the actual Word of God. He read the Scriptures, and then translated and explained them so that the people could understand. While there is nothing wrong with reading commentaries and listening to other teachers—and as a Rabbi, Jesus certainly did lots of this—when Jesus taught, He didn’t quote lots of Rabbis as proof that what He was saying was true (Barclay 1975:51; Pentecost 1981:145). Nor did He simply state the numerous views on any one passage and leave it at that. Rather, He clearly stated what the Scriptures said, and based His interpretation on His own authority rather than on tradition (Bock 1994:429).
But the authority of Jesus’ word was not just in proclamation, but also in powerful signs that accompanied His teaching (cf. 4:36). It was these signs that the people of Nazareth wanted Him to perform, but He refused. Miracles are not parlor tricks to be performed on demand as a show. Rather, the Spirit moves as He wills, in accordance with the clear teaching of the Word of God.
4:33. On this particular Sabbath, in the synagogue where Jesus was teaching, there was a man who had a spirit of an unclean demon.[/b] There are many theories about demon possession, especially since it does not seem to occur today, or at least, not as openly or frequently as in the days of Jesus (Edersheim 1988:483). Some believe demon possession was simply a pre-scientific way of describing various physical and psychological disorders (cf. Evans 2003:96). Others believe that demon possession was something that only took place around the time of Jesus, as a way to help Jesus reveal His authority over the devil. Some believe it happens just as frequently today, but the “symptoms” are different because our culture and worldview are different. The best approach is one of cautious humility: [quote]If we are asked to explain the rationale of the phenomenon, or of its cessation—if indeed, it has wholly and everywhere ceased—we might simply decline to attempt that for which we have not sufficient data, and this, without implying that such did not exist, or that, if known, they would not wholly vindicate the facts of the case (Edersheim 1988:482).[/quote]
It should be noted as well that “demon possession” is not really a biblical term. A better translation or understanding of what is occurring in Scripture might be “demonized” or “demonization.” The state of demonization does not seem to be permanent, but comes and goes; is not a result of immorality on the part of the demonized, yet at the same time does not leave the demonized person without fault in their actions, and finally, the removal of the demonic influence is not dependant on the faith of the one who is demonized (cf. Edersheim 1988:481-484, 770-776).
Also, from a thematic perspective, the unclean spirit here should be read in contrast to the Holy Spirit which Jesus received at His baptism (cf. 3:22). Also, this unclean spirit is understood to be in league with the devil, who tempted Jesus in the wilderness (4:1-13). Though the devil departed from Jesus until an opportune time (4:13), Jesus will still have numerous encounters with various minions of the devil.
Whatever the case may be, this man, according to Luke, had an unclean demon, and as a result, issued a challenge to Jesus.
4:34. The man (under the influence of the demon) said, ”Let us alone!” Up to this point in the Synagogue meeting, Jesus hadn’t done anything but preach, and yet this demon wants to be left alone. He is afraid of what Jesus might do to him (Bock 1994:431). He speaks of himself using the plural us. The man is not possessed by multiple demons (as in the case of Legion in Luke 8:30). While it is possible that the demon is referring to himself and all other demons who will be destroyed by Jesus, it seems more likely that the demon is referring to himself and to the man he possesses. He is issuing a challenge to Jesus, saying in effect that the only way Jesus can get to the demon is by destroying the man as well (Bock 1994:432; Green 1997:223). Jesus has come to help humanity, not harm it, and so the demon advises Jesus to Let us alone. The implication is that if Jesus does not leave them alone, the demon will hurt, harm, and even destroy the man.
The man with the unclean demon goes on to ask, ”What have we to do with You, Jesus of Nazareth?” The demon clearly understands that the goals of Jesus and of Satan are at odds. Light has nothing to do with darkness. The two are so at adds, the demon asks Jesus, ”Did You come to destroy us?” It may be that Jesus had been teaching how He came to destroy the devil’s work (cf. 1 John 3:8). Certainly, in light of what Jesus taught in Luke 4:18-19, part of the task of Jesus was to deliver those who were in bondage to Satan. This demon knows that its destruction will come through Jesus, and seems to think that now is the time (cf. Matt 8:29).
The demon then says, ”I know who You are—the Holy One of God!” There was a belief in that day among street magicians and those who tried to practice sorcery that you could gain power over a person by naming them. So this demon, by naming Jesus as the Holy One of God, is trying to gain power over Jesus. The term Holy One most often refers to God, but here, the term (Gk. hagios) might be better translated as Holy Man and therefore refers not to Jesus as divinity, but Jesus as a prophet (Malina 2003:244). Either way, whatever the demon understood about Jesus, it is unlikely that the Jewish audience would have understood the title as a reference to the deity of Jesus. Most of the audience probably understood the title as a way of referring to Jesus as an anointed king (cf. Psa 16:10), a holy messenger from God (Dan 4:13, 23; 8:13), or the promised Messiah (Wright 2004:52).
4:35. Jesus refused to allow the demon to speak, and rebuked the demon, saying, “Be quiet, and come out of him!” The phrase be quiet comes from the Greek word phimōthēti, and is used of muzzling an animal. Jesus effectively muzzles this demon, forcing it to be silent against his will. There are various theories as to why Jesus wanted the demon to cease speaking, but the general consensus seems to be that Jesus did not want to be declared as the Holy One, the Messiah, by a demon (cf. Bock 1994:434).
There were no theatrics or magical incantations and rites which were familiar among other exorcists. Jesus simply commands the demon to be quiet and come out. And the demon, after he threw the man in the midst of the crowd, came out of him and did not hurt him. The implication seems to be that in coming out of the man, the demon tries to hurt him, but failed even in this. Though the demon had threatened to hurt the man, it was unable to do anything other than throw him down in the midst of the crowd. Jesus is in complete control—even over the disruptive and destructive intentions of demons.
4:36. The crowd was amazed at what they say, and said, “What a word this is! For with authority and power He commands the unclean spirits, and they come out.” Similar statements are made here as were said about the authority of Jesus’ teaching (cf. 4:32). His authoritative word was accompanied by powerful miracles.
4:37. As a result of this event, the report about Him went out into every place in the surrounding region. News about Jesus continued to spread, and questions about Him would continue to be raised. They seem not to understand who He is or why He has come, but they love what He is doing. This disconnect becomes more clear in 4:38-44.
To comment on this post, please use the forum.
| Please Leave Comments in the Commentary Forum
Luke 4:20-30
By J.D. Myers | February 6, 2010
Luke 4:20-30 reveals the reaction of the people to Jesus after He taught from Isaiah 61:1-2a. They respond by trying to kill Him. Such a response is initially surprising since there does not seem to be anything offensive or controversial in the text that Jesus expounded. The verses He read seem to promise only blessings and restoration to the Jewish people, and through them, to all the earth.
Of course, Luke does not record the actual teaching Jesus provided, and so maybe His explanation was more controversial than we assume. Whatever Jesus said, there are hints in the passage which explain why the Jewish audience would have taken exception with Jesus when He taught this text in the Nazareth synagogue. These will be seen as the text unfolds.
4:20. After Jesus had read from Isaiah 61:1-2a, He closed the book (probably a scroll). It is unclear if Luke has recorded the entire Scripture portion that Jesus taught from that day, or only the crucial text for his narrative. Some argue that this could not be the entire text because Jewish tradition required that Sabbath-day teachings come from at least three verses of text, whereas Jesus had only read one-and-a-half. But this is a later tradition which was most likely not universally followed at the time of Jesus. Even if it was, Jesus was known for breaking with certain traditions if it would prove a point and did not break any of the Mosaic Law.
And if that is what Jesus did here, it would have made His point quite clear. After mentioned the Year of Jubilee (the Year of the Lord’s Favor), Isaiah 61:2 then speaks about the day of vengeance of our God. The Jewish expectation was that when the Messiah arrived, He would not only restore the fortunes of Israel, but would do so by destroying her enemies. But Jesus does not read that part. Instead, He seems to make a point about stopping in midsentence, and closing the book. Luke, it seems, knows the point that Jesus is making, and so emphasizes the fact that it was here that Jesus stopped and closed the book. With His actions, Jesus emphatically shows that He is not going to talk about the vengeance of God upon the enemies of Israel, not even upon the Roman Empire, Israel’s current captor. Such an exclusion was unthinkable for most Jews. Deliverance from captivity was not complete without some sort of destructive judgment upon the enemies of God who enslaved them. Think of their deliverance from Egypt! Think of the entrance into the Promised Land. Think of the times of the Judges! Think of the deliverance from the Babylonian Empire, and the Medo-Persian Empire. In all these cases, deliverance came through the destruction of their enemies. It should be no different with the Roman Empire.
And after He closed the book, He gave it back to the attendant—who may have been the Synagogue Ruler or some other person in charge of caring for the scrolls—and then sat down. The teacher would generally stand to read the Scripture portion for the teaching, and then sit to explain it.
Since Jesus stopped reading mid-way through Isaiah 61:2, and had stopped right before “the good part,” He certainly had the attention of all who were there: The eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him. They were eager to know what He would say about the text and read, and more importantly, why He had stopped where He did.
4:21. The words of Jesus recorded here are not the entire sermon. Luke only records what Jesus began to say. After reading the text, Jesus started His teaching by saying, ”Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” In homiletic terminology, this would be “the hook” or the attention grabber. It is the introductory statement which gets the audience interested in what will be said. It is certain that following this statement, Jesus goes on to explain the text of Isaiah 61:1-2a, explaining what the statements mean and how they were fulfilled in their hearing. It seems unlikely that Jesus is saying that the statements were literally fulfilled right at that moment—either spiritually or physically—for He still had most of His earthly ministry ahead of Him, including His death and resurrection. So maybe what He explained is how they would be fulfilled in His ministry as the Messiah and in the life of those who followed Him.
4:22. The custom was that the audience would let the teacher finish his lesson before any questions were asked or additional comments were made. But after Jesus finished His teaching, the people all bore witness to Him, and marveled at the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth. It seems that their initial response was quite positive. However, in the following verses, their response quickly turns negative. How did this happen? There are three possibilities. First, it could be that some received and accepted what Jesus while others did not. Those who received it are mentioned here, and those who are critical are described later. This option seems unlikely in the context.
A second option is that they were all initially impressed by what Jesus said, but when He clarifies in verses 23-27 that He is referring not just to the Jewish people but also to the Gentiles, and specifically their Roman Captors, the mood of the audience turns sour. The primary problem with this option is that verses 23-27 seem to be to a defense against an accusation. Does Jesus manufacture this accusation Himself in verse 23 just so He can refute it in verses 24-27? That seems unlikely. He either knew their critical thoughts (cf. 6:8), or they actually said something which showed their disdain and disagreement with His exposition.
The third option is that the audience disagreed with Jesus all along, and make a statement of disagreement here in verse 22: “Is this not Joseph’s son?” In this case, they would be saying, “This is the son of Joseph, a carpenter! Didn’t he grow up here? Doesn’t he know how we feel and how we understand this text?” With this understanding, the opening words of verse 22 are better translated, “And all witnessed against Him, and were amazed at the words of mercy that came out of His mouth” (Bailey 2008:151). They did not speak in favor of Him, but murmured against Him. They are not amazed at His great teaching, but instead, shocked at His claim that God desires to show mercy to the enemies of Israel. They were looking for a ruling Messiah who would throw off Roman occupation and lead Israel to world domination.
But Jesus left all that out of His sermon and instead, indicated that He had come to be a light and blessing to the Gentiles. This definitely would have offended the Jewish audience of that day. At that time, many Jews viewed Gentiles as scum of the earth, as dogs only fit to be kicked around. Some Jews thought that the only reason God created Gentiles was to be fuel for the fires of hell (Barclay 1975:10). So for Jesus to have taught that God’s blessings were also intended for Gentiles would have shocked many in the Jewish audience. He sees their shock and outrage, and so continues to defend His explanation in the following verses.
4:23. One of the ways Jewish prophets proved the validity of their message was with the use of signs and predictions (cf. Deut 18:21-22; John 2:18; 1 Cor 1:22). The other method Jewish people used to decide if a prophet spoke the truth or not was by comparing his teaching with what was already recorded and commanded in Scripture. If the prophet had signs and miracles but contradicted the Word of God, they should still not heed his teaching (cf. Deut 13:1-3). The proverb which Jesus refers to, ”Physician, heal yourself” has this background in mind. If a physician says he can cure colds but he always has a cold, his “cure” should not be trusted. The sign that he is unreliable is his inability to cure himself.
In the case of a prophet, the Jewish people expected to see signs as proof that what the prophet taught was true. Specifically, the signs that were done in Capernaum they wanted Jesus to do here also in Nazareth. Luke has not recorded any signs that were done in Capernaum, but as this passage is already one year into Jesus’ ministry, He has already taught and performed signs in other locations (cf. John 2:1-11; 4:43-54). The Jews want Jesus to perform some of those same signs here. They do not want to accept the eye-witness reports that came from Capernaum and Galilee, but want Jesus to perform signs for themselves also.
This isn’t necessarily an unreasonable request, since Jews were instructed by God to test the prophets in such a manner. However, they themselves (as quoted by Jesus) admit that Jesus has already performed signs. This report they have received—and apparently believed—should be enough for them to accept and believe the message of Jesus. But they want to see the signs for themselves.
Jesus responds to this request in two ways. First, in verses 24-27, He takes them back to Scripture to provide proof of the validity of His message. In so doing, Jesus shows that signs—as important as they were for the Jewish people—still take second place to being consistent with Scripture.
4:24. The reason, Jesus says, that they won’t accept His teaching is not because He hasn’t done any signs, but because no prophet is accepted in his own country (cf. John 4:44). The word country does not refer literally to “the country of Israel” but could also be translated “hometown” and so refers to the region or area that Jesus grew up, which was Nazareth. It is often argued that the reason Jesus was not accepted in Nazareth is that the people there were so familiar with Him as a young boy, and watched Him grow up and become a carpenter, they had trouble recognizing Him as a teacher and a prophet, let alone the promised Messiah. While this may be part of the reason, the account that Jesus relates in the following verses hints at a deeper reason that prophets do not minister in their own country.
4:25. Jesus points the audience to the Prophet Elijah. When Elijah lived and ministered, many widows where in Israel. And certainly, these widows had great need, especially since the heaven was shut up three years and six months, and there was a great famine throughout all the land. For three and one-half years it did not rain, which resulted in famine. It is likely that many died as a result.
4:26. During this family, God did not send Elijah to minister to any of the needy people of Israel, not even the widows who had no one else to provide for them. Instead, Elijah was [/b]sent[/b] elsewhere by God. This is one reason why some prophets are not accepted in their home country. While sometimes it is due to a lack of faith (Matt 13:38), most often it is because God sends the prophet elsewhere. The rule is not universally applied, since some prophets do minister in their home region.
In this case, God sent Elijah to Zarephath, in the region of Sidon, to a woman who was a widow. Though there were many widows in Israel who were in dire need of aid, God sends Elijah to someone that the Jewish people would have despised and looked down upon. Not only was this person a woman, but she was a Gentile woman. With this example, Jesus shows that God is concerned about the needs of Gentiles; not just those of Israelites.
4:27. Jesus provides a second example from another great prophet to prove the identical point. In this example, many lepers were in Israel in the time of Elisha the prophet, and none of them was cleansed except Naaman the Syrian. If a Gentile woman was bad, a Gentile leper was worse. Not only that, but Naaman was the general of the Syrian army, which had killed and enslaved many of the Israelite people. At the time of Elisha, Naaman was one of the most hated men in all of Israel. When it was discovered he had leprosy, those Jews who heard of it must have rejoiced that God had judged him for his sins against Israel. Many may have viewed Elisha as a traitor when he healed Naaman.
The point, once again, is that God wanted to show His compassion and love for all people, not just the Israelites. And He was so intent on showing the Israelites His love for all people, He chose the most hated man in Israel to show that love to.
So Jesus is not telling His Jewish audience that He can’t or won’t do miracles in Nazareth. He can and He does. Instead, Jesus is trying to address their deep-seated sense of superiority, their hatred toward Gentiles, and especially their neglect of God’s plan for them to be a blessing to the nations. Though they expected the Messiah to overthrow the enemies of Israel and rule and reign over the world from Jerusalem, Jesus is showing them that He, as the Messiah, has come to be a blessing to all the world, as God has always intended.
4:28. When the people in the synagogue hear what Jesus is saying about God’s concern for Gentiles and the Messianic mission to all people, they were filled with wrath.
4:29. The people were so angry with Jesus, that they rose up and took Him out of the city…to the brow of the hill where they intended to throw Him down over the cliff. The people of Nazareth disagreed so strongly with what Jesus taught, that they tried to kill him by stoning Him. There were two different kinds of stoning. The more familiar kind is when a crowd of people throw stones at a person until he or she dies. The second kind involved taking the person to a cliff, and throwing him off of it so that the legs broke. Then they would drop stones down on top of the person until they were crushed. This people from the synagogue were trying to stone Jesus using this second method. He had taught something different than what they believed the Bible taught, and since He had refused to “produce a sign” they felt justified in stoning Him. In their minds, Jesus was a false prophet.
4:30. But the people were unsuccessful in stoning Jesus. Instead, passing through the midst of them, He went His way. Jesus miraculously escapes the mob and gets away safely. Ironically, they asked for a sign, and when they refused to accept His teaching, He gave them a sign to prove that what He had taught was true.
There is a parallel here between this event and the third temptation of Jesus in Luke 4:9-12. There, the devil led Jesus to the pinnacle of the temple, and challenged Jesus to throw Himself off the temple in the sight of all the people below. The devil quoted Scripture to say that God would send angels to protect Jesus from hitting the stone courtyard below. Jesus stood against that temptation since it was not God’s will or God’s timing. But here, as Jesus is following God’s will in God’s way, God does protect Jesus from “striking his foot against a stone” and being put to death. This miracle was performed in the sight of the Jewish people, and Jesus escapes from them unharmed. The sign they asked for was granted, but only after they revealed their heart of unbelief and hatred for God’s desire to show mercy and compassion to the Gentiles.
To comment on this post, please use the forum.
| Please Leave Comments in the Commentary Forum
Luke 4:16-19
By J.D. Myers | January 17, 2010
From a thematic perspective, Luke 4:16-30 may be the central passage of the Gospel. This passage contains a mission statement from Jesus about His ministry and also provides a foreshadow for how His ministry will be received. The rest of the Gospel of Luke unfolds how Jesus fulfilled this mission, and yet was continually misunderstood and rejected by the people He worked among.
Above even this, it could be argued that Luke 4:16-30 is the foundation passage for the Book of Acts. If the Gospel of Luke shows how Jesus fulfilled the mission mandate of Jesus as recorded in Luke 4:18-19, then the Book of Acts shows how the church, guided and empowered by the same Spirit, worked to carry on the ministry of Jesus.
As discussed in Luke 4:14-15, this event occurs after one year of ministry, and Jesus is now beginning to transition from gaining disciples to training them.
4:16. To initiate these two years of training His disciples, Jesus traveled to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. It was in Nazareth where Jesus Himself received His training, and where He grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men (Luke 2:52). So it is natural for Him to choose Nazareth as the place where He will begin focusing on training His disciples.
Luke writes that it was the custom of Jesus to go into the synagogue on the Sabbath day. Attending the synagogue was part of the normal, weekly routine of Jesus. The synagogue setting is probably the background foundation for many of the practices of the early church. It is uncertain from history when exactly the Hebrew people started meeting in synagogues, but most believe it was around the time period of Ezra and Nehemiah. The primary purpose and function of the synagogue was to provide a place for Jewish people to pray and study the Scriptures in community (the meaning of synagogue is literally “assembly”). It was required that at least ten men commit to faithfully attending and supporting a synagogue before one could begin. Ten such men could be found in most Jewish communities, and so nearly every town had at least one synagogue, while some of the larger cities had several. It is reported that at the time of Jesus, Jerusalem had over 400 synagogues.
Luke records that Jesus went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, which is Saturday. The Sabbath was the primary day that the Jewish people attended the synagogue, but it was not the only day. Other common days of attendance were Monday and Thursday, while some attended every day.
No matter what day a person attended the synagogue, the primary synagogue activities were prayer and the teaching of the Scriptures. Though we cannot be certain about the order of events in the average synagogue at the time of Jesus, later Jewish tradition codified set prayers and passages for each day of the week and year. Depending on which tradition is followed, the Torah (the Pentateuch, or first five books of the Bible) are taught through either once per year, or once every three years. If Jesus used a cycle, it was probably the Triennial cycle, as it is known to have been in use in Palestine during the First Century AD. It also contained additional passages from the Prophets which the One-Year cycle did not contain, and the passage Jesus reads from is not found in the One-Year cycle. (See the article on the Triennial Cycle.)
Whichever cycle was used, the synagogue gatherings were used to read, interpret, and explain the weekly Torah readings. Also, depending on the Torah reading for the day, related passages from the historical books and prophets would also be taught (these were called Haftarah, meaning “parting” or “taking leave”). At the time of Jesus, the Haftarah passages were probably not codified, and so the man asked to teach the concluding Sabbath lesson (he was called the maftir) was allowed to choose his own text. (See the article on Haftarah.)
On this Sabbath, Jesus was probably this concluding teacher, because when he stood up to read, He read not from the Torah, but from one of the Prophets.
4:17. Jesus was handed the book of the prophet Isaiah. As the Hebrew Scriptures were written on scrolls, the entire Bible could not be contained on one scroll. Sometimes, longer books (like Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Psalms, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel), would fill multiple scrolls. The scroll that was handed to Jesus probably contained the second portion of the book of Isaiah (Chapters 40–66). He opened the book and found the text He was going to read from that day. The text He reads is primarily from Isaiah 61:1-2. This specific text is not contained in the modern one-year cycle of Haftarah readings, though the first weekly portion (Bereshit, Genesis 1–6) does contain a reading from Isaiah 42:6-7 which has similar content, while the fifty-first portion (Nitzavim, Deuteronomy 29–30) contains Isaiah 61:10-11. Regardless of how the text of Isaiah 61:1-2 was chosen, it became the basis for the sermon of Jesus which followed the reading and interpretation.
4:18. From Isaiah 61:1-2, Jesus explained to the people of Nazareth what He came to do. The six statements in this passage very aptly summarize His earthly ministry. While we don’t have the full text of His explanation of this passage (all we have is the opening statement in verse 21), we can guess at what Jesus said by how He fulfilled these verses throughout the rest of His ministry.
The text appears to be originally spoken by Isaiah about himself. He didn’t see himself to be the Messiah, but He did correctly believe that God had chosen and prophetically anointed him to help lead the people of Israel back into righteous obedience to God (cf. Isa 6:7-13). Here, however, Jesus applies the passage to Himself, and by inference, to all who would follow Him.
The passage states that The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me. This is a reference to the Holy Spirit. He is the source of empowerment for godly ministry, and even the Messiah had to depend on the Spirit for guidance and power. Prior to Pentecost in Acts 2, the Spirit only came upon certain individuals (like prophets, priests, kings, and artisans) for a period of time to help them accomplish specific tasks. After Pentecost, the Spirit permanently dwells within all who believe in Jesus for everlasting life. The purpose of this indwelling stays the same: to guide and empower people to accomplish specific tasks. Jesus, of course, lived prior to Pentecost, and so it can be assumed that He, as the Messiah, permanently had the Spirit upon Him to guide and empower Him for ministry. The Book of Acts records how the Spirit that was upon Jesus came also to indwell believers, so that the church could carry on the mission and ministry of Jesus to the entire world.
The Spirit anointed Jesus to accomplish specific tasks. In the Hebrew text of Isaiah 61:1, which Jesus was reading from, the text refers to “the anointed one,” which could also be translated “Messiah.” And so the play on words is that when Jesus read that the Spirit has anointed Him, He is implying that the Spirit has anointed Him to be the Messiah. The rest of verses 18-19 reveal six mission tasks that the Messiah would focus on.
There is much disagreement over how to understand these six statements of Jesus, primarily about whether they should be understood spiritually or physically. Did Jesus come for those who were materially poor, or for all who are spiritually poor? Did He set out to deliver those who were captive to Rome, or those who are captive to the devil? Did He want to heal those who were physically blind, or those who couldn’t see what God was doing in their midst?
The best way to solve this debate is to look at what Jesus actually did during His ministry, and assume that most of His actions were in fulfillment of these six statements. When this is done, it immediately becomes clear that we do not have to choose between the two. The ministry of Jesus focused on both physical and spiritual needs. Meeting a physical need often led to meeting a spiritual need, even if these needs were not always for the same person.
The first mission task of Jesus was To preach the gospel to the poor. The term preach the gospel is really one word in Greek (euangelizō; cf. Luke 1:19; 4:43), which is where English gets the word “evangelize.” It might be best translated “to proclaim the good news.” This proclamation involves both words and actions, as evidenced by the life of Jesus (cf. Luke 9:6). Both sermons and service are used to reveal the gospel to other people.
So while preaching the gospel is often thought to be only a spiritual issue, such a view is a distortion of the biblical gospel. The gospel is concerned with much than simply how people can receive eternal life through faith in Jesus Christ. While that truth is central to the gospel, it is not the entire gospel. Instead, when the background of the term gospel is understood, and it’s usage in the New Testament is carefully studied, the biblical gospel is best defined as
[quote]good news for everybody, whether Jew or Gentile, believer or unbeliever, regarding the benefits and blessings which come to us from the person and work of Jesus Christ. …[The] gospel contains everything related to the person and work of Jesus Christ, including all of the events leading up to His birth, and all the ramifications from Christ’s life, death, and resurrection for unbelievers and believers. (Click here for article)[/quote]
This means that the gospel is not just about spiritual issues and needs, but also the various forms of physical deliverance that came in and through Jesus Christ. The gospel is not just about Jesus providing grace and forgiveness to sinners through His death and resurrection, but also about healing sicknesses, helping the poor, delivering those in captivity, and everything else done by Jesus and His apostles in the Gospels and Acts. In fact, though this statement in 4:18 is the first of six mission statements, it could also be the title statement (with 4:19 being the summary), which is explained in more detail by those that follow. In this way, “preaching the gospel” includes things like healing the brokenhearted, proclaiming liberty to the captives, and giving sight to the blind.
This understanding is further supported by the fact that the gospel will be preached to the poor. There are two terms for the poor in Scripture, penes and [/i]ptochos.[/i] The penes were the poor who worked in the fields, and are contrasted to rich landowners who did not work. The ptochos, however, are those who don’t even have jobs. They are reduced to begging, and are destitute of all resources, including other family members. It is this “begging poor” that have the focus of attention in the gospels (cf. Matt 26:11; Mark 10:46-52; Luke 7:22; 14:21-23; 16:19-31; Acts 3:1-10. See article by Neyrey for more on “the poor.”).
So the physically destitute are the primary focus of this first mission statement of Jesus, which reveals that preaching the gospel to them is more than just telling them how they can receive eternal life. Proclaiming the gospel also requires us to feed, clothe, and train the poor so their physical needs are met.
Admittedly, a few places in Scripture do talk about being spiritually poor (Matt 5:3; Rev 3:17), but both seem to refer to believers who have not recognized or taken advantage of the riches that are theirs in Jesus Christ. Unregenerate people are not referred to in Scripture as being spiritually “poor.” Therefore, if this first mission statement of Jesus has any reference at all to meeting spiritual needs, it refers not as much to telling unbelievers how to receive eternal life, as to believers to take advantage of their spiritual riches in Christ. From a spiritual perspective then, the “preaching of the gospel” in this context is closer to “discipleship.”
Ultimately though, the primary emphasis in this context, and in the Gospel of Luke as a whole, is that the first mission intention of Jesus was to provide for the needs of those who were physically destitute. In His ministry He showed them through words and actions that they mattered to God, and that God was concerned to meet their needs.
Second, Jesus reads that He was sent…to heal the brokenhearted. This phrase is not in all Greek manuscripts, and so some translations omit it. However, since this phrase is included in Isaiah 61 that Jesus is reading, we can be fairly certain that Jesus read it on this day. It would be uncommon for a Jewish Rabbi to skip a phrase from the text he was teaching.
This mission purpose, unlike the other five, is very difficult to read in a strictly spiritual sense. Whereas the other five statements are often taught only for their spiritual application (e.g., Jesus is freeing people from sin, death, and devil), this one cannot be so easily spiritualized. Maybe that is why some prefer to omit it.
However, if Jesus came to deliver people not only from sin, death, and the devil, but also from enemies, injustice, addictions, and heartache, then this second mission statement of Jesus fits in quite well. Jesus came to heal, or restore, the brokenhearted, that is, people with deep emotional pain and distress. In the Gospels, Jesus is constantly portrayed as a man of sorrows (cf. Isa 53:3) who is intimately associated with our pain and grief, so that He can turn the tears into the laughter, and the grief into joy.
All of this, of course, was good news to Jewish people at the time of Jesus. Many of them had lost loved ones, land, and jobs due to the policies of the Roman government and the practices of the Roman military. Even more, due to sicknesses and poor living conditions, it is estimated that a child had only a fifty percent chance to live until the age of ten (Carter 2006:116). This means that most families probably experienced the death of one or more children. There was much to be brokenhearted about, and Jesus states that one of His purposes is to mend their hearts and restore their joy.
Third, Jesus has come to proclaim liberty to the captives. Again, while this can refer to both spiritual and physical deliverance, the original context and meaning heavily favors physical deliverance. The term liberty (Gk. aphesis) could also be translated “release” or “forgiveness” (cf. Luke 1:77; 3:3; 24:47) and primarily “denotes eschatological liberation” (TDNT I:650). A primary element in Jewish history and theology was that national sin and rebellion against God led to conquest and captivity by foreign powers. The reverse was also true. If Israel was in captivity, repentance from sin led to forgiveness (aphesis) by God, which resulted in the deliverance from captivity, and the restoration of the land and the temple. With this understanding, aphesis, or “forgiveness” is not just the removal of guilt from past offenses against God, but in response to repentance, leads to the future deliverance from one’s enemies.
This understanding is how Jesus’ audience would have understood Him. He lived and ministered at a time when the Hebrew people were captives of Rome. The hope and expectation was that if the Jewish people repented and returned to God as a nation, then God would throw off their captors, and restore Israel to her rightful place among the nations. This is what John the Baptist declared would happen when the Messiah came (cf. Luke 3:3). Jesus seems to affirm this view here.
The objection, of course, is that Jesus didn’t accomplish anything like this. To the contrary, at the end of the Gospels, it appears that rather than overthrowing the Roman rule in Israel, it is the Roman rulers who have defeated Jesus by crucifying Him (Mark 15:24-27; Luke 23:33; John 19:18). And His resurrection doesn’t result in the overthrow of the Roman Empire either.
For this reason, many argue that Jesus is applying this text to Himself in a spiritual sense only. It is then taught that Jesus came to deliver people from spiritual bondage. In this way, the term captives is understood as those who are possessed by demons, enslaved to sin, or captive to addictions. This application of the text cannot be denied since Jesus certainly did these things during His ministry.
However, it must be emphasized that this is not the way Jesus’ audience would have understood His words, and not the way Isaiah meant them when they were written. This “spiritualized application” is not the primary intended meaning of the original author or audience. Among those who accept a literal, physical fulfillment of this third phrase, there are three perspectives on how Jesus accomplished it.
The first view is that Jesus meant to accomplish this task of overthrowing the Roman Empire, but failed because Israel did not fully repent, nor did they accept Him as their Messiah. Those who hold this view argue that if the Jewish people had repented and accepted Him as their promised Messiah, then the long-awaited kingdom would have been inaugurated immediately. Jesus would have declared Himself as King, and would have led a militaristic revolt against Rome. This, of course, did not occur, and so in this view, the overthrow of various wicked human governments is now a future event, to be fulfilled at the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.
The second view is a combination of this first view and the spiritualized understanding of this text. This view argues that Jesus did seek to overthrow the Roman Empire (not just set people free from sin and Satan), but that the overthrow was not through violence and military might, but through the gentler and slower methods of love, mercy, and compassion. In this view, Jesus never intended to use violent force against the Roman Empire, for that would be using the same methods they used. So in this way, Jesus defeated the Empire and inaugurated His Kingdom in a different way; He showed people how to live through love, mercy, and compassion, rather than by the Empire’s methods of force, power, and coercion. Those who followed Jesus’ example in this found they had no fear of Rome, and were able to accomplish God’s will and purposes despite Roman interference. Effectively, though the Roman Empire still existed, for those who followed the way of Jesus, the Roman Empire was defeated.
The third view is a combination of the first two. In alignment with the first view, Jesus truly did intend to physically overthrow the Roman Empire, as well as any human government that was based on greed, corruption, and an improper use of might. Also, it didn’t fully happen during the earthly ministry of Jesus. In alignment with the second view, the means by which Jesus wanted to accomplish this overthrow was not through violence and force, but through acts of mercy and forgiveness. The unique element of this view is in regard to the timing. The first view says that Jesus failed in His first coming, while the second view says He finished what He set out to do, but in a spiritual sense. This view argues that Jesus neither failed nor finished, but only began to accomplish this third mission element. What He began, He wanted His followers to finish, not just in Israel with the Roman Empire, but in the entire world, with all who take others captive.
This third view seems to be best supported by Luke’s second volume, the Book of Acts. It shows how the followers of Jesus continued to live and practice the kingdom principles that Jesus initiated, and reveals how these peaceful methods worked to overthrow and defeat powers and authorities, not with violence and might, but with love and compassion. Sometimes, those who are captive are set free (Acts 12), while others are given the opportunity to preach the gospel to kings and governors (Acts 24:24). Much of the rest of the New Testament supports this view. There is even one particular way of reading the Book of Revelation which reveals the methods for this nonviolent overthrow (cf. Carter 2006:124-128).
When Jesus read out of Isaiah 61 that He would bring liberty to captives, while this did include the spiritual captivity to sin and Satan, it also referred to the physical and temporal captivity to wicked rulers and abusive empires. Followers of Jesus are to continue the work that Jesus began and seek justice and righteousness on the earth through the methods of love, forgiveness, mercy, compassion, generosity, and grace.
The fourth mission statement of Jesus is that He would bring recovery of sight to the blind. This can easily be understood in both a physical and a spiritual sense. During the ministry of Jesus, He healed numerous people who were blind (Matt 9:27-31; 12:22; 15:30-31; 20:30-34; Luke 14:13, 21; 18:35; John 9:1-32; etc.) It could be argued that all these healings were symbolic for the spiritual blindness of the Israelites (Matt 15:14; John 9:39-41). As Paul writes later in the New Testament, the devil has blinded the minds of unbelievers so they will not believe in Jesus (2 Cor 4:4). Part of the mission of Jesus was to remove this spiritual blindness. It must also be noted that it is occasionally believers who are called “blind” and so spiritual blindness does not refer only to unbelievers (cf. Rev 3:17).
However, even though Jesus did seek to remove the spiritual blindness of other people—especially that of the Jewish religious leaders (cf. Matt 23:14-26)—the emphasis in this passage must be placed on physical healing. The reason is that healing the blind was not just a nice thing for Jesus to do, but was a clear sign to the Jewish people that the Kingdom of God had arrived, and that He was the promised Messiah (cf. Matt 11:5; Isa 35:5).
Fifth, Jesus came to set at liberty those who are oppressed. The term liberty is the same word used earlier (Gk. aphesis) and can be translated as “release, deliverance, set free, or forgiveness.” See above for a further discussion on this term. In this case, rather than the captives being set free, it is the oppressed (Gk. thrauō). This is the only time this word is used in the New Testament. The only other place where the exact form is used is Isaiah 58:6, where God declares that He wants His people to loosen the chains of injustice and let the oppressed go free. Most other forms of the term in the Septuagint refer to the oppression of Israel by her enemies as a result of their sin (cf. Exod 15:6; Deut 20:3; 28:33; 2 Chr 6:24). One significant passage is Numbers 24:17 which is a prophecy of how the Messiah will overthrow the enemies of Israel, but with these nations, the Messiah will oppress (or crush) them.
As with all the other terms, there is a spiritual element to this mission statement. Certainly, people are emotionally and spiritually oppressed by the circumstances of life and evil, demonic forces. Acts 10:38 is often used to support this point, but the word used there is not the same as used here. Nevertheless, the Bible frequently speaks of the evil forces arrayed against us, and how God, through the Spirit, empowers us to stand against them (cf. Eph 6:10-20). Jesus came to destroy the devil’s work (Heb 2:14; 1 John 3:8).
4:19. The final statement describing the mission of Jesus is a summary of the first five. Jesus has come to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord. This is primarily a statement about the Year of Jubilee when slaves were set free, the land reverted to the original owner and was not plowed, planted, or harvested, and all debts were cancelled (cf. Leviticus 25). This was supposed to happen every 50 years, but there is some question as to whether it ever happened in Israelite history.
Regardless, Jesus is saying that He intends to inaugurate a Year of Jubilee. And since the Year of Jubilee primarily affected people who were in slavery, hardship, or debt, Jesus is showing with this concluding summary statement that He was concerned not only with mankind’s spiritual needs, but also with their physical wellbeing. Along with the forgiveness of sins and eternal life, Jesus wanted to bring relief from suffering, sickness, slavery, injustice, crushing debt, generational poverty, and governmental oppression.
To comment on this post, please use the forum.
| Please Leave Comments in the Commentary Forum
Luke 4:14-15
By J.D. Myers | November 28, 2009
The ministry of Jesus finally begins in Luke 4:14-15. And yet, these verses are not really the beginning of ministry for Jesus. Chronologically, they do not immediately follow the events of 4:1-13. There is actually about a one year gap in between verses 13 and 14. When the Gospel of Luke is compared with Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, it is discovered that only John says anything at all about the first year of Jesus’ ministry. All three of the others, Matthew, Mark and Luke, when they begin to talk about the ministry of Jesus, begin with the second year (Bock 1994:386). A quick survey of almost any Harmony of the Gospels reveals the following:
First Year
John 1:19-34 John introduces Jesus
John 1:35-51 Points disciples to Jesus
John 2:1-12 Water turned to wine at Cana
John 2:13-22 Temple cleansed
John 3:1-21 Jesus & Nicodemus
John 3:22–4:3 Jesus in Judea, baptizing
John 4:4-42 Jesus & Samaritans
Second Year
Matt 4:12 Jesus returns to Galilee
Mark 1:14
Luke 4:14-15
John 4:43-45
John 4:46-54 Nobleman’s son healed (Cana/Capernaum)
Luke 4:16-30 Jesus rejected at Nazareth
So according to John, sometime after the period of temptation in the wilderness, Jesus gained a few followers from John the Baptist and went with them into Galilee (John 1:43). While there, Jesus attended a wedding feast where He performs His first miracle of turning water into wine (John 2:1-12). After this, Jesus went to Jerusalem for the Passover (John 2:13). But in Jerusalem, He found the temple full of merchants and corrupt moneychangers, and so He made a whip out of cords and cleansed the temple (John 2:13-22). His actions and his teachings sparked controversy among the Pharisees, and one of them named Nicodemus came to Jesus by night to question Him about eternal life (John 3:1-21).
Jesus and some of His disciples went out into the Judean wilderness and started to baptize Jewish people who came to them (3:22–4:3). This started further controversy, and so Jesus left that region and headed north for Galilee again. On the way there, they traveled through Samaria where Jesus met and talked with a Samaritan woman about how to worship God (John 4:1-42). As a result, many Samaritans believed in Him for eternal life (John 4:39-42).
After this, He went again to Galilee, and it is at this point that Luke picks up the story. One year has passed. Jesus has been to Jerusalem and back. Many have believed in Him for eternal life, and many more have become His followers. He has taught, performed some miracles, and initiated a few controversies.
Why does Luke (and Matthew and Mark) neglect to write about this first year of ministry? First of all, it is impossible for Luke to record everything (cf. John 21:25). All writers, including biographers, must be selective in what they record. When writing about a person’s life, the biographer records events that seem important and definitive. Or they write about events which fit a particular theme or perspective. From reading the opening chapters of the Gospel of John, it appears that in His first year of ministry, Jesus focused on inviting people to believe in Him for eternal life. As Jesus went about from place to place, John writes that Jesus constantly told people that in order to receive eternal life, all they had to do was believe in Him for it. The word “believe” is found 22 times in the first four chapters of John. Over and over and over again, Jesus does something or teaches something to get people to believe in Him. The overriding purpose of this first year of ministry was to make believers. And in this first year, Jesus gains hundreds, if not thousands, of believers.
In the second year of ministry, Jesus transitions from gaining believers, and focuses on turning those believers into disciples. He not only focuses on making disciples, but specifically on pouring His life into twelve disciples, so they can be the apostles who continue His work after He is gone.
So why does John record these first-year events while Matthew, Mark, and Luke do not? The reason is due to purpose and theme. The Gospel of John is often called the Gospel of Belief. The word “believe” is found almost 100 times in John. One of the primary purposes of John is to tell people how they can receive eternal life (John 20:30-31). John records in numerous ways that eternal life is given to anyone who simply believes in Jesus for it (cf. John 3:16; 5:24; 6:47, etc.).
But the purposes of the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke are different. If John was written to help people believe in Jesus for eternal life, Matthew, Mark and Luke were all written to help people who had already believed become fully-committed followers of Jesus. The Gospel of John helps with this too, but while discipleship is a twin purpose to John, it is the only purpose for Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
This helps explain why Luke did not record anything of Jesus’ first year of ministry. Jesus was mainly concerned about gaining believers His first year of ministry, but Luke is mainly concerned with making disciples. So Luke skips the first year and jumps straight to the disciple-making years. Luke is writing to Theophilus, and wants to impress upon him that the path of discipleship has no end. After coming to faith in Jesus, there is always more to learn (Bock 1994:387). With this in mind, verses 14-15 contain two of the things Christ focused on in His ministry and in His disciplemaking: the Spirit and Truth (cf. John 4:23). In this way, Luke continues to portray Jesus as a new Moses. Just as Moses was guided by God in leading and teaching the Israelites, so also is Jesus.
4:14. Verse 14 focuses on how the ministry of Jesus was empowered by the Holy Spirit. Luke writes that Jesus returned…to Galilee. Since Jesus returned to Galilee at least twice in his first year of ministry (John 1:43; 4:43-45), Luke probably intends this as a summary statement of Jesus’ movement. See 4:44; 5:15; 7:17; 8:1-3 for other similar summary statements which provide structure and movement for Luke’s narrative.
There is a special emphasis in Luke 4:14–9:50 regarding the region of Galilee, and this section of Luke is often referred to as “The Galilean Ministry.” This is not simply a title, for it also describes a mode or method of ministry that Jesus undertook. Galilee was a fertile, agrarian region composed of both rich and poor, cities and rural villages, highly educated and relatively uneducated (cf. Green 1997:200-203; Barclay 1975:45). That Luke places such an emphasis on Galilee reveals Luke’s conviction that Jesus is a Messiah for all people. While Jesus caters to the political, religious, and cultural expectations of all people He encounters, He also challenges, redeems, and transforms these expectations in order to call people to a new way of thinking and living (Green 1997:203).
The ministry in Galilee was by in the power of the Spirit, indicating that Jesus was led and guided by the Holy Spirit on where to go and what to do. It was in this first year that Jesus called His first disciples (John 1:35-51), performed His first recorded miracle (John 2:1-10), cleansed the temple (John 2:13-25), and reached out to both religious elite (John 3:1-21) and religious rejects (John 4:1-42). While the birth narratives of Jesus provided a constellation of Jewish expectations for the Messiah (Luke 1:1-3:38), the early ministry actions of Jesus show how He is actually going to perform His ministry (Green 1997:297). In the context here, Luke mentions nothing about miracles, but focuses primarily on the teaching of Jesus. This reveals that for Luke, the primary ministry of the Spirit is to guide Jesus and equip Him for teaching the Scriptures (Bock 1994:391).
As a result of what Jesus did and taught during His first year of ministry, news of Him went out through all the surrounding region. The word for news is pheme which is the origin for the English word “fame.” (Bock 1994:391). People were talking about Him, wondering about Him, and trying to figure out if He was just another teacher, or maybe a prophet, or perhaps the long-awaited Messiah. It was the miracles of Jesus, the signs that followed His teaching, which authenticated His claims to be the Messiah. Miraculous signs have always been the means by which God proved to the Israelites that He had chosen a particular person for a special prophetic task (cf Exodus 4; Pentecost 1981:136).
4:15. If verse 14 focuses on the Spiritual ministry of Jesus, verse 15 emphasizes the teaching ministry, which, of course, is empowered by the Spirit. The text says He taught in their synagogues. The term synagogue means “gathering” and it was the central place of religious life for Jewish people in a particular community. There was only one temple, and it was in Jerusalem. Every community that had a least ten Jewish men would have a synagogue where they gathered for prayer and teaching. They gathered at least weekly on the Sabbath (Saturday), but many would gather much more frequently (cf. Edersheim 1988:432). The primary activity when they gathered in the Synagogue was teaching and instruction in the Torah, the first five books of the Bible. They went weekly, if not daily, to the synagogue to learn the Bible. In fact, sometimes, rather than call them Synagogues, they were referred to as a “school” or “House of Instruction.” The synagogue was the local religious school where Jews went as often as they could pray and learn the Word of God (Edersheim 1988:439-450).
So when Luke records that Jesus taught in their synagogues, it means that every week, at least on the Sabbath, but maybe more frequently, Jesus was in a local synagogue, teaching the Scriptures to the others who had gathered to learn. It can also be shown from other sources that the typical method of synagogue teaching was book by book, verse by verse. Typically, when Jewish Rabbis taught the Torah, they taught it straight through (cf. Neh 8:8), and this is probably how Jesus taught (cf. Luke 4:16-21; 4:31; 6:6; 13:10). Jesus “took the Old Testament Scriptures, read them, explained them, and caused the people to understand them” (Pentecost 1981:137). This practice was also used by the early church (Acts 2:42; 13:14-15; 14:1-3; 15:21; 18:4; 19:8-10; etc.). Lightfoot records that the one who taught this way was often referred to as “an interpreter,” and the teaching as an “interpretation” (Lightfoot 1989:68; Edersheim 444). This is partly because the readings were in Hebrew, while some of those in the synagogue may have only understood Greek or Aramaic (cf. Edersheim 1988:432). So the text was read in Hebrew, then if an interpreter was present, it would be interpreted into a language everyone could understand, and then explained and taught so it could be understood and applied. This is what Jesus did in the synagogues He visited.
Parallel to the end of verse 14, Luke reiterates that the Spirit-empowered teaching of Jesus resulted in Him being glorified by all. However, Luke will go on to show in 4:16-30 that not everyone appreciated His teaching and His claims. Nevertheless, the ministry of Jesus was marked by a perfect balance between the Spirit and the truth, and as a result, many believed in Him, became His disciples, and praised His name among their friends and family.
Jesus has begun His ministry with the power of the Spirit and the teaching of Scripture. These themes are mentioned again in 4:42-44, forming an inclusio around 4:16-41, which contain specific examples of Jesus’ Spirit-empowered teaching and ministry. These two primary themes dominate the narrative of Luke 4:16–9:50 (cf. Green 1997:199), as seen especially in Luke 4:16-30.
To comment on this post, please use the forum.
| Please Leave Comments in the Commentary Forum
Luke 4:1-13
By J.D. Myers | October 31, 2009
Luke 4:1-13 contains a description of the forty days of temptation Jesus experienced in the wilderness. The placement fits perfectly in the narrative as it immediately follows the genealogy of Jesus and precedes the beginning of ministry of Jesus. The genealogy concluded with a reference to Adam, the son of God (3:38), which recalls for the reader the sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3). Jesus, if He is going to make right what went wrong with Adam, must pass the tests which Adam failed. In this section Jesus faces similar temptations and the same foe as did Adam and Eve. As the genealogy in Luke 3 was technically that of Mary, the temptation of Jesus begins to reveal how God would crush the serpent’s head through the seed of the woman in fulfillment of Genesis 3:15.
Once Jesus has passed the temptation and stood against the tempter, He was able to begin His mission, that of reversing what went wrong with Adam (See 4:16-21). This period of temptation was like an entrance exam before beginning His ministry. The flow of the narrative reveals that Luke is making many parallels between the life and ministry of Jesus, and the history of the Israelite people. The baptism of Jesus by John represented the baptism of Israel by Moses in the Red Sea (1 Cor 10:2), the genealogy of Jesus is like the first census of Israel before they were instructed to enter Canaan (Numbers 1-3), and the forty days of testing in the wilderness represent the forty years of discipline in the wilderness (Num 14:33-34). Other similarities are brought out in Matthew 2. Such parallels help the reader see that Jesus is inaugurating a renewed Israel: His ministry reveals what God desired Israel to be and do for the world.
4:1. The forty days of temptation began when Jesus was filled with the Holy Spirit. Being filled with the Spirit is being led, or controlled, by the Spirit. And curiously, in this instance, the Spirit is guiding Jesus into a time of temptation and testing. Generally, it is assumed that being filled with the Spirit brings an absence of temptation and testing, and not being filled leaves one open to the devil and his temptations. However, while God does not tempt anyone (Jas 1:13), He does allow people to be tempted (1 Cor 10:13), and even leads people to places where they will face temptation. The place where Jesus will be tempted is the wilderness, which was part of the region of Judea, east of Jerusalem. It was 35 miles long by 15 miles wide, and was called Jeshimmon, “The Devastation.” The hills are like dust heaps; the limestone looks blistered; the rocks are bare and jagged (Barclay 1975:43). As indicated previously, Jesus being led into the wilderness for testing is reminiscent of Israel being led by God in the wilderness for their time of testing and refinement.
4:2. Whereas Israel spent forty years in the wilderness, Jesus was tempted for forty days. Luke’s reference here to forty days also recalls the 40 days spent by Moses on Mount Sinai (Exod 34:28) and the 40 day journey by Elijah to Mount Horeb (1 Kings 19:48). In all cases, the time period was for the purpose of preparing these men for the next stage in their ministry. It appears by how Luke phrases this that Jesus was being tempted for the entire forty days (cf. Mark 1:13). If so, then the temptations as recorded here are only summaries, and also explain why the accounts in Mark 1 and Matthew 4 differ in their details and order of events.
The temptations Jesus faced were brought to Him by the devil. Just as the devil, through the serpent, caused Adam and Eve to fall into sin in the Garden of Eden, so also he was now trying to stop God’s plan of redemption in Jesus by also getting Jesus to sin. The reverse the curse God placed upon creation as a result of sin, Jesus must resist the temptations of the devil, and remain sinless (Heb 4:15).
There are three temptations brought by the devil, which fit with the three temptations described in 1 John 2:16 as the primary temptations that people face. These three temptations are the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. These three temptations are similar to the ways Israel was tempted in the wilderness, and similar to the ways Adam and Eve were tempted in the garden of Eden (Gen 3:6). Specifically, Eve saw that the tree was good for food (the lust of the flesh), that it was pleasing to the eyes (the lust of the eyes), and that it was desirable to make one wise (the pride of life). Jesus was tempted by the devil in three similar ways. The devil tried to get Jesus to turn stone into bread (the lust of the flesh), to take a shortcut in receiving the kingdoms of the world (the lust of the eyes), and to throw himself down from the pinnacle of the temple in order to easily declare himself as the Messiah and prove that God was working in Him (the pride of life).
Those are the devil’s three primary temptations. It is also seen that the devil has only one tactic in these three categories of temptation. No matter what the temptation is, the devil tries to raise doubt about the Word of God. The devil twists the Word of God by making subtle changes to it such as adding to it, subtracting from it, or quoting verses out of context.
During the time in the wilderness, Jesus ate nothing. Not only was this time of fasting important for Jesus to withstand the testing He was about to enter, but forty days without eating is another way that Jesus is showing Himself to be like Moses and Elijah, both of whom spent forty days fasting while they communed with God and prepared for the ministry God had for them (cf. Exod 34:28; Deut 9:9-11; 10:10; 1 Kings 19:8).
After the forty days had ended, He was hungry. This is most certainly an understatement, as by the end of forty days without food, Jesus was probably nearing starvation. His hunger sets up the first temptation.
The Lust of the Flesh (4:3-4)
4:3. The first temptation plays on Jesus’ hunger, which, after forty days of fasting, is a pressing need. When the devil came to tempt Jesus, he begins by recognizing who Jesus is. The If is first class conditional and could be translated since you are the Son of God (cf. also 4:9). He is not challenging the identity of Jesus, but is basing the temptation on it.
The identify of Jesus as the Son of God is not equivalent to saying that Jesus is God, let alone the Second Person of the Trinity. Though Paul and later New Testament writers may have infused the term with Trinitarian teaching, the term did not contain this idea in Roman and Jewish culture at the time Jesus lived (see IDB 4:408-413; NIDNTT 3:634-648). The term Son of God is sometimes used of angels, the nation of Israel, as well as Israelite kings (cf Gen 6:2-4, Job 1:6; 38:7; Exod 4:22; 2 Sam 7:14; Psa 2:7; 89:27). In the context of Jesus, it is primarily a kingly title, and is equivalent to “Messiah” or “Christ” (cf. Matt 26:63; Luke 4:41; John 20:31).
So the devil is saying, “Since you are the Son of God, you have certain rights and privileges.” All of the temptations are based on this premise, that Jesus, as the Son of God, the Messiah, the King of Israel, has certain rights and privileges. This first temptation is based on the hunger of Jesus. The devil tells Jesus that to satisfy his hunger, all he has to do is command this stone to become bread. Many of the stones in that region are about 8-10 inches in diameter, round, and sun-baked brown. They look almost exactly like loaves of bread. The devil uses this similarity to tempt Jesus to turn one stone into bread. The devil was not asking for anything large and excessive, just one stone to help satisfy the hunger of Jesus. On the surface, the temptation is really quite harmless. The sensation of hunger is given by God to help humans know when their bodies require food. It is healthy to eat, and food is a gift from God.
Furthermore, since it appears that Jesus was intentionally portraying Himself as a prophet like Moses and as the one who will renew the people of Israel, it would be natural for Him to do for Himself what God had given to Moses and Israelites when they were in the wilderness. When they got hungry, God sent them manna, “bread from heaven.” We don’t know if the devil used this approach, but if the temptations as recorded in the gospels are only summaries of the extensive and trying periods of temptation that Jesus faced (4:2 indicates that Jesus was tempted for the entire forty days), then the devil probably used every approach and persuasive argument possible. Few temptations we experience as humans are ever over in a second or two, and the temptations of Jesus were just as strenuous, of not more so, than ours (Heb 4:15).
If this is how the devil tried to persuade Jesus (as it appears to be from the answer of Jesus is 4:4), then the devil is using his one and only tactic to tempt Jesus. He is trying to raise doubt about God’s Word, or twist it to teach something it does not. He is trying to get Jesus to just do for Himself what God did for Moses and the Israelites. However, when when the Israelites received bread from heaven to satisfy their hunger, they were relying upon God’s provision. “Though the manna was on the ground, it was still a test of faith for the people. They had to believe that God’s Word was trustworthy” (BKC 2:213). and that if they did things God’s way, He would provide for them daily.
If Jesus were to do what the devil was suggesting, He would be committing the same sin that some of the Israelites committed. In the wilderness, the people were only supposed to collect what they needed for one day, and then on the sixth day, collect enough for two days so they would not have to collect food on the Sabbath. But initially, some of them collected enough for multiple days, and when they woke up, the extra they had collected was rotten and was full of maggots. So then on the sixth day, they failed to collect enough, and so went hungry on the Sabbath when no manna appeared on the ground. The temptation for the Israelites was to attempt to provide for themselves rather than trust in God. If they wanted daily sustenance, they had to daily trust in God to provide it.
This is the same temptation Jesus faces. If Jesus performed a miracle to make bread for Himself, He would be relying on Himself rather than on God. Satan wants Jesus to selfishly use His abilities to meet His own desires. That’s the lust of the flesh. Jesus does similar things later in his ministry when He turns water into wine (John 2), or feeds multitudes of people with just a few loaves and fish (Matthew 14; Luke 9). But in those cases, it was not just Himself He was feeding, and more importantly, He was following God’s guidance. Here, He would be selfishly meeting only His own needs, and the guidance came not from God, but from the devil.
4:4. In all three temptations, Jesus quotes from Deuteronomy. Though the devil can twist Scripture, Jesus knows how to use it properly to help Him stand against the temptations of the devil. In this first instance, Jesus quotes Deuteronomy 8:3, which helps support the idea that this first temptation is related to Jesus being a prophet like Moses, the one who will inaugurate a renewed Israel. Deuteronomy 8 contains a reminder from Moses to the people of Israel about how God provided manna, the bread from heaven, to meet their needs when they were hungry. Moses says there, as Jesus quotes here, that ”Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.” The point of Moses, and therefore the point of Jesus, is that feeding the body is not what is important, but obeying God. God did not provide manna to the people of Israel just so they could be fed, but also so they could practice obedience to His word.
Furthermore, in the context of Deuteronomy 8, Moses reminds the people that God promised to bring them into their own land. If He helped them escape Egypt, and delivered them through the Red Sea, He would certainly make sure they didn’t starve in the desert. So also, Jesus knows that God would not protect Him as He was growing up, promise that He would be the Messiah, and then allow Him to starve in the wilderness. Jesus trusts God’s Word, and bases His faith and decisions upon it.
The Lust of the Eyes (4:5-8)
4:5. The implied response of Jesus to the first temptation was that God had promised Jesus would be the Messiah, not only for Israel, but for the whole world. Since God’s promises could be trusted, God would not let Jesus starve in the wilderness. The second temptation of the devil builds upon these Messianic promises. The devil recognizes that Jesus is to be the Messiah, the Son of God (cf. 4:3), and seeing now that Jesus wants to follow the promises of God, takes Jesus up on a high mountain for the next temptation. The text does not indicate which mountain this was, though some believe it was not a literal, physical mountain, since from it, Jesus was shown the entire earth, and no mountain affords that kind of view. However, it seems more likely that the mountain was a physical, earthly mountain, and while there, Jesus was given a vision of all the kingdoms of the earth. This also fits better with the growing imagery of Jesus being a prophet like Moses (and Elijah) who went up on a mountain to receive revelation and direction from God. High mountains were thought to be places one could meet with the gods. This is why shrines and temples were often built on top of mountains (cf. Psa 121:1).
While on the mountain, the devil tempts Jesus with the second temptation: the lust of the eyes. The devil showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the world. There is some question as to whether Satan showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the entire world or just those of the known world. Also, is Satan offering all the kingdoms throughout time, or just those in existence at that time? The phrase in a moment of time may refer to the latter, since it could also be translated “at that moment of time.” Otherwise, it is hard to discern the reason for showing Jesus all the kingdoms of the world in a single instant.
4:6. Now that Jesus has seen the kingdoms, the devil offers them to Jesus, and specifically, the authority and glory that comes with them. Both the devil and Jesus know that authority over the nations is something that was supposed to be given to the Messiah (cf. Matt 28:18; Php 2:9-10; Rev 19:15). This right to rule over the nations was something that God promised to the people of Israel, with the Messiah on her throne (cf. Deut 15:6; Psa 22:28). The devil, however, states that authority over the nations had been delivered to him, and he can give it to whomever he wants. The devil again twists and distorts the truth. The first part of his statement is true. When Adam listened to and fell before Satan, Adam, in essence, gave up his power, his dominion, to Satan. He forfeited the earth to Satan. So he does have authority over the nations, and is the god of this age (2 Cor 4:4). However, it is not true that he owns the nations and can give them to whomever he wishes. Though Satan took control of the earth, it is not Satan’s to give away. That belongs to God alone (Dan 4:32).
4:7. The devil, of course, is trying to obtain the authority that belongs to God alone, and so just as the devil was able to wrest away from Adam authority over the earth, in tempting Jesus, the devil is trying to wrest authority away from the Messiah, and ultimately, from God. Therefore, the devil says to Jesus that ”If You will worship before me, all will be Yours.” The devil is offering to Jesus what Jesus is on earth for. The Messiah was supposed to gain rulership over the earth.
The one condition was that Jesus had to worship the devil. The word for worship (Gk. proskuneses) literally means “to bend the knee.” To kneel before someone represents swearing an oath of fealty to them. So by asking Jesus to worship him, the devil is asking Jesus to give an oath of fealty to him. Satan knows that unless he can get Jesus to kneel before him, the day will arrive when he must kneel before Jesus (Php 2:10).
If Jesus bows to the devil, then the universe, which ultimately belongs to Jesus, would be given to the devil, and that is how the devil could then “give it to whomever” he wishes. So the offer by the devil is a shortcut to the plan of God. Jesus knows that God’s plan includes pain, suffering, ridicule, and scorn. Only after He suffers and dies as a human will Jesus receive the right to rule the world. The devil offers to Jesus a way to the ultimate goal, but through a path that avoids all the pain and suffering.
It is possible that there is a parallel here between what the devil offers Jesus, and what God offers to Moses on Mount Sinai after the people of Israel began to worship other gods (Exod 32:10). God tells Moses that due to the idolatry of the Israelites, God was going to wipe them out, and start over with Moses. Moses declines the offer, and instead, intercedes with God on behalf of the idolatrous Israelites. Jesus knows, as did Moses, that by putting his own desires first, He would be destroying the lives of countless multitudes.
4:8. The reply of Jesus to this temptation is first of all to command the devil. Jesus says, “Get behind me, Satan!” This indicates the conviction of Jesus that the devil must follow Him in service, not He follow the devil. To support this claim, Jesus quotes once again from Deuteronomy, this time from 6:13. In this passage, Moses instructs the people that when they get into the Promised Land, and gain the authority and glory that has been promised to them, they must not forget God by worshiping, or bowing the knee to false gods. Instead, they must continue to worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve.
Although Moses warned the Israelites about this, Scripture reveals that they did not obey. Instead, they frequently turned after other gods. Jesus is not about to make that mistake. He will not fail as Israel failed. He knew His Bible, and knew that there is no shortcut to achieving God’s promises. If He worshiped the devil, and knelt before him, Jesus would then have to serve the devil, not God.
The Pride of Life (4:9-13)
4:9 In the second temptation, Jesus was able to rebuff the attempts of the devil to gain immediate rulership over the kingdoms of the world. Though Jesus, as the Messiah, will ultimately gain dominion over the earth, He had to obtain it in God’s way with God’s timing. The third temptation builds upon the Messianic understanding of Jesus. The devil tries to get Jesus to proclaim Himself as the Messiah in a miraculous fashion. In order to be the Messiah, Jesus would eventually have to be recognized as such, and so the devil urges Jesus to reveal Himself to the Jewish people.
With this goal, He brought Jesus [/b]to Jerusalem[/b] which is, of course, the center of Judaism, and the nexus of all the Messianic hopes. It was expected that the Messiah, when He appeared, would proclaim Himself in Jerusalem. And the devil brought Jesus, not just to Jerusalem, bu to the pinnacle of the temple. If Jerusalem was the political and religious center of Judaism, the temple was the center of Jerusalem. The temple itself embodied all the political and religious expectations for the Messiah. By placing Jesus at the the pinnacle of the temple, the devil was symbolically placing Jesus above it, putting Jesus, in a sense, in authority over the temple.
This highest point of the temple was probably the southeast corner of the temple which loomed over a cliff of the temple mount. If this is where Jesus stood, He would be about 450 feet above the bottom of the cliff and would be able to oversee all of Jerusalem, and all the people in the Temple courts below (Nelson’s 1999:1257). From here, the devil tempts Jesus to throw Himself down. The devil is not tempting Jesus to commit suicide, but to perform a miracle in the sight of all the worshipers below. This becomes clear by what the devil says next.
4:10 In the previous two temptations, Jesus has used Scriptural quotes to defeat the temptations of the devil. With this third temptation, the devil uses what is written in Psalm 91:11-12 to tempt Jesus. To support his suggestion that Jesus throw Himself from the pinnacle of the temple, the devil quotes a Scripture which says that God will give His angels charge over you, to keep you. this means that God will send angels to protect Jesus.
4:11. The devil continues to quote from Psalm 91 to show what the angels will do for Jesus. He says that “In their hands they shall bear you up, lest you dash your foot against a stone.” The devil is trying to show Jesus that if He casts Himself from the Temple, God will have angels catch Jesus before He hits the ground.
The devil, however, misquoted the text, and in so doing, twisted it to mean what it does not say. Where the devil inserts the word and, he removed several key words from Psalm 91:11. The verse actually says, “He shall give His angels charge over you, to keep you in all your ways.” When properly read in context and applied to Jesus’ situation, the text reveals that the angels are not there to keep Jesus from committing suicide, but to help Him walk in the ways God has laid out for Him, to help Him obey God.
The devil twisted Scripture to try to get Jesus to perform an amazing demonstration of power before the multitudes of people below. To perform this miracle in the Temple would have helped Jesus immediately be recognized as the Messiah. Of course Jesus wanted to be recognized as the Messiah, but again, it had to be done in God’s ways with God’s timing.
4:12. Jesus again responds with Scripture. He does not challenge or question the devil on his misuse of Scripture, but simply quotes a verse used properly in context, from Deuteronomy 6:16. Jesus said, “You shall not tempt the Lord your God.” In this passage, Moses reminds the people of when they doubted whether God was with them or not (Exod 17:7). They had seen God miraculously provide for them time after time. But then the days in the wilderness got long and hot, and they ran out of water, and they began to wonder if God had forgotten about them, or abandoned them. They accused Moses, and therefore God, of bringing them into the desert just to die. But what they were really doing, according to Exodus 17:7, was testing God. In their complaining, they were saying, “If God is really there, and if He really loves us, He will provide water for us.” God did provide water for them – out of a rock – but He was not happy about their lack of trust.
Jesus sees many similarities between this incident with the Israelites in the wilderness and what the devil is tempting Him to do. Satan is tempting Jesus to test God by saying, “If God is really there, and if He really loves me, He will protect me as I throw myself from the highest point of the temple.” But Jesus chose wisely where the Israelites did not. Where the Israelites tested God, Jesus would not.
4:13. Jesus has overcome every temptation brought against Him, and so the devil departed…until an opportune time. There were several other opportunities for Jesus to sin during His years of ministry. One is when Satan, through Peter, tells Jesus that He will not have to take the road to the cross. There, just like here in verse 8, Jesus says, “Get behind me, Satan.” Another attempt might have been on the night before his crucifixion in the Garden of Gethsemane. But Jesus was victorious over all temptations.
To comment on this post, please use the forum.
| Please Leave Comments in the Commentary Forum
Luke 3:23-38
By J.D. Myers | September 17, 2009
After writing about the baptism of Jesus, and His anointing by the Holy Spirit, it would seem natural for Luke to transition immediately into the ministry of Jesus. But instead, he records the genealogy of Jesus. Issues as to why Luke does this, and how to understand this genealogy abound. The approach here will be to first address three issues related to the genealogy and then work through the genealogy one name at a time.
The Issues
1. Why Have Genealogies?
The first issue is why there are genealogies in Scripture in the first place. It must be emphatically stated that since genealogies are Scripture, and all Scripture is God-breathed and profitable (2 Tim 3:16), the genealogies must also be profitable. This includes the genealogy here, as well as those in Genesis, Numbers, 1-2 Chronicles, Ezra, and Matthew. Each genealogy is different, and each must be considered in context to determine its profitability.
Nevertheless, there are some basic, overarching truths which help make all genealogies profitable.
First, and most obviously, genealogies are lists of names. Such lists are reminders that the Scriptures are rooted in history. The Scriptures were not invented out of someone’s imagination, but contains the stories and ideas of real people who lived and died, worked and played, got married and had children, and tried to follow God. Though we do not recognize most of the names on these lists, to many Jewish families, the lists of names bring to mind great stories of faith in the midst of trials and perseverance in adversity (Wright 2004:39). For those who knew the stories, genealogies would be read with the same interest as a college football fanatic reading a list of Heisman Trophy winners or a politician reading a list of the Presidents of the United States. For us, some of the names are prominent and well-known, while others are obscure and unknown. However, all were needed to bring Jesus to the world.
Second, genealogies point the reader to the sovereignty of God. Since the lists contain names of real people, these people have stories of things that happened in their lives, many of which can be read about in Scripture. These written accounts reveal how God is at work both behind the scenes and in miraculous ways to accomplish His plans and purposes within the world.
Third, genealogies within Scripture reveal that God is a list maker. He keeps records. Though He does not need them to aid His memory, He has put them in Scripture to remind us that He is watches our lives, cares about us, and keeps records of the things that matter to Him. Genealogies reveal that people matter to God.
This leads to the fourth truth about genealogies. They reminder the reader that God knows our names. Psychologically and emotionally, it is comforting to know that somebody knows our name. Remembering someone’s name makes them feel accepted, cared for, and important.
Fifthly, genealogies help reveal that God’s blessings are for all people. Many in Luke’s day, as in ours, believe that God reserves His blessings for only a select few, the people who are good enough to receive it, or the people of a particular race or denomination. But genealogies often contain the names of some people who lived very questionable lives, as well as people from other backgrounds and people groups than were commonly “accepted.”
Finally, in certain cultures, genealogies are badges of honor. Greater honor was given to those who could trace their line the furthest, and if prominent people were on the list, the honor was greater still. Malina and Rohrbaugh (2003:365) write this:
Recent studies of genealogies indicate that genealogies can serve a wide range of social functions: preserving tribal homogeneity or cohesion, interrelating diverse traditions, acknowledging marriage contracts between extended families, maintaining ethnic identity, and encoding key social information about a person. Above all, genealogies established claims to social status (honor) or to a particular office (priest, king) or rank, thereby providing a map for proper social interaction.
2. Why Place One Here?
A second issue is why Luke placed this genealogy here. Matthew, for example, began his Gospel with a genealogy. Why does Luke wait until here to record the genealogy? It seems out of place. If it were not here, 4:1 could naturally follow 3:22 (cf. Matt 3:17-4:1; Mark 4:11-12). But Luke intentionally places the genealogy here for multiple reasons.
First, the genealogy lends credence to the immediately preceding events, and particularly, the statement from God that Jesus is His Son (3:22). To support this statement, Luke provides the genealogy of Jesus, which goes all the way back to “Adam, the son of God” (v. 38). This, in turn, provides the basis for the first temptation in the wilderness when Satan questions whether Jesus really is “the son of God” (4:3).
Of course, since all humanity originated with Adam, it could be argued that we are all “descendants” of God in a similar way. But this is actually a second point of Luke. By beginning with Jesus and ending with God (the genealogy is reversed in Matthew 1, and begins with Abraham, not Adam), Luke shows that Jesus is not only the son of God, but also the representative of all mankind.
Third, it may be that Luke, who was a traveling companion of Paul, was influenced by some of Paul’s thought about Jesus being “the second Adam” (1 Cor 14:45). Just as Adam was the son of God, so also now Jesus is called the son of God, indicating that with Jesus, humanity has a new start. This point is supported by the fact that Luke reverses the usual genealogical order by beginning with Jesus and ending with Adam, the son of God. This places Adam nearer to the temptation of Jesus in 4:1-13.
Fourth, Luke is making a political statement as well. While Caesar claimed to be “the son of God,” Luke is showing that Jesus is the true “Son of God.” It is interesting to note that (depending on how two textual variants are handled) there are 77 names in the genealogy. If the two variants are added in, there are still 77 names, not counting Jesus and God.
Fifth, the genealogy, which points to both the human and divine origins of Jesus, prepares the reader for the three temptations of Jesus by Satan in the following passage. If Jesus was only human and not divine, such difficult temptations by Satan Himself would be unnecessary. But if Jesus was only divine and not human, Jesus would be above temptation.
Finally, the fact that Jesus has a genealogy while John does not proves once and for all that Jesus is superior to John and has surpassed him in every way (Green 1997:189). Prior to this, the narrative has gone back and forth between John and Jesus. After this, while John is occasionally mentioned, the focus of the text is entirely upon Jesus.
So with Luke’s purpose, theme, and context, the genealogy fits perfectly at this point in the narrative. It proves that in every way — in his humanity, divinity, Jewishness, and royal lineage — Jesus is the Messiah.
3. Why is it Different than Matthew’s?
Finally, there is much debate about why this genealogy of Jesus is different than the one recorded in Matthew 1.
Though many solutions have been proposed, the preferred solution is that Matthew records the genealogy of Joseph, while Luke records that of Mary (cf. Pentecost 1981:36-39). This is culturally and prophetically significant. In verse 23, Luke writes that Jesus was the supposed (Gk. nomidzo) son of Joseph. The phrase Luke uses could also be variously translated: as was the custom, as it was assumed, as was acknowledged by law, as was entered in the ledger, or as it is on record (cf. Green 1997:189; Zodhiates 1998:1014; Henry 1997:1835).
But as Luke has already revealed, Jesus had no earthly father. Born of a virgin, Jesus only had an earthly mother. However, the official legal documents of the Roman Empire did not allow women to be listed in genealogies. So whoever recorded the genealogy of Jesus on the official records put down Joseph, even though it was Mary’s genealogy (contra. Bock 1994:352).
This is culturally significant from a Jewish perspective as well. Jewishness is passed down from the mother, not from the father. So a genealogy through Mary shows that Jesus was fully Jewish. Matthew, who writes to show that Jesus is the promised King of Israel, takes the genealogy back through Joseph since royal lineage was passed down from father to son. So when Luke takes his genealogy all the way back to Adam, it reminds the reader what God told Adam and Eve, that one would come from the seed of the woman, and he would crush the serpent’s head (Gen 3:15).
The differences in the two genealogies are prophetically significant as well. Joseph is in direct lineage of Solomon, the heir to the throne. But Jeconiah (Also called Jehoiachin or Coniah; see 2 Chr 36:8-9.), one of Solomon’s descendants, was so evil, God pronounced that with Jeconiah, the royal line was cut off. (He ruled for only three months! See 2 Chr 36:9. I prefer the view that he was eighteen. See 2 Kings 24:8; 1 Chr 3:17-19.) No one from Jeconiah’s family line would ever sit on the throne of David (Jer 22:28-30). So Joseph, although he was technically and legally of the royal line of David through Solomon, could never have sat on the throne because that line had been spiritually cursed by God. Nevertheless, God had promised to David that someone from his family would always sit on the throne (2 Sam 7:12-13). Luke reveals how this promise was fulfilled. Once the royal line of Solomon was cut off with Jeconiah, God brought the royal line through Nathan, a different son of David, all the way up through Mary to Jesus, the promised Messiah and King of Israel. Receiving an inheritance through women had precedent in Jewish Law (Num 27:1-7).
So in this way, Jesus had every right to the throne. By Roman legal systems, he was an heir to the throne through Joseph. By blood, he was Jewish through Mary. Prophetically and spiritually, he was heir through Mary and Nathan to David. However the issue is approached, Jesus is the heir to the throne of David.
The Genealogy
As in any genealogy, there is limited information on some names, while whole books could be written about others. The approach here will be to summarize what we know about each of the names. Most commentaries say little or nothing about the names in a genealogy, and so most of the information about the names was gleaned from Bock 1994:353-360.
3:23. When Jesus..began His ministry He was about thirty years old. In Greek society, this was the age that most men entered public service. Up until that age, they would be learning their craft or trade, and at thirty they would start to practice it on their own. It was the same for the Hebrew people, but especially for the Levitical priesthood. Levites did not start to serve in the temple until they were thirty (Num 4:3; 23-47). It was at thirty that a Jewish man was allowed to enter legal disputes (Evans 2003:45). This is also the age at which Joseph began serving before Pharaoh (Gen 41:46) and David became the king of Israel (2 Sam 5:4). In the days of Jesus, when the average life span was 45-50 years, a thirty-year old would be equivalent today to someone in their mid 40’s (cf. Malina 2003:239).
The genealogy begins by stating that Jesus was assumed, or supposed as being the son of Joseph. As indicated above in the section on Issues with this genealogy, Luke is indicating that Jesus was not the actual son of Joseph, but was on record as such. This genealogy is really that of Mary. See above for more explanation. This is the only place where the word son (Gk. uios) is used. Everywhere else it is supplied by the English translators. It seems this may be another way in which Luke hints that something different is going on with Jesus being the son of Joseph.
Joseph was of Heli, though this was actually Mary’s father. Nothing is known about him, though it is debated about whether he was the physical father of Mary or Joseph. Rabbinical literature speaks of “Mary the daughter of Heli” as hanging by the nipples of her breasts and hell is hung on her ear (Lightfoot 1989:55). If this is Mary the mother of Jesus whom the writers are trying to vilify, then the record shows that Heli was in fact her father.
For more, see the discussion above about why Luke’s genealogy is different than Matthew’s (cf. Bock 1994:918-923)
3:24. Matthat. Nothing is known about Matthat, though there are others in this genealogy and Scripture with similar names (Ezra 10:33; 2 Chron 3:29; Luke 3:25, 26, 29, 31).
Levi. Nothing is known about Levi, though there are others in this genealogy and Scripture with the same name (Gen 29:34; Luke 3:29). The original Levi became the forefather of the Hebrew Tribe of Levi, which is the tribe of Priests. Some believe that since Mary and Elizabeth were relatives (1:36), and Elizabeth was a descendant of the Levitical Aaronic Priesthood (1:5), Mary was also of the Tribe of Levi, thereby qualifying Jesus for the Levitical Priesthood. The main problem with this is that the Messiah is to be of the Tribe of Judah (Gen 49:10; Rev 5:5).
Melchi. Nothing is known about Melchi. The name appears again in 3:28.
Janna. Nothing is known about Janna. This is the only place this name appears in Scripture.
Joseph. Nothing is known about Joseph, though there are others in this genealogy and Scripture with the same name (Gen 30:24; Luke 3:23, 26, 30).The story of the Patriarch Joseph can be found in Genesis 37-50.
3:25. Mattathiah. Nothing is known about Mattathiah, though this is a common Jewish name (1 Esdr 9;43; Ezra 10:43; Neh 8;4; 1 Chr 9:31; 1 Macc 2:1, 14). There are similar names in this genealogy (3:24, 26, 29, 31).
Amos. Nothing is known about Amos, though kings (2 Kings 21:18) and prophets (2 Kings 19:2; Amos 1:1) had the same name.
Nahum. Nothing is known about Nahum, though a prophet had the same name (Nah 1:1).
Esli. Nothing is known about Esli. This is the only place this name appears in Scripture.
Naggai. Nothing is known about Naggai. This name appears one other time (1 Chr 3:7).
3:26. Maath. Nothing is known about Maath. This name appears two other times (1 Chr 6:35; 2 Chr 29:12).
Mattathiah. Nothing is known about Mattathiah, though this is a common Jewish name (1 Esdr 9;43; Ezra 10:43; Neh 8;4; 1 Chr 9:31; 1 Macc 2:1, 14). There are similar names in this genealogy (3:24, 25, 29, 31).
Semei. Nothing is known about Semei. This is the only place this name appears in Scripture.
Joseph. Some translations have this as “Josech.” Nothing is known about Joseph, though there are others in this genealogy and Scripture with the same name (Gen 30:24; Luke 3:23, 26, 30).The story of the Patriarch Joseph can be found in Genesis 37-50.
Judah. Nothing is known about Judah, though there are others in Scripture with the same name (Gen 29:35; Luke 3:33). The Judah in Genesis 29-50 was one of the Twelve Tribes of Israel, and was one of the two Tribes that made up the southern kingdom (1 Kings 12:20-21).
3:27. Joannas. Nothing is known about Joannas, though a similar name appears in Ezra 10:6 and 2 Chronciles 23:1. There is some speculation that Joannas might be the same person as Anania in 1 Chronicles 3:19, the son of Zerubbabel, but the main problem with this is that Luke has Rhesa as the son of Zerubbabel, not Joannas.
Rhesa. Nothing is known about Rhesa. This is the only place this name is recorded in Scripture. However, some speculate, based on the theory that Joannas (above) was actually the son of Zerubbabel, Rhesa might therefore be a title for Zerubbabel, meaning “Prince.” However, the lack of other titles in this genealogy argues against such a view. Of course, the other genealogy of Zerubbabel does not list Rhesa as a son (1 Chr 3:19), so either way, there is a problem. Most likely, 1 Chronicles 3:19 simply does not list all the sons of Zerubbabel.
Zerubbabel. Zerubbabel was the leader of the Tribe of Judah who led the people out of captivity in Babylon back to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple around 539 BC (Ezra 2:2; 3:2).
Shealtiel. There are some problems with his name since 1 Chronicles 3:19 lists Pedaiah as the father of Zerubbabel, but most other references have Shealtiel (Hag 1:1, 12, 14; 2:2, 23; Ezra 3:2, 8, 5:2; Neh 12:1). A possible solution is that Shealtiel died childless, and so according to Levitical law, Pedaiah, the brother of Shealtiel (1 Chr 3:17-18) married Shealtiel’s wife. Their first son together would be considered the son of Shealtiel (Deut 25:1-10). If this was the case, Zerubbabel could be the son of both Pedaiah (biologically) and Shealtiel (by law). But of course, if these two were brothers, and were both sons of Jeconiah (1 Chr 3:17-19), then a problem is encountered about the prophecy of Jeremiah 22:28-30 (discussed in the Issues section above), and why Luke lists Shealtiel as the son of Neri, rather than Jeconiah.
Neri. Both 1 Chronicles 3:17 and Matthew 1:12 have Jeconiah as the father of Shealtiel, not Neri. As indicated in the preceding paragraph, if Shealtiel and Pedaiah were brothers and sons of Jeconiah, then a problem would arise from the prophecy of Jeremiah 22:28-30. But when it is remembered that Jeconiah was only eighteen when he became king (2 Kings 24:8) and he only ruled for three months (2 Chr 36:9), it becomes clear that he could not have had numerous sons at such a young age by only one wife. Probably, he took multiple wives, and some of them already had children. Therefore, it seems possible that while Shealtiel and Pedaiah were brothers, they both had different mothers and fathers. Shealtiel, the biological son of Jeconiah, died childless. Pedaiah, the biological son of Neri and adopted son of Jeconiah, married Shealtiel’s wife, and had Zerubbabel. This solution, while highly speculative, allows all the details to fi, and also helps explain why Jeconiah was such an evil king: he was stealing wives from other men.
So having picked up with Neri, the genealogy moves into names prior to the exile, and begins to work back toward Nathan.
3:28. Melchi. Nothing is known about Melchi. This name appeared earlier in 3:24.
Addi. Nothing is known about Addi. This is the only time this name appears in Scripture.
Cosam. Nothing is known about Cosam. This is the only time this name appears in Scripture.
Elmodam. Nothing is known about Addi. This name appears one other time in Scripture (Gen 10:26).
Er. Nothing is known about Er. This name is somewhat common in Scripture (Gen 38:3; 1 Chr 2:3; 4:21).
3:29. Jose. The Greek here is actually Iesou which is normally translated “Jesus.” Nothing is known about this Jesus, though the name in Hebrew, Yashua or “Joshua” is well known (cf. Exod 17:9; Josh 1:1).
Eliezer. Nothing is known about Eliezer. This name appears other times in Scripture (Gen 15:2; Exod 18:4).
Jorim. Nothing is known about Jorim. This is the only time this name appears in Scripture.
Matthat. Nothing is known about Matthat. though there are others in this genealogy and Scripture with similar names (Ezra 10:33; 2 Chron 3:29; Luke 3:24, 25, 26, 31).
Levi. Nothing is known about Levi, though there are others in this genealogy and Scripture with the same name (Gen 29:34; Luke 3:24). The original Levi became the forefather of the Hebrew Tribe of Levi, which is the tribe of Priests..
3:30. Simeon. Nothing is known about Simeon. There are others in Scripture with the same name, including Simeon, one of the twelve sons of Jacob (Gen 35:23) and the Simeon which Luke writes about in 2:25.
Judah. Nothing is known about Judah, though there are others in Scripture with the same name (Gen 29:35; Luke 3:26). The Judah in Genesis 29-50 was one of the Twelve Tribes of Israel, and was one of the two Tribes that made up the southern kingdom (1 Kings 12:20-21).
Joseph. Nothing is known about Joseph, though this is also the name of the legal father of Jesus (Luke 3:23) and one of the Patriarchs of Israel (Gen 37-50).
Jonan. Nothing is known about Jonan, though there are others in Scripture with similar names (1 Chr 26:3; Neh 6:18).
Eliakim. Nothing is known about Eliakim, though there are others in Scripture with similar names (2 Kings 18:18; Matt 1:13).
3:31. Melea. Nothing is known about Melea. This is the only time this name appears in Scripture.
Menan. Nothing is known about Menan. This is the only time this name appears in Scripture.
Mattathah. Nothing is known about Matthathah, though there are others in this genealogy and Scripture with similar names (Ezra 10:33; 2 Chron 3:29; Luke 3:24, 25, 26, 29).
Nathan. This is David’s third son (2 Sam 5:14; 1 Chr 3:5; 14:4; Zech 12:12). Little else is known about him. This is where the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew 1 diverges from the genealogy here. Matthew traces the line through Solomon, while Luke traces it through Nathan. As indicated in the Issues section above, this is to fulfill prophecy from Jeremiah 22:28-30 that no one from the line of Jeconiah, who was a descendant of Solomon, would sit on the throne.
David. In Scripture, David is a key figure. Much of 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles records the events of his life, and he is the author of most of the Psalms. David is frequently mentioned in the New Testament as well. In the rest of his writings, Luke continues to point the reader back to the fact that Jesus is a direct descendant of King David as a way to show that Jesus is the heir to the throne of David (1:27, 31-35, 69; 2:4, 11; 18:38-39; Acts 2:25-31; 13:34-37). From this point on, the genealogy follows similar lists in Matthew 1, 1 Chronicles 2:1-15; and Ruth 4:18-22. These references will not be repeated for each name below.
3:32. Jesse. This is David’s father. Jesse and his eight sons were of the Tribe of Judah and lived in Bethlehem (1 Sam 16:1; 17:12; 20:27; Ruth 4:22; Acts 13:22; Rom 15:12).
Obed. Nothing is known about Obed. There are others in Scripture with the same name (1 Chr 2:37; 11:47).
Boaz. This is one of the main individuals in the Book of Ruth. He owned grain fields and married a Moabite woman named Ruth.
Salmon Nothing is known about Salmon, and is the only person in Scripture with this name.
Nahshon. There is one other man in Scripture with the same name, which might possibly be the one mentioned here. This other man lived at the time of Moses, and was one of the chiefs of the twelve tribes (Exod 6:23; Num 1:7). If so, his sister married Aaron.
3:33. Amminadab. Nothing is known about Amminidab, and if he is the father of the Nashon mentioned in Exodus 6:23, is the only person in Scripture with this name
Ram. There is a difficult textual problem with this name, which may lead to the possible inclusion of two other names at this point, Admin and Arni. Given the diversity of views, it is difficult to say anything about Ram (or Aram, as in some translations).
Hezron. This is likely the Hezron mentioned in Genesis 46:12. Nothing else is known about him, but there are others in Scripture with the same name (Exod 6:14; Num 26:6).
Perez. This individual is also listed in Genesis 38:29 and 46:12. This was Judah’s son through Tamar when Judah slept with her thinking she was a prostitute. The genealogy in Ruth begins with Perez.
Judah. This is the founding father of the Tribe of Judah, and was one of Jacob’s ten son through Leah (Gen 29:35; 35:23). More can be read about him in Genesis 37-49. A man with an identical name was mentioned in 3:30.
3:34. Jacob. This is one of the founding fathers of Israel. He was the son of Isaac and Rebekah, and the younger twin brother of Esau (Gen 25:19-26). His name is changed to Israel in Genesis 35:10, and the names of the Twelve Tribes take their names from Jacob’s twelve sons. There are technically thirteen tribes, with two tribes being named after Joseph’s two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim (Gen 48:5). Levi received no land, and so there were still only twelve divisions.
Isaac. This is the son born to Abraham and Sarah in their old age (Gen 21:1-7). He also is considered one of the founding fathers of Israel.
Abraham. This is the original founding father of Israel. He is the man of faith from whom God decided to call out a people from the world for Himself (Genesis 12-25). He is the father of faith, and one of the leading figures in all of Judaism. Matthew’s genealogy begins with Abraham. The names on the rest of this genealogy come from Genesis 5:1-32; 11:10-26; 1 Chronicles 1:1-26. These references will not be repeated with each name.
Terah. Terah is the father of Abraham. They lived in Ur. Joshua 24:2 indicates that he worshiped idols, as did Abram until God revealed Himself to Abram as the one, true God.
Nahor. Nothing else is known about Nahor. He is the only person in Scripture with this name.
3:35. Serug. Nothing else is known about Serug. He is the only person in Scripture with this name.
Reu. Nothing else is known about Reu. He is the only person in Scripture with this name.
Peleg. Nothing else is known about Peleg. He is the only person in Scripture with this name. Genesis 10:25 indicates that in his days, the earth was divided. It is not known exactly what the biblical author meant by this.
Eber. Nothing else is known about Eber. He is the only person in Scripture with this name.
Shelah. Nothing else is known about Shelah. He is the only person in Scripture with this name.
3:36. Cainan. Nothing else is known about Cainan. There is another person with the same name in 3:37. Noah has a grandson named Canaan, which is similar, but not identical (Gen 9:18).
Arphaxad. Nothing else is known about Arphaxad. He is the only person in Scripture with this name.
Shem. This was one of Noah’s three sons. After Noah got drunk, Ham mocked his father, but Japheth and Shem covered their father’s nakedness. As a result, Noah blessed Japheth and Shem (Gen 9:22-27).
Noah. It was during the lifetime of Noah that the great flood came upon the earth (Genesis 6-9). Due to his faith in building the ark, he is frequently mentioned in Scripture.
Lamech. Little is known about Lemech. He is known for killing another man, but declaring his own innocence (Gen 4:23-24).
3:37. Methuselah. Little is known about Methuseleh except that Scripture records he lived longer than any other man (Gen 5:27).
Enoch. The Scripture states that Enoch walked with God, and so God kept Enoch from death (Gen 5:24; Jude 14). Nothing else is known about Enoch.
Jared. Nothing else is known about Jared. He is the only person in Scripture with this name.
Mahalalel. Nothing else is known about Mahalalel. He is the only person in Scripture with this name.
Cainan. Nothing else is known about Cainan. There is another person with the same name in 3:36.
3:38. Enosh. Nothing else is known about Enosh. He is the only person in Scripture with this name.
Seth. Little else is known about Seth. He was the third son of Adam and Eve, after Cain was cursed for murdering Abel. He is the only person in Scripture with this name.
Adam. This is the father of the human race. He was created from the dust of the ground, given life by the breath of God, and given the earth to tend. Bringing the genealogy all the way back to the first man, Adam, helps focus the reader on two related concepts. First, by going all the way to Adam, rather than stopping at Abraham, Luke shows that the Gospel of the Kingdom is not only for the Jewish people, but is for all who are children of God — all who are sons of Adam. And yet, Luke will soon show that Jesus is the son of God in a special and unique way (Wright 2004:40).
But second, just as the first Adam led humanity into rebellion against God when he sinned by eating the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (Genesis 2-3), so also, the second Adam, Jesus Christ, must provide a way of redemption and reconciliation. But of course, before He can do this, He must succeed where Adam failed, in facing the temptations of the devil. This provides a perfect transition to Luke 4, and the 40 days of temptations Jesus faced in the wilderness.
God. The final name on the genealogy is God. No other genealogical record in Scripture or extra-biblical literature ends in this way (Malina 2003:366). Once again, this is Luke’s way of showing that in some sense, all humans are sons of God, not just Caesar. And Jesus is the ultimate “son of God” (cf. 3:22; 4:3). Here also is a reminder that Adam was created in the image of God, and so also, in some sense, all who are human bear God’s image. But through sin, that image has been marred. Jesus Christ perfectly reveals God, wants to restore the image, and reveals what it looks like to be the image of God.
To comment on this post, please use the forum.
| Please Leave Comments in the Commentary Forum
« Previous Entries