Journey into the Wilderness

Hello everyone. 

I have recently finished going through Luke telling of the temptation of Jesus in Luke 4.  There is lot that can learn from Jesus here. The story begins with a double reference to the Holy Spirit. It starts by stating that Jesus was filled with the Holy Spirit and then that the Spirit led him into the wilderness.  Jesus was very attuned to the prompting of the Holy Spirit.  But we have to understand that the Spirit did lead Jesus into a time of testing.  

This is the second time in Luke that we see someone being led by the Spirit to a certain place.  In  Luke 2, Simeon was led by the Spirit to the temple to see the young Savior, and now that Savior has been led into the wilderness for this time of prayer, fasting and testing before kicking off his ministry.  There is an interesting comparison here with Mark's account.  In Luke, Jesus was led into the wilderness, but Mark uses a different word.  He uses the word ἐκβάλλει (ekballei) which means to throw or cast.  So in Mark's account, Jesus was driven into the desert by the Spirit. A lesson for us, sometimes, when the Spirit leads, it is rough, without soft landing spots.  

Robert Stein suggests that this time of temptation was initiated by the Spirit rather than the devil.  He says that Jesus was not just being passively drug around the wilderness, but that God is the offensive, confronting the devil. According to Stein, God was the initiator here. (Stein, 145).

Matthew records that the devil came at the end of the 40 days.  Mark and Luke say that Jesus was in the wilderness 40 days, being tempted. These do not have to be inconsistent.  The three recorded temptations may be the culmination of a long period of temptation.  In fact, it is likely the devil tried to tempt Jesus his whole life, not just these three times. Now, I know that Jesus was “God in the flesh,” but He was still ‘in the flesh,” and subject to all of the temptations that we are. He said ‘No’ for forty days (and beyond.)

Heinz Schurmann (from Bock, 363) points out that Jesus is obedient to God in a way that others are not.  He uses this example: Jesus succeeds in the wilderness, where the children of Israel failed so miserably in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers. I appreciate Schurmann's comparison to Jesus in the wilderness to the Israelites in the wilderness. (I also appreciate Bock reading Schurmann's commentary Lukasevangelium, since my German is limited to the phrases, "Please", "Thank you", "I don't understand" and "Where is the bathroom?") Like Jesus and the Israelites, we will all have our own journey through the wilderness.  Over my next three posts, we will look at each temptation.  We will see how the Israelites failed the test, but Jesus passed. 

            

            Darrell Bock, Luke Volume 1: Luke 1:1-9:50, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Baker Academic, 1994.

            Heinz Schurmann, Lukasevangelium, vol. 1, Kommentar zu Kap, 1,1-9,50, Herders theologisher Kommentar zun Neuen Testament 3, Freiburg:Herder. 

            Robert Stein, Luke, Nashville, Tennessee, B&H Publishing Group, 1992. 

          

We're Important!

Hello everyone.

With today's post, I am wrapping up my study of Luke 3.  It mostly consists of a list of geneologies going backward from Jesus to Adam. In doing my own translation, I will confess that I found the spelling of the names in English to be difficult.  Obviously, some like Abraham and David were pretty easy, but others like Mahalaelell and Arphaxad.  So I did my best, and then checked every spelling against the King Jesus Translation.  Where they were different, I went with the KJT spelling. 

Any way, Luke starts this section by telling that Jesus is starting his ministry and then breaks into Jesus' lineage. Luke does not give the age of thirty as definitive, but says that Jesus is about thirty when he begins his ministry.  So it has been about eighteen years since we have seen Jesus and he has grown up and spent about a decade working as a carpenter, a trade he learned from his father Joseph. 

It was assumed that Jesus was the son of Joseph, and Luke gives a genealogy for Joseph goes all the way back to Adam.  In Luke’s narrative, it has been well established that Jesus was the son of God, but now, using the genealogies, Luke traces Jesus’s bloodline through all of Israel’s history and through the primeval history to Adam, and then concludes with “the son of God.”  Luke shores up his claim that Jesus is indeed the son of God. 

Personally, I have wondered at times the significance of these lists of geneologies.  Luke and Matthew have them and the Old Testament is filled with them.  These lists of names take up a lot of space.  Paul Copan helped me out in understanding something about these genealogies.  He says, “The Old Testament reveals a God who has a global (cosmic) plan, and who involves humans as history-shaping participants in that plan. Yes, humans matter.  The Old Testament’s genealogies reflect the important role that humans play in the unfolding of God’s purposes. (Copan, 217) People matter to God, and He uses human beings to accomplish His purposes.  It seems that God uses a lot of space in the Bible to make this point, but perhaps that is how important this point is. We, humans, are important. You're important.  Isn't that great?

Tom

     Paul Copan, Is God a Moral Monster, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Baker Books, 2011. 

Well Pleased

Hey Everyone, 

Today, I will continue the story of John the Baptist in Luke, by looking at how Luke relates the story of John baptizing Jesus.  Luke give the actual baptism.  Matthew tells us more about the actual baptism. Luke basically says, “John was baptizing and he baptized Jesus too.” (paraphrase of Luke 3:21)  And that’s about it.  The focus here seems to be not on the baptism, but on God's response to Jesus’ prayer afterwards.  Only Luke mentions the prayer.  Both Matthew and Mark mentioned the voice from Heaven coming as Jesus was coming up out of the water, while has it happening as Jesus was praying.  Did Jesus immediately break into prayer after his baptism?  Possibly. 

While praying after the baptism the skies open and the Spirit descends upon Jesus and a voice says, “You are my son, whom I love.  I am well pleased with you.” The Spirit appears in bodily form.  He takes the appearance of a dove and descends upon Jesus. God then makes a statement in three parts.  He identifies Jesus as His son.  He declared that Jesus is beloved and He declares that He is very pleased with Jesus. The word God uses to described His feeing for Jesus is εὐδόκησα (eudokaysa), a form of the verb εὐδοκέω (eudokeo).  In the Greek-English Lexicon of New Testament words, εὐδοκέω means 'to take pleasure or find satisfaction in something, be well pleaased, take delight." God, in this statement is making His testimony: Jesus is His son and God the Father is very well pleased and satisfied with His son. 

Luke has been presenting Jesus from even before his birth as something quite special. Gabriel said that Mary’s son would be holy and would be called the Son of God.  The angelic choir states that a savior had been born.  Simeon and Anna spoke about Jesus as the redemption of Israel. John has stated that there would be one coming after him who is stronger and who he himself is unworthy to even untie his shoes.  Now, even God has given Jesus his endorsement.  Luke has given his readers overwhelming testimony to the uniqueness, specialness and awesomeness of Jesus. In the words of the angelic choir.  'Behold, a Savior.'  Let's all dig deep into God's word and get to know this amazing savior, Jesus. 

Tom

Shouting in the Wilderness, Part 3

Hello everyone.

Today, I will continue to look at the ministry of John the Baptist in Luke.  Luke mentions that the people were expectant of the Messiah. (Luke 3:15) I'm sure that John’s message of coming wrath would likely encourage the thought that the Messiah was coming soon. in fact, many people were questioning in their hearts as to whether John could be the Messiah.  It appears that this was something that they weren’t necessarily saying out loud, but ‘in their hearts.’  John addresses it anyway, talking about one someone coming after him who had a far greater worth. In his denial of Messiahship, John offers three statements about this one who would come after him.

First, he will be stronger than John.  (Luke 3:16) Luke has repeatedly shown Jesus’ superiority to John throughout the birth narratives of chapter 1, and now John himself confirms.  'He will be ἰσχυρότερός (iskyroteros) stronger than me.'  John says that the stronger one coming was so much greater than he was, that John was not even worthy to loosen the strap of his sandal.  We understand that Jesus is the Stronger One.  Compare with Mark 3:23-29.  No one can bind the strong man unless he is even stronger.  

Darrell Bock tells us that during Jesus time that untying of the Master’s sandals was the responsibility of the slave.  But the act was so degrading that Hebrew slaves were not to do it.  John is saying that he is so unworthy, in comparison to Jesus, that he is not even worthy of performing the most menial and degrading task for this coming Stronger One. (Bock, 321)

Second, He will bring a different baptism. John’s baptism was in water. The Stronger One, Jesus, would bring a baptism of the Spirit and with fire.  It is not exactly clear what John means by this and theories abound.  Robert Stein suggests two ideas.  1) We do see Spirit and fire together in Acts 2, on the day of Pentecost.  The apostles are filled with the Spirit as what appears to tongues of fire come to rest on them. 2) John is talking two different baptisms, both brought by Jesus.  A baptism of the Spirit for the obedient, and a baptism of fire (judgment) for the disobedient. (Stein, 134-135.) (Personally, the second option here makes the most sense to me, but am open to other meanings.)

Third, He will bring judgment. John illustrates the judgment by comparing it to a process that most of his audience was undoubtedly familiar with.  Using the winnowing fork to separate the wheat (good) from the chaff (bad.) The wind blows the chaff out from among the wheat.  The wheat is gathered into the barn, while the chaff is gathered and burned.  As we draw near to Jesus, we will be gathered by Him into Heaven. 

Luke 3:18 tells us that John continued to preach good news to the people.  So far, his repent-or-else message may not sound like good news, but it was, because John was preparing the way for the Stronger One, Jesus, to arrive. 

John's message really challenged the people to repent. And he continued to preach this message even to  rebuking Herod the tetrarch. (Bock points out that John 'exhorted' the people, but 'rebuked' Herod, maybe evenly publicly. (Bock, 328-329.) We can only imagine what he might have said to Herod that was harder than ‘children of snakes.’) One of the issues of the rebuke was Herod’s marriage to Herodias.  She had been married to Herod’s half-brother, but both Herod and Herodias ended their previous marriages so that they could be together. So two marriages are destroyed so that Herod could violate the Old Law by taking his still-living brother’s wife. This, however, was not the only issue.  Luke mentions the marriage to Herodias, but also states that the rebuke came for all of the other evil that Herod had committed. Then Luke states that Herod adds to his many sins by putting John in prison.  We know that the eventual outcome from this is that Herod has John’s head cut off.  Herod eventually silences the voice shouting in the wilderness, but before he had completed the task God gave him to do, to prepare the way for the Lord. 

Tom 

     Darrell Bock, Luke, Volume 1 1:1-9:50, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Baker Academics, 1994.

     Robert H. Stein, The New American Commentary: Luke, NAshville, Tennessee, B&H Publishing, 1992.  

Shouting in the Wilderness, Part 2

Recently I posted about John the Baptist as a voice of one shouting in the wilderness.  I stopped at a place in the story where John calls his audience to produce the corresponding fruits of repentance.  John has deleivered a hard message about the coming wrath of God, and his message hit home with many people.  Today I want to look at the responses by some in the crowd. 

Certainly some in the crowd were mistakenly trusting in their status as the children of Abraham to spare them from the coming wrtath.  John addresses this. In verse 8, he tells that they cannot merely trust in their position as the children of Abraham.  That will not save them from the coming wrath.  Their history should tell them that God did not spare their ancestors just because they were descendants of Abraham, but allowed them to be carried off into captivity in Babylon. He further tells them  that God is able to raise up children from stones if He wants too.  John uses the word δύναται (dynatai) meaning God has the power or the ability to do this.  In creation, God brought life into the inanimate Earth, and could do so again if He chose to. 

John continues by stating that the ax is at the root of the tree.  They should repent now.  There is an urgency to John’s message. It is the fruitless, unrepentant tree that gets thrown into the fire. John’s message landed, and they began to ask John what they should do. The word for ‘do’ from their question ‘What should we do?’ is the word that I translated earlier as ‘produce.’    What is the fruit of repentance then?  They are asking John then "what fruit should we produce?"  

One could sum up John’s response to the groups coming forward by saying that, the fruit of repentance involves helping those in need, not cheating people and being content with our pay. The crowd as a whole asked what to do, and John responded that if they have two tunics, they should share with the one does not have a tunic.  To most the corresponding fruits of repentance meant helping those who were in need. 

But there were also two groups are mentioned specifically as coming forward to ask what they should do. Darrell Bock points out that these two groups were typically among the most hated groups in Israel - the tax collectors and the soldiers. (Bock, 310)

Tax collecting in Israel worked like this: Wealthy Romans would pay for the right to collect the taxes, paying the taxes then charging a surcharge for their own expenses and income.  They would farm the actual collecting of the taxes out to Jews.  These particular Jews were hated among all of the Jews, for their connection to the Roman empire.  Add to that, these tax collectors would place additional taxes for their own income on top.  (Bock, 310-311) Abusing this system for personal gain would be pretty easy.  How does John respond to the tax collector? What is the corresponding fruit of their repentance? Verse 13, they were told to collect no more than was required.  You can be right with God and be a tax collector, but that meant that you had to stop cheating people. Bock says, "John is not a political revolutionary, for he does not attack the right to collect taxes.  What John argues is that taxes should be collected without extortion, surcharges, kickbacks, payoffs or bribes.  The tax collectors are to do their job and not take advantage of their authority." (Bock, 312.) 

The other group that Luke specifically mentions is the soldiers.  Bock says that these were likely Jewish rather than Roman soldiers, probably coming from one of three groups: Antipas’s army, the Judean ‘police’ or soldiers hired to help and protect the tax collectors. (Bock, 313) Of these options, the last makes the most sense.  The corresponding fruit of their repentance was threefold: First, don’t shake people down.  John uses the word διασείσητε, (diaseisaytay) which means to ‘shake violently.”  Bock says that in our modern vernacular, it would mean to ‘shake people down.’  Second, don’t defraud people.  Συκοφαντήσητε (Sycophantaysaytay) - Bock says that the meaning of this is debated, but that likely it means to falsely accuse for monetary gain.  (I do notice however, that the word appears very similar to our English word 'sycophant.) Finally, the soldiers are told, to be content with their pay.  Perhaps, if you are content with your pay, you won’t need to do either of these other two.  

So John has quickly laid out for three different groups what the corresponding fruits of repentance are.  I notice that these corresponding fruits are largely our attitudes about money and about our treatment of others, particularly those in need.  

There is more to John's message and we will delve into it more next time. 

Tom 

      Darrell Bock, Luke Volume 1 - 1:1 - 9:50, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Baker Academic, 1994. 

Shouting in the Wilderness

Heloo everyone.

Today, we start our exegesis of Luke 3. We are still getting everything set up for the ministry of Jesus, and chapter 3 mostly deals with the ministry of John the Baptist. Luke, as historian, frames this story by telling who was in charge during the time period.  In fact, he lists seven different leaders.  Tiberius was emperor and Pilate was governor in Judea.  He lists three tetrarchs: Herod, Philip and Lysanias and two high priests: Annas and Caiaphas. 

As for John, Luke 1:80 says that John lived in the wilderness until the time came for him to appear publicly.  Now in Luke 3, the time for that appearance has come. I assume that John has spent all of that time in the wilderness, being prepared for this ministry.  He was, after all, filled with the Holy Spirit even before he was born. (Luke 1:15)  

The word of God came to John while in the wilderness, and from the wilderness he came to the Jordan preaching baptism and repentance. Regarding John, Luke makes reference to Isaiah 40:3-5. Here is my own translation of Luke 3:4-6:  

Just as it is written in the book, the words of the prophet Isaiah: 

     A voice shouting in the wilderness,

       “Prepare the way for the Lord,

           Make straight paths for him.’

    5 Every valley will be filled 

         And all of the mountains and hills will be made low.

       What is crooked will be made straight 

          And what is rough will be made smooth. 

     6 And all people will see the salvation of the Lord. 

 So, John is the voice of one shouting in the wilderness, he was actively preparing the way for the Lord.  Isaiah says, ‘prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.” John's ministry fulfilling this passage. With the coming of the Lord, God is levelling the playing field and now, all can stand on equal footing before the Lord.  He lowers the mountains and raises up the valleys, so that we can see the salvation of the Lord. So Jesus's ministry on the horizon, John has a very important role.  God has been promising salvation since the beginning.  People were wating for it. Now it was coming near.  John's message as recorded in Luke 3 is lengthy, and also rich and full of meaning.  We will have to look at it in parts.  In today's post I will look at the beginning of this message that is preparing the way for the Lord and making straight paths for Him. 

First of all, John has a bold message.  He starts by calling his audience ‘Γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν’ (gennaymata ekidnown) which means ‘children of snakes.’ John is clearly not worried about charming these people.  His message is straightforward, if not offensive. And still multitudes were coming to be baptized by him. (Messages like this explain why John was regarded basically as an Old Testament prophet.)  Snakes can be poisonous.  The Old Testament sometimes refers to the enemies of God as vipers. (Isa. 59.5, Jer 46:22) Darrell Bock says that John is basically blasting his audience, who believe themselves to be the chosen people of God, calling them children of the devil (Bock, 303) Then he asks, “Who warned you to run from the wrath that is coming soon?” Bock suggests that the comparison to the snakes is still in play.  The analogy being that when there is brush fire in the desert, the snakes come up out of their holes in the ground to flee from it.  (Bock, 304) 

What is John really asking here?  Is this a questioning their sincerity?  Is it seeking to know their level of understanding of his message of repentance?  Is he just continuing the insult?  Knowing that judgment is coming one day, are these people here as some sort of cosmic life insurance policy, or are they truly ready for repentance and a relationship with God? 

Jihn then says in the Greek Ποιήσατε οὖν καρποὺς ἀξίους τῆς μετανοίας. (Poiaysatay oun karpous axious tays metanoias) I have translated this as ‘Therefore produce the corresponding fruits of repentance.  I'm going to break it all down for you. 

Οὖν (oun) means ‘therefore.  John has just warned them that wrath is coming, now he will tell them what to do to escape this wrath. 

Ποιήσατε (Poiaysatay)-2nd person plural active aorist imperative of ποιἑω (poiayo) - it is often translated as ‘do’, ‘make’ of ‘produce.’ In this context, 'produce' seems to be the best choice. 

Καρποὺς (karpous) - Fruits, plural. Bock points out that the plural here means that this is not to be a one-time action, but a constant behavior. 

 Ἀξίους (axious) - is an adjective describing the fruits produced.  In the Greek-English Lexicon of New Testament Words the entry for  ἀξίους lists possible definitions of this word as corresponding, comparable and worthy. Corresponding seems to fit context best, knowing that these fruits are produced by our repentance.  

Μετανοίας (metanoias) - repentance. 

So what does this all mean? It means that when we truly repent our lives will produce the corresponding fruits. So this is John’s call to repentance. For what purpose?  To help his audience avoid the coming wrath of God. John's message comes off as hard, for sure, but as we will see, his message did strike a cord with many people.  

Tom 

     Darrell Bock, Luke Volume 1 - 1:1 - 9:50, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Baker Academic, 1994. 

Boy in the Temple

 Hello everyone.

We will finish off Luke 2, in verses 41-52, by looking at the story of the twelve-year-old Jesus and his stay at the temple.  It is interesting that Luke follows a story set in the temple, with another story set in the temple, only twelve years later. We get very little in the Gospels about the childhood of Jesus. Luke does tell us this one story, occuring when he is twelve years old.  The next time we see Jesus, he is thirty. 

Like we did in the temple, we see the great righteousness of Jesus’ parents.  Faithfully, every year, they would travel to Jerusalem for the Passover.  (The Old Testament had required the men to travel to Jerusalem three times a year for feasts: Passover, Pentecost and Tabernacles. Darrell Bock states that it was considered acceptable for those who traveled a great distance would come for Passover, it being the major feast of the three. (Bock, 263.)) 

Bock also states that families traveled in large caravans for protection.  The 90 mile journey would take three or four days. Between traveling both directions and the Passover festival, if a family stayed for the entire festival, this journey would take at least two weeks. (Bock, 264.) It is not clear how long into the festival Joseph and Mary arrived at the Passover, but it does indicate that they stayed until the end of it.  When they left, Jesus remained behind in the temple.  They had traveled for the entire day before realizing that Jesus was not with them.  They had assumed that he was in the traveling caravan somewhere.  

Understanding that they already gone an entire day before realizing that Jesus was not with them, they had to travel another day back to Jerusalem to find him, but this time, one would assume, it was just the two of them, traveling without the protection of the caravan.  I wonder, was twelve-year-old Jesus alone in Jerusalem for three days or five days?  When did that three day search begin? Does it start on that first day when they realized he was missing, or did it start when they returned to Jerusalem and began searching for him? It is not clear.  What is clear, however, is that when they finally find Jesus, he is in the temple with the teachers, listening and asking questions, and those around were amazed by his quick understanding. 

So young Jesus is shown here as having a thirst for understanding and discussing spiritual matters. His discussions with the teachers of the law here are quite a contrast to the heavy disputes that he will have one day with the same group. 

When Mary and Joseph finally find Jesus, Mary scolds him a little bit, saying that they had been anxiously searching for him.  I have translated the word ὀδυνώμενοι (odynomenoi)as ‘in great distress,’ but the word actually means ‘to suffer pain.’  Mary expresses to Jesus great suffering on his account.  When Jesus responds to his mother, he asks, 'Why were you searching for me?’ He speaks to her as though it should have been obvious where he was.  The temple should have been the first place that they looked.  

He further responds with the word δεῖ (dei). The Greek word means 'it is necessary.' What he is doing is necessary.  What is necessary is not quite clear.  A literal translation from the Greek would be “in the …of the Father.’ It is as if a word was left out.  It is often translated as house or business. Bock makes a pretty good case for ‘in my Father’s house.’ (Bock, 269-270.) We see young Jesus having deep convictions about doing His Father's work.  

I am curious about young Jesus. Did he, at this point, understand who he was? Perhaps, perhaps not.  It does appear that he understood that he was more than a mere student of Judaism.  It is unclear how much of his mission Jesus understood at this point.  Something that is clear is that Joseph and Mary do not understand what Jesus’ mission is.  (I personally give them a pass on this, because how could they have understood his mission? Later on, the apostles did not understand it even when he told it to them.) 

After the affair in the temple, Luke records that Jesus returned to Nazareth with his parents and submitted to them.  Did the boy Jesus understand who he was?  Was God willingly submitting to these two human beings?  Well, at some point, he came to a full understanding of who he was, and apparently still submitted to his parents.  Now, somewhere along the way Joseph died, but we know from the story in John’s gospel of the wedding at Cana, that Jesus, even at thirty, was still willing to submit to his mother. God in the flesh was humble, submissive and respectful toward his parents. 

     Darrell Bock, Luke Volume 1: 1:1-9:50, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Baker Academics, 1994.