Birth pangs of new beginnings

Birth pangs and labor pains signal destruction in sight with new beginnings promised from the ruins of that destruction. According to the War Scroll the final age was to be preceded by a period of tribulation or "birth pangs [of the Messiah]" (1QH 3:7-10), which "shall be a time of salvation for the People of God ..." (1QM 1)(B.C.E.). This 1^st statement is best illustrated by two verses from the fourth chapter of Micah where the Prophet states:

9: Now why do you cry aloud? Is there no king in you? Has your counselor perished, that pangs have seized you like a woman in travail?
10: Writhe and groan, O daughter of Zion, like a woman in travail; for now you shall go forth from the city and dwell in the open country; you shall go to Babylon. There you shall be rescued, there the LORD will redeem you from the hand of your enemies.
11: Now many nations are assembled against you, saying, “Let her be profaned, and let our eyes gaze upon Zion.”

With respect to verses 9-10 in Micah, Stephen L. Cook, The Social Roots of Biblical Yahwism, writes: “New life will come for the people only after they have suffered the fall of Jerusalem to their enemies.”

Beginning in the mid-first century, we see the first reference to birth pangs in one of Paul’s earliest letters. In 1 Th. 5:3 we read: “When people say, ‘There is peace and security,’ then sudden destruction will come upon them as travail comes upon a woman with child, and there will be no escape.” The emergence of false prophets appear to reflect the circumstances from the mid-fifties CE to the end of the Jewish War as described by Josephus. Both Matthew and Mark include “all this is but the beginning of the birth-pangs.” The calamities existing at the close of the present age and the beginning of the new age are said to present the birth-pangs of the new age.
The Greek word ἀρχὴ occupies the same role in Matthew and Mark as does the three instances of “now” in Micah. Cook writes: “Each passage begins with the word “now” followed by a vivid description of Jerusalem besieged by enemies. These descriptions of the contemporary suffering of Jerusalem, right “now,” use striking quotes and rhetorical questions, forcing Judah to realize that Jerusalem is vulnerable to defeat.”

Luke does not include the birth-pangs because he is writing early and has not experienced the banditry, false messiahs and the abomination of desolation.

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke

The Consequences are announced:

Prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem

41: And when he drew near and saw the city he wept over it,
42: saying, "Would that even today you knew the things that make for peace! But now they are hid from your eyes.
43: For the days shall come upon you, when your enemies will cast up a bank about you and surround you, and hem you in on every side,
44: and dash you to the ground, you and your children within you, and they will not leave one stone upon another in you; because you did not know the time of your visitation."

The passage in Luke 19:41-44 is unusual for a number of reasons. Jesus wept but later he told the women of Jerusalem not to weep for him. The prediction is initiated by the phrase “days are coming” which Bock indicates was used by OT prophets to introduce “coming events of great significance.” Only Luke uses this Septuagint expression appearing 17 times in the LXX including four times in Jeremiah. In Jeremiah 7:32-34 the segment ends with “for all the land shall become a waste.” Bock also notes that “All three verbs are future, so Jesus is speaking prophetically: the city will crumple.”

Verses 43 and 44 contains four hapax legomenon: χάραξ a military mound for circumvallation in a siege;

περικυκλώσουσίν to circle around; ἐδαφιοῦσίν to dash to the ground, raze; and ἐπισκοπῆς visitation.

Jeremiah 52:4 is perhaps the closest parallel in the MT:

“And in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, on the tenth day of the month, Nebuchadrez'zar king of Babylon came with all his army against Jerusalem, and they laid siege to it and built siegeworks against it round about.”

The Septuagint (NETS) has: “And it happened in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month on the tenth of the month, King Nabouchodonosor of Babylon came with all his force against Ierousalem, and they blockaded it and walled it in on four sides all around.”

But there is no Greek verbal allusion to Jeremiah. Luke, having employed four NT hapax legomenon, was not intending to allude to any specific OT passage but rather to convey the sense of the prediction made by Jesus. All we can say is that perhaps Luke used Jeremiah as a source. In Luke 19:28, Luke use Greek word Ἱεροσόλυμα for Jerusalem. This exact form appears three times in Luke. However Jeremiah used the form Ιερουσαλημ for Jerusalem. Luke certainly did not use Matthew or Mark as a source.

There is one other possibility. Both Jeremiah (41:5) and Luke used a form of the Greek word κλαίω to express the weeping that occurred when the prediction of destruction was made. Weeping because they did not obey; but instead violated his covenant. This idea that “they did not obey” appears four times in Jeremiah and also once in 2 Kings and three times in Jeremiah LXX.

No such weeping occurs in Matthew or Mark.

As I researched weeping Jesus, weeping prophet, I recalled that Isaiah 29:2 (MT) states: “Yet I will distress Ariel, and there shall be moaning and lamentation, and she shall be to me like an Ariel.” In the very next verse, we read: “And I will encamp against you round about, and will besiege you with towers and I will raise siegeworks against you.” Verse 3 in the Septuagint used the Greek word χάρακα which Luke also used in verse 19:43 as a NT hapax legomenon. However, in verse 2 of the Septuagint, there is no “moaning and lamentation.” Is Verse 3 missing Greek verbal allusion?

In verse 44, Luke used the Greek word ἐπισκοπῆς for visitation. In view of this verse: “there will be great earthquakes, and in various places famines and pestilences; and there will be terrors and great signs from heaven,” appearing in Lk. 21:11, which we will discuss later, Luke with his use of ἐπισκοπῆς may have been alluding to Sirach 17:18 which states: “Behold, heaven and the highest heaven, the abyss and the earth, will tremble at his visitation. Thus ἐπισκοπῆς anticipates that there will be an announcement that the earth will tremble, that there will be earthquakes.

This is the third part of a mini-series that began with Divorce as an impurity.

This being a work in progress, I plan to return to the controversy sayings of Luke 16 as well as the predictive prophecies relating to Jerusalem. I hope to integrate more of my findings on Lucan hapax legomenon.

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke

Actions have consequences

Initially, I considered the possibility in Divorce as an impurity that the word “divorce” was used by the Lucan Jesus as a catchword.

Yet it is possible that the use of the word “adultery,” in Luke 16:18 is a catchword that triggers an allusion to the 4^th chapter of Hosea and to the condemnation of Israel’s adultery which is most explicit: “There is no faithfulness or kindness, and no knowledge of God in the land; there is swearing, lying, killing, stealing, and committing adultery; they break all bounds [boundary lines] and murder follows murder.” In the second part of his book, Hosea urges the utmost fidelity to God while promising restoration if the people repent and keep the Sinai covenant. An allusion to the 4^th chapter of Hosea and words quoted above would provoke a strong reaction. The Pharisees knew the promises were not unconditional. They knew that the choices had consequences. The ultimate consequences of defiling the Sinai covenant is that God will allow Israel’s destruction.

Faithlessness to the covenant has consequences. It brings enemy oppression upon Israel. Only repentance and God’s intervention can save it. This is part of the Sinai theme and the message of the Book of Judges. It is also the message of Luke.

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke

Divorce as an impurity

After Jesus made his comments on the unjust dishonest steward and the importance of being faithful, “The Pharisees, who were lovers of money, heard all this, and they scoffed at him.” In response, Jesus in 5 verses made a number of controversy sayings ending with "Every one who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery” (Lk. 16:18). I write to suggest that Jesus is in fact saying that the Pharisees, who perhaps are offended by the allegations against the temple priests, have also deviated from right or moral principles or conduct.

In Judaism, sin was viewed as an impurity. There are two kinds of impurity: ritual or moral. Klawans has shown that the concern of Ezra about Gentiles was moral impurity. I do mean to suggest that Jesus is in fact saying that the Pharisees, who perhaps are offended by the allegations against the temple priests, have also deviated from right or moral principles by their conduct and/or teachings on divorce. This is perhaps the only way to understand the parables about the corrupt temple establishment and the seemingly out of place sayings between the parables in Chapter 16. Lee Dahn has suggested that the divorce saying of Jesus is to be contrasted with the directive of Ezra.

After Ezra and his company arrived in Jerusalem, Ezra was informed that some of the Jerusalem priests have married foreigners. Ezra directed that a genealogy be prepared of everyone. Apparently approximately 100 priest and 10 laymen had married foreigners. Ezra assembled the community, read the Book to them and directed that the 110 priests and laymen divorce their spouses forthwith. In Ezra 9-10, intermarriage with foreigners is viewed as a defilement of the holy race and as unfaithfulness to God (9:2; 10:2, 10). Ezra and his community believed that intermarriage constituted a defilement of the “holy seed” that corrupted the holy land and had to be eliminated to protect the land of Israel.

Linnemann has asserted that “a firmly established result of recent parable interpretation is that the parables of Jesus refer to the historical situation in which they are told.” After Jesus made his comments on the unjust dishonest steward and the importance of being faithful, “The Pharisees, who were lovers of money, heard all this, and they scoffed at him.” Consequently in response, Jesus must have been aware that some of the Pharisees in his audience were urging those who had married foreigners to divorce their spouse but unlike Ezra he said: "Every one who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery” (Lk. 16:18). I say must be aware because the only way one can compare the corruption of the temple priests to the corruption of the Pharisees is to point out that their advocacy of divorce of those married to foreigners is just as bad as stealing from the Temple. No group in Judaism had ever suggested that divorce or divorce and remarriage created an impurity that corrupted the holy land. Yet, this is the sense of the radical statement made by the Lucan Jesus.

When two prohibitions seemingly conflict, which controls? Ezra said the prohibition on intermarriage controls. Malachi rebukes Israel for profaning the Mosaic covenant (Mal 2:10-16). One example is the breaking of the marriage covenant by divorcing the wife of their youth. The MT translates the 14^th verse as: “Because the Lord was witness to the covenant between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant.” The Septuagint has “whom you abandoned.” Jesus said the divorce and remarriage was tantamount to adultery. The penalty for adultery was death by stoning.

Jesus was able to make this statement in Luke 16:18 using a pesher ‘This is that’ argument before a Jewish audience, which we find elsewhere in Luke with the “finger of God,” because he had already commented on the faithful steward in chapter 12. Jesus was now suggesting that the faithful unfaithful analogy can also be applied to the unfaithless husband (MT) who divorces his wife and marries another thus committing adultery. Jesus has recognized that as a result of the corruption, including impurity caused by divorce, the Temple no longer existed as a House of God. Jesus in effect adopted the viewpoint of the Books of Joel, Ruth, Jonah and Malachi which were a reaction to the reforms and visions of Ezra and Nehemiah of separateness of the people of Judah from the other people of the world.

The pesher argument is possible if one understands the comparison using the MT text. Several verses later the famous passage from Malachi (MT), “Behold, I send my messenger before thy face” appears in Luke 7:27. Therefore it seems reasonable to base the pesher argument on the MT text of Malachi 2:14. Not only does the Book of Ezra solve a translation problem in the Parable of the Unjust Steward, it also assists us in understanding the pesher argument utilized by Jesus.

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke

Richard Fellows responds

I remain unconvinced, for the reasons that I have given. Joanna has an important eye-witness role (but no more so than the others), but I see no reason to suppose that she was related to Theophilus. And even if she was related to Theophilus, that would not be reason enough to equate Theophilus with Theophilus the high priest. Most men in Palestine at that time will have had a Joanna in their extended family. Unless I have missed something, the whole line of argument is very tenuous.

The name “Theophilus” was, in my view, an alias and was used by Luke to protect the identity of his addressee. Theophilus therefore could have been absolutely any high status person with an interest in Christianity.

Richard Fellows

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke

The Role of Johanna in Protective Anonymity

Richard Fellows stated: “I don't see that Joanna has a position of particular prominence, since she appears second to Mary Madgalene in both places where she is mentioned. The name Joanna was held by 3.7% of all females in Palestine so it is not significant that the name appears on the same ossuary as a Theophilus.”

The 3.7% cited by Richard Fellows appears in an article published by Tal Ilan in the Journal of Jewish Studies. Thus Fellows acknowledges that the name is Jewish and that these sources are proper sources for determining the relative frequency of these two names. The name of Theophilus represent .54% of the total sample of 2040 culled from the same sources utilized for the study of the frequencies of Jewish women’s names conducted by Ilan. Theophilus is not a common name represented in the study.

More importantly, Tal Ilan stated in this same article, “Two Names. If a certain person is mentioned by both his own name and that of his father, or by his own name and a family, the chances that the identification is sound are greater, though in cases where both names are very common it is by no means certain, . . . .”

Finally, the phrase “position of prominence” is a technical term relating to the fact that the name Johanna appears in the vertex of the chiastic structure appearing in Lk. 24:8-11. The name Mary Madgalene appearing next to Johanna by definition is not in the vertex of the chiastic structure and thus does not occupy the “position of prominence.”

The strength of the ‘two name combination’ is shown by the fact that J.T. Milik used a two name ossuary inscribed with “Alexander son of Simon”, two admittedly common names in Palestine and the whole context of the inscriptions to propose “that the tomb in question belongs to the family of him who helped Jesus to carry the cross.”

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke

Richard Fellows responds

We have been exchanging emails for several years. I suggested that his response to my comments on Protective Anonymity was probably too lengthy for comments so we agreed to post it on the blog.

In the NT we see Christians frequently taking measures to avoid persecution. See Mark 11:1-6; 14:12-16 14:51-52; 14:66-72; and parallels; Matt. 10:23; John 3:1-2; 7:1-13; 9:22-23; 11:54; 19:38; 20:19; Acts 9:26; 12:17b; 20:3. While they were indeed courageous, they nevertheless took sensible precautions. It is to be expected that they would be particularly cautious not to endanger each other. While it was no doubt acceptable for a Christian to give up his own body to be burned, it would not have been acceptable for someone to expose a brother to persecution through careless words. We should therefore fully expect believers to protect the identity of fellow Christians where appropriate. We see this in the case of Joseph of Arimathea

(John 19:38) and probably Nicodemus (John 3:1-2) who were secret followers of Jesus and this must mean that Jesus and his close companions honoured their secret.

Clearly Luke hoped that Theophilus would become a believer if he was not a believer already. It is inconceivable that Luke would write anything in Luke-Acts that would endanger Theophilus, unless he knew that Theophilus accepted the risk. If Luke had addressed his books to Theophilus's real name this would have put Theophilus at risk. Written evidence that connected Theophilus to the production of Luke-Acts could be used against him by persecutors. There is no way that Theophilus would be able to ensure that the texts would not become known to false brothers or enemies, unless he kept them under lock and key and reserved them for exclusively personal use. The latter seems unlikely since did, after all, come down to us.

So, if Theophilus was a non-Christian, or sympathiser of sorts, it is hard to imagine that Luke would have used his real name. Luke would use Theophilus real name only if Theophilus was openly and courageously Christian and had given his permission. But if that were the case, why do we

not hear of him in any other context? With many others, I suspect Theophilus was a Christian and the sponsor of the publication of Luke-Acts. If that is the case, it is rather likely that he had an alias because a high proportion of Christian benefactors received new names, as I have argued on my web pages.

We cannot know whether Theophilus held this alias before or whether it is an impromptu alias that Luke invents. The meaning of the name "Theophilus", lover of God, is highly suggestive that it is indeed an alias. There only two other names of first century Christians that are constructed from the word THEO. They are Theophorus, an alternate name used by Ignatius, and Timotheos, which I strongly argue was a new name given to Titus.

You wrote:

"It is hard to believe that a high ranking Roman official could become a Christians and the Romans not know the person and his new identity. Furthermore, the Christian missionaries would have been citing the conversion example of ‘Theophilus’ to all their potential converts."

But I do no require that Theophilus was a Christian. Even if he was a Christian, I do not require that he has able to hide the fact (though Joseph of Arimathea did). I argue rather that Luke would have given Theophilus the choice of whether he wanted his prominence in the Christian movement to be a matter of public record.

You wrote:

"Secondly, there is no evidence that Theophilus is a Christian apart from the translation of the Greek word, κατηχήθης‚ as instructed."

Again, I do not require that he was a Christian. A sympathiser or potential convert would be even less happy about having his name connected with the books.

You wrote:

"Thirdly, there are no examples prior to the third century of a Christian bearing an honorific title."

This is evidence that the Theophilus's title is not an honorific Christian title. It is not evidence that Theophilus was not a Christian.

You wrote:

"Fourthly, Christians sought to become martyrs so much so that steps had to be taken to discourage it."

See my comments above.

I don't see that Joanna has a position of particular prominence, since she appears second to Mary Madgalene in both places where she is mentioned. The name Joanna was held by 3.7% of all females in Palestine so it is not significant that the name appears on the same ossuary as a Theophilus.

Richard Fellows

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke

Protective Anonymity

Richard Fellows, Names changes and aliases in the New Testament, “has proposed that prominent first century Christians were often honored with new names. He has recently suggested that new names were sometimes used to hide the identity of the individuals from potential persecutors. He cites ‘Theophilus’ as an example of this. He believes that the author of Luke would have endangered Theophilus if he had identified him with his real name. He supports his case by pointing out that ‘Theophilus’ means something like ‘lover of God’, and is therefore an appropriate alias for a believer.” I disagree.

Initially, it should noted that Theophilus has a prefix of κράτιστε which is an honorific title applied to high ranking appointed Roman officials. Luke correctly applies the title to Felix and Festus but not to King Agrippa. In the second century and later, the title could be applied to any Roman official or person of high status. Interestingly, Theophilus does not have the honorific title at the beginning of Acts. This probably is an indication he no longer holds his high ranking Roman appointment. It is hard to believe that a high ranking Roman official could become a Christians and the Romans not know the person and his new identity. Furthermore, the Christian missionaries would have been citing the conversion example of “Theophilus” to all their potential converts.

Secondly, there is no evidence that Theophilus is a Christian apart from the translation of the Greek word,κατηχήθης as instructed. In Acts, this same Greek word is translated as informed in Acts 21:21 and 24.

Thirdly, there are no examples prior to the third century of a Christian bearing an honorific title. See generally the dissertation of Lucilla Dinneen, Titles of address in Christian Greek epistolography to 527 A.D. (1929).

Fourthly, Christians sought to become martyrs so much so that steps had to be taken to discourage it. A number of books have examined through pagan, Jewish and Christian sources the fascination of first and second century society with the noble death phenomenon. Thus protective anonymity must be explained against this cultural background.

Finally and perhaps most importantly, Luke has a two witness theme wherein a particularly obscure woman is a witness to the resurrection but placed in a “position of prominence” in a chiastic structure suggesting that she is someone important to most excellent Theophilus. There is only one other example of the name of a person being placed in the “position of prominence” in a chiastic structure. Her name and that of Theophilus also appear on an ossuary owned by the Israeli government whose inscription has been cited by both Richard Bauckham and James Vanderkam. If the ossuary is authentic, then Johanna may be the granddaughter of the High Priest Theophlus.

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke

Reading Psalm 78

Psalm 78 is one of several psalms that look back across God's works with and for God's People. It presents a sharp contrast between God's faithfulness within the creation and, on the other hand, the faithlessness of the covenant community. Michael Goulder finds in this Psalm, originally composed for the three-times-a-year Israelite pilgrimage festivals, evidence that the Southern Kingdom rewrote it making it acceptable for Jerusalem Temple use yet retained evidence of its northern origin. Goulder believes “The Exodus-wilderness story is being accepted as our story, God's act of redemption for us, his people; but the sins committed on the way were not committed by us, but by the children of Ephraim, that is, the Joseph-Benjamin tribes, who were in fact the group of the Exodus, and no doubt did actually turn back in some day of battle in the 720s.” According to Goulder, Exodus elaborates and further develops the material of Psalm 78 adding “The people’s faithlessness, Moses and his rod, angelic manoeuvres with the cloud and fire” in chapter 14.

Stephen L. Cook states: “The modifications to the psalm are clear evidence of its adoption for Jerusalem. Michael Goulder’s judgment is on target. ‘An influence from the Asaph community ... was accepted in Jerusalem in Hezekiah’s time, but with v. 9, 67-69 as ... glosses.’”

In reading Psalm 78 since my initial comments last February 6, 2006, I noticed that after “I will open my mouth in a parable; I will utter dark sayings from of old, things that we have heard and known, that our fathers have told us” the Psalmist continues with this admonition:

“We will not hide them from their children, but tell to the coming generation the glorious deeds of the LORD, and his might, and the wonders which he has wrought. He established a testimony in Jacob, and appointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our fathers to teach to their children; that the next generation might know them, the children yet unborn, and arise and tell them to their children, so that they should set their hope in God, and not forget the works of God, but keep his commandments; and that they should not be like their fathers, a stubborn and rebellious generation, a generation whose heart was not steadfast, whose spirit was not faithful to God.”

Verse two and three influenced the theme of secrecy we find in the Gospel of Mark. Yet this theme is inconsistent with the teaching of the Psalmist that follows “I will open my mouth in a parable.”

Since the sheep/flock image is a favorite of the Asaph psalmist, it is not surprising that verse 52 reads: “Then he led forth his people like sheep, and guided them in the wilderness like a flock.” The image of a people, harassed and helpless without a shepherd, present in Matthew 9:36; 25:32; 26:31; Mark 6:34 and 14:27 is absent from Luke. Instead, Luke tells us, “in that region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night."

The Brandywine Creek reached flood stage at Chadds Ford PA as I was preparing this piece so I have included verse 53: “He led them in safety, so that they were not afraid; but the sea overwhelmed their enemies.”

This is a work in progress.

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke

Luke, Paul and Galatians

It is generally accepted that Luke did not have access to the letters of Paul. However, Heikki Leppä has concluded in his dissertation, "Luke's Critical Use of Galatians", that Luke did use Galatians. I have not read the dissertation but Antti Mustakallio has provided me some examples from the dissertation that support this conclusion. I am only going to discuss one example involving the use of the Greek word συμπαραλαβὼν in Gal 2:1. Paul tells us that he and Barnabas took Titus with them to Jerusalem. Leppä considers the use of this Greek word to be rare. Luke uses the word in Acts 12:25; 15:37 and 38 mentioning Mark instead of Titus but not describing the same event. In addition to the LXX, Philo and Josephus examples, the Greek word also appears in 3 Maccabees 1:1 for a total 12 known examples of the use of the word in Greek writings.

The fact that the Greek word συμπαραλαβὼν also appears in 3 Maccabees may undercut the force of this dependency on Galatians since Luke has also used Maccabbees as a source for words. However the significant point about this example, as noted by Leppä, is that Luke and Paul use this word only in connection with Paul and Barnabas taking a companion with them on a trip.

Finally, I should note that Antti Mustakallio has indicated that Richard Pervo has cited this dissertation in his new book, Dating Acts.

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke

Psalms of Asaph

Goulder read the Psalms of Asaph looking for a solution to the formation of the Pentateuch. He postulated, inter alia, an origin in Northern Israel in the decade 732-722 BCE for these psalms which he believes were edited later for use in Jerusalem after 722. My reading is less ambitious.

These 12 public psalms are interesting in ways not previously appreciated. Psalm 74 describes the burning of the Temple. In Psalm 77, the psalmist remembers God’s redeeming of his people in Exodus. The Temple is defiled in Psalm 79 and the army slaughtered. In Psalm 80, the vine is burned and cut down. Psalm 50 is a demand for national repentance. In Psalm 50 and 81, the enemy is menacing. In Psalm 78, the people are asked to remember his wondrous works. Behind all of these psalms, the fear of national catastrophe exists but none imply the loss of national sovereignty.

Collectively, the Psalms of Asaph were written in the face of national military crisis as a sequence of calls to repentance, of laments, of prayers of confidence and appeals to the divine covenant. Like all of the prophets, Jesus believed that if he issued his call for repentance, made his laments, prayers and appeals, the coming destruction could be averted. Perhaps the predictive prophecy of Jesus should be considered in the light of the Psalms of Asaph. In Matthew and Mark, after the traditional calls of John the Baptist, repentance disappears as a theme because they knew that Jerusalem was already history and talking about repentance would not save the city and the Temple.

“Mark this, then, you who forget God, lest I rend, and there be none to deliver!” Ps 50:22.

“Remember thy congregation, which thou hast gotten of old, which thou hast redeemed to be the tribe of thy heritage!” Ps 74:2.

“They set thy sanctuary on fire; to the ground they desecrated the dwelling place of thy name.” Ps 74:7

“I will open my mouth in a parable; I will utter dark sayings from of old, things that we have heard and known, that our fathers have told us. We will not hide them from their children, but tell to the coming generation the glorious deeds of the LORD, and his might, and the wonders which he has wrought.” Ps 78:2-4.

“O God, the heathen have come into thy inheritance; they have defiled thy holy temple; they have laid Jerusalem in ruins.”
Ps 79:1.

“They have shed their blood like water on every side of Jerusalem and there was no one to bury them.” Ps 79:3.

“There is no more any prophet.” Ps 74:9.

“Thou hast with thine arm redeemed thy people,

the sons of Jacob and Joseph.” Ps 77:16

The Psalms of Asaph not only inspired Jesus but also provided a source for Luke.

This is a work in progress.

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke

Mire of the streets

The Prophet Micah used the πηλός in the phrase, “now she will be trodden down like the mire of the streets.” This expression, “mire of the streets” appears four times in the RSV translation: 2 Samuel 22:43; Isaiah 10:6; Psalm 18:42 and the passage I mentioned in Micah as a Source for Luke, Micah 7:10. It also appears in the KJV in Zechariah 9:3 and 10:5.

I have been thinking about the ideas we have associated with particular words and the possible significance of the use of stock phrases. “Mire of the streets” is associated with “trodden down” in 2 Samuel 22:43, Micah 7:10 and Zechariah 10:5.

John used the word πηλός in his narrative about Jesus healing the blind man on the Sabbath telling us when “he said this, he spat on the ground and made clay of the spittle and anointed the man's eyes with the clay.” Not everyone made the same association.

Birger Gerhardsson produced the first major study of oral and written transmission in the NT period. His approach emphasized the importance of verbatim memorization and delivery from memory. Gerhardsson also discussed techniques used to aid memory such as catch-words, acrostics and signs. Since the publication of Memory and Transmission in 1961 there have been a number of studies on formulaic language, repetitive devices such as inclusion and structural devices such as chiasmus.

I have discussed some of these techniques which can be found in the Septuagint and the writings of Luke. I plan to return to this topic.

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke

Happy Easter

“We are Easter Christians in a Good Friday world.”

The Significance of the Micah Allusions

Although the findings of Micah as a Source for Luke are preliminary, it is not premature to discuss their significance. Earlier it was noted in Sinai and Zion, that the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Micah both includes ideas from the Sinai and Zion theology. A detailed study of the both Micah and Luke is necessary to ascertain what ideas from Sinai and Zion have been included in both books.

These findings may demonstrate that Luke like Micah presented an irenical message to the temple establishment. Both Micah and Luke were social critics who were willing to accept some of the ideas of Zion theology provided that the social message of Sinai was adopted as primary. If the temple establishment proclaimed this message then both Micah and Luke would have no problem with including some Zion ideas, being the centrality of Jerusalem and the importance of temple ritual. For Luke, alms as part of repentance, was extremely important. This is not inconsistent with the teachings of Micah.

Until the publication of The Social Roots of Biblical Yahwism, scholars considered Sinai to be a northern phenomenon and Zion southern. Stephen L. Cook recognized that the Prophet Micah had included both as part of his irenical presentation to the temple establishment and that these ideas were not a later insertion. Cook did not use the word “irenical” to describe the writings of Micah but the word “irenical” best describes it. The observations of Cook are profound.

Recognizing that Micah and Luke were both diplomatic explains what some scholars claim were later insertions to Micah and strengthen the argument that Luke adopted the modus operandi of the Prophet Micah. However it is necessary to do more research before presenting such a bold claim.

This is a work in progress.

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke

Micah as a Source for Luke

I have been studying Micah looking for possible word and/or conceptual allusions in Luke. The first example comes from the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus.

16:27-31: And he said, `Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father's house, for I have five brothers, so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.' But Abraham said, `They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.' And he said, `No, father Abraham; but if some one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.' He said to him, `If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced if some one should rise from the dead.'"

This is a conceptual allusion to Deuteronomy 4:13 (Moses) and Micah 6:8 (prophets).

Deut 4:13-14: And he declared to you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, that is, the ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone. And the LORD commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and ordinances, that you might do them in the land which you are going over to possess.

Micah 6:8: He has showed you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

Translation: The people have long known the requirements of the Sinai covenant.

Luke has also alluded to Micah 6:4.

4: For I brought you up from the land of Egypt, and redeemed you from the house of bondage; and I sent before you Moses, Aaron, and Miriam.

Luke 1:68: Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he has visited and redeemed his people.

The third example in this preliminary study is Micah 3:8.

“But as for me, I am filled with power, with the Spirit of the LORD, and with justice and might, to declare to Jacob his transgression and to Israel his sin.”

Power is what the πνεύματι provides. Luke uses this same Greek word for “spirit” in the following verses: 1:17; 1:80; 2:27; 3:16; 4:1; 8:29; 9:42; 10:21 with additional verses in Acts.

Micah presents a unique messianic form with its emphasis on decentralized clan-based leadership. Luke in 22:28 in appointing the disciples to judge the twelve tribes may be reconstituting the decentralized clan-based leadership espoused by Micah.

The fifth example is found in the fourth chapter of Micah where prophet states in verses 6-7: “In that day, says the LORD, I will assemble the lame and gather those who have been driven away, and those whom I have afflicted; and the lame I will make the remnant; and those who were cast off, a strong nation; and the LORD will reign over them in Mount Zion from this time forth and for evermore.” According to Luke, the followers of Jesus have certainly welcomed the lame, the poor and the down trodden to the ministry as well as the Samaritans and other groups who have been driven away from the Temple.

The sixth example in this preliminary study is based on the usage of the Greek word for “redeem” in Micah 4:10; 6:10 and Luke 24:21.

4:10: Writhe and groan, O daughter of Zion, like a woman in travail; for now you shall go forth from the city and dwell in the open country; you shall go to Babylon. There you shall be rescued, there the LORD will λυτρώσεταί you from the hand of your enemies.

6:4: For I brought you up from the land of Egypt, and λυτρόω you from the house of bondage; and I sent before you Moses, Aaron, and Miriam.

24:21: But we had hoped that he was the one to λυτροῦσθαι Israel. Yes, and besides all this, it is now the third day since this happened.

The two men, traveling on the road to Emmaus, were hoping for the political release of Israel from Roman rule just as their forefathers had been redeemed from the land of Egypt and from the Babylonians.

The next three examples are all allusions found in the 21^st chapter of Luke based on verses in the 7^th chapter of Micah.

The troubling passage in Luke 21:16-17: “You will be delivered up even by parents and brothers and kinsmen and friends, and some of you they will put to death; you will be hated by all for my name's sake” is an allusion to Micah 7:5-6. “Put no trust in a neighbor, have no confidence in a friend; guard the doors of your mouth from her who lies in your bosom; for the son treats the father with contempt, the daughter rises up against her mother, the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; a man's enemies are the men of his own house.”

Luke in 21:24 (Jerusalem will be πατουμέν by the Gentiles) has alluded to Micah 7:10 where the prophet is referring to Jerusalem: Then my enemy will see, and shame will cover her who said to me, "Where is the LORD your God?" My eyes will gloat over her; now she will be καταπάτημα like the mire of the streets. Luke used the Greek word πατουμένη for “trodden down” which, according to Zhubert, is a word related to καταπάτημα.

In the Parable of the Fig Tree (21:30), the Lucan Jesus says you “know that the summer is already near.” This is an allusion to Micah 7:1 where we read: “Woe is me! For I have become as when the summer fruit has been gathered, as when the vintage has been gleaned: there is no cluster to eat, no first-ripe fig which my soul desires.”

The next example is conceptual and subtle. John the Baptist tells his audience to give one of their garments to a person who has none. Luke has alluded to Micah 2:8 where we read: “But you rise against my people as an enemy; you strip the robe from the peaceful, from those who pass by trustingly with no thought of war.” Among those listening to John the Baptist are persons such as tax collectors who have stripped “the robe from the peaceful” taxpayers.

The final example is interesting because Luke uses the Greek word ἄροτρον, which is a NT hapax, to tell us "No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God." It is an allusion to Micah 4:3 “they shall beat their swords into ἄροτρα.” Only the Lucan Jesus restores the ear of the servant of the high priest. He abhors violence as does the Prophet Micah.

This is a work in progress.

Copyrighted 2007

Religion

Christianity

Gospel of Luke