Story, p.

Paul's Damascus Road Experience

Observations on Acts 9

Introduction
The fact that the account of the Christophany occurs three times in Acts (Acts 9;
22; 26) and is alluded to in the Pauline epistles should make us as readers aware of the
critical importance of the event. indicate the central importance that attached to this
pivotal event. Paul, whothe Damascus Road, is elected by God to be the major catalyst in
extending the Gospel beyond the confines of Israel to remote places, to the Gentiles as
well as the Jews.
In Paul’s words, he was apprehended by Christ Jesus (Phil. 3:12) and becomes the
champion of the movement he was trying to exterminate, and building up th. What was it
that caused this radical Paul’s own repeated explanation is that he saw the once-crucified
Jesus now exalted as the Risen Lord:
Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you
my workmanship in the Lord? (I Cor. 9:1).
In 1 Corinthians 15:8, when Paul refers to the same occasion, he insists that his
experience of the Risen Jesus qualifies him as much a Peter, James and many others:
"Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me."
When Paul says, “God has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the
glory of God in the face of Christ” (2 Cor. 4:6), he no doubt alludes to the Damascus
Road event when he saw the “light from heaven, brighter than the sun”
The term "conversion" is often used to refer to the event, may be misleading.
"Conversion" usually signifies the movement from no-religion or one religion to another,
which . The Christian faith was not a new religion that renounced religious identity and a
shared heritage with the Jews, but continued its inner link with Jewish faith and practice.
While the term "conversion" does depict the radical "about-face/turn-around" that
occurred with Paul, we have chosen the term "Paul's Damascus Road Experience."
It is significant that many of the leaders of the initial Apostolic College (Acts 12)
disappear from view in the course of Acts. Matthias is chosen, he . John, who preaches
in Jerusalem, accompanies Peter to Samaria, but is heard of no more. . D. M. Stanley
notes, "At Pisidian Antioch, upon the rejection of his message, Paul and Barnabas
announce, as applied by Christ Himself to their apostolate, the words of the Isaian
Servant Song: 'I have constituted you a light to the Gentiles, in order that you may be a
source of salvation to the end of the earth' (13:47). That is principally in Paul's journey
to Rome, Luke finds these words fulfilled, implying as they do that Paul's work is
somehow an extension of the Redeemer's."1 Luke will highlight the journey of Paul to
Rome is curiously unconcerned with the specific outcome of Paul's trial. His theme is
played out to the finish with Paul's presence and preaching activity in Rome. The
apostolic company has indeed broken out of the confines of Jerusalem, Judea, and has
extended its influence not only to Samaria, but to Rome:

The Promise: Acts 1:8 Progression of the Witness in Acts

"You shall receive power, after Descent of the Spirit on the Day of
1D. M. Stanley, "Paul's Conversion in Acts: Why the Three Accounts?" The Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, vol. 15, 319.
Acts9obs.doc
5/4/2015
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 2

the Holy Spirit comes upon you Pentecost (Acts 2:1-42)

and you shall be My witnesses in Witness in Jerusalem (3:1-5:42)
Jerusalem
and in Judea Witness in Judea (6:1-8:3)
and in Samaria Witness in Samaria (8:4-9:31)
to the end of the earth Witness (9:32-28:31)

The event of Jesus' appearance to Paul marks a critical turning point in the Acts
narrative. Hedrick notes, "Luke introduces it [his conversion/call] immediately before
the movement of the gospel into the Gentile world, as the conclusion to the Palestinian
mission (see the summary statement at 9:31)."2 This story is positioned immediately
before the account of Cornelius (Acts 10-11), which is a preliminary fulfillment of the
divine concern for a mission to the Gentiles noted in Acts 9:15. The narrative the
historical progression of the church from a Jewish to a Gentile community. In a
secondary sense the text justifies Paul’s mission to the Gentiles.
How are we to understand this incredible event? The traditional approach is that
Paul experienced a conversion, a position that has a long history and reaches back to an
early father such as Augustine. Conversion is generally understood as the end of a
process wherein one, who struggles with sin and guilt, experiences forgiveness and a
release from guilt. Thus, in this view, Paul as a Pharisaic Jew, is conscious of his failure
to keep the Law, and then experiences justification by faith through his conversion on the
Damascus Road. In this model, the once Jewish persecutor of the Church becomes a
Christian convert who preaches the message of justification by faith. In this sense the
Damascus Road experience legitimizes Paul’s mission to the Gentiles.
Some interpreters approach the text from a psychological perspective, suggesting
that Paul was overcome by uneasiness, self-distrust, recrimination and guilt.3 Other
scholars view the event as a change of religions, from Judaism to Christianity. The event
can be looked at from a sociological perspective in that there is a changing of
communities within Judaism. Another approach is to focus on Paul’s call to the Gentiles.
Others such as Bultmann speak in existential terms, "In it he surrendered his previous
understanding of himself; i.e. he surrendered what had till then been the norm and
meaning of his life, he sacrificed what had hitherto been his pride and joy (Phil. 3:4-7)."4
However, the texts, including Gal. 1:13-17, no evidence on the Damascus Road.
There is a pre-history but certainly no predisposition or inclination on Paul’s part to
believe in the Lord Jesus. From Gal. 1:13ff., we learn that Paul is relating information to
his readers which they already know:
Gal. 1:13 For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecutthe
church of God violently and; 14 and I advan in Judaism beyond many of my own
age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers.
His audience knew his past and how he stood out from his contemporariesFrom
2 Charles W. Hedrick, "Paul's Conversion/Call: A Comparative Analysis of the Three Reports in Acts,"
JBL, 100/3 (1981), p. 421.
3 Hans Wendt, Die Apostelgeschichte, Kritish-exegetischer Kommentar uber das Neue Testament,

(Gottingen: H.A.W. Meyer, 1913). Others such as Stott widely conjecture about Paul's pent-up
guilt concerning the death of Stephen. John R.W. Stott, The Message of Acts, (Leicester, England:
Inter-Varsity Press, 1990), p. 172.
4 Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons,1955),

p. 188.
 Story, p. 3

Paul's writings, we cannot find sufficient justification for a psychological build-up of

self-distrust.8 for an internal struggle under Judaism or Torah religion. Indeed, Paul
gives a positive estimation of his former life as a Jew:
Phil. 3:6 "as to zeal a persecutor of the church, as to righteousness under the law
blameless."
acious God, such as is found in Augustine and Luther.
The change that altered Paul's life so dramatically was not initiated from within
but from without.

The Context:
The context depicts the persecution of the Church, following in the wake of
Stephen’s martyrdom. In 8:1-3, besides the description of the burial of Stephen, the
writer briefly cites a double aspect of the persecution: 1) the Church of Jerusalem is
forced to flee into Judea and Samaria (8:1), 2) the violent nature of the main persecutor
(8:3). The statement, “Saul was breathing (ejmpnevwn) murderous threats (9:1)
parallels the statement of 8:3, “Now Saul was trying to ruin the Church” (8:3). Acts 8-9
may be regarded as two examples of the truth of Psa. 76:10, “Surely the wrath of men
shall praise you,” for the persecuted Church in Jerusalem becomes the witnessing church
in Samaria, and the arch-persecutor becomes the arch-supporter of the cause which he
had persecuted.
In his own account of the event in the letter to the Galatians he emphasizes how
he was in the traditions of his fathers.9 Paul's position in the Jewish community coupled
with his fierce persecution of Christianity clearly demands the conclusion that he went to
Damascus not in preparation for the gospel but in aggressive and conscious opposition to
the gospel.
A biographical interchange builds to a climax:
Act I--Jesus and Saul on the road to Damascus (9:1-9)
Act II-Jesus and Ananias in Damascus (9:10-16)
Act III--Saul and Ananias in Damascus (9:17-19)
This third scene is climactic in that the two main human characters, of the two former
scenes, are brought together by the risen Jesus. In both narratives, both men are
overpowered by the risen Jesus.
With respect to the structure of Acts, R

Act I--Jesus and Saul on the road to Damascus (9:1-9)

7:58 and 8:1 in that Saul as one of those who participated in and was in agreement
with Stephen's death issu in further persecution of the Christian movement:
7:58 "And the witnesses laid aside their robes at the feet of a young man named
8 Loisy notes, "The account of his conversion, assuming that it is historical, has none of the
features of a psychological study; it is sheer miracle, and we are not told what led up to it." A.
Loisy, "La Conversion de Paul et la Naissance du Christianisme,, Revue d'Histoire et de
Litterature Religieuses, 5, 1914, pp. 289ff.
9 Gal. 1:13 For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God

violently and tried to destroy it

13 jHkouvsate gaVr thVn ejmhVn ajnastrofhvn pote ejn
tw' / jIoudai>smw'/, o{ti kaq· uJperbolhVn ejdivwkon
thVn ejkklhsivan tou' qeou' kaiV ejpovrqoun aujthvn,
 Story, p. 4

Saul."
8:1 "And Saul was in hearty agreement with putting him to death." (8:1)
This prepares the reader for Paul's' Damascus Road experience in that 9:1 notes the
adverb "still," thus carrying forward his hostility:
9:1 Now Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord,
went to the high priest, and asked for letters from him to the synagogues at
Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, both men and women,
he might bring them bound to Jerusalem."
purpose clause in 9:2 explains why Paul went to the high priest, i.e. for extradition
letters. The Roman Caesars had granted the High Priest and Sanhedrin power over the
Jews in foreign cities, but this right was not always recognized in every local community
outside Judea. s a Pharisee, was asking for letters Damascus is located ca. 150 miles
from Jerusalem.11 to the Christians of the Way intensifies and reaches beyond Jerusalem
and Judea to the synagogues at Damascus (9:2). Obviously, the victims of the
persecution are Jewish Christians who still attend the synagogue. The term "the Way"
(hJ oJdov") is used in an absolute sense (9:2; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22) and may
be traced to the words of Jesus, "I am the way. . ." (Jn. 14:6). Conzelmann states that the
term "denotes Christian teaching as well as Christians as a group."13 It is the first time in
Acts that the term is used to refer to faith in Jesus. In the Synoptic gospels, the term
"Way of God" is used as an equivalent to the Jewish halakah, ("walk or manner of
life").14 In Acts 24:14, Paul uses the term "the Way" to refer tohis opponents label as a
11See 1 Macc. 15:16-21 for such power of extradition. From Acts 26:10 we learn that Paul
carried out the Jerusalem persecution on the basis of such an authority: "And I did so in
Jerusalem; I not only shut up many of the saints in prison, by authority from the chief priests, but
when they were put to death I cast my vote against them." Acts 26:10 o} kaiV
ejpoivhsa ejn JIerosoluvmoi", kaiV pollouv" te tw'n
aJgivwn ejgwV ejn fulakai'" katevkleisa thVn paraV
tw'n ajrcierevwn ejxousivan labwvn, ajnairoumevnwn te
aujtw'n kathvnegka yh'fon,
13 Hans Conzelmann, Acts of the Apostles, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), p. 71.
14 Mk. 12:14 And they came and said to him, “Teacher, we know that you are true, and care for no

man; for you do not regard the position of men, but truly teach the way of God. Is it lawful to pay
taxes to Caesar, or not?
Mk. 12:14 kaiV ejlqovnte" levgousin aujtw'/, Didavskale,
oi[damen o{ti ajlhqhV" ei\ kaiV ouj mevlei soi periV
oujdenov", ouj gaVr blevpei" eij" provswpon ajnqrwvpwn,
ajll· ejp· ajlhqeiva" thVn oJdoVn tou' qeou'
didavskei": e[xestin dou'nai kh'nson Kaivsari h] ou[;
dw'men h] mhV dw'men;
Matt. 22:16: and they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we
know that you are true, and teach the way of God truthfully, and care for no man; for you do not
regard the position of men.
kaiV ajpostevllousin aujtw'/ touV" maqhtaV" aujtw'n
metaV tw'n JHrw/dianw'n levgonte", Didavskale, oi[damen
o{ti ajlhqhV" ei\ kaiV thVn oJdoVn tou' qeou' ejn
ajlhqeiva/ didavskei", kaiV ouj mevlei soi periV
oujdenov", ouj gaVr blevpei" eij" provswpon ajnqrwvpwn.
Luke 20:21 kaiV ejphrwvthsan aujtoVn levgonte", Didavskale,
oi[damen o{ti ojrqw'" levgei" kaiV didavskei" kaiV ouj
lambavnei" provswpon, ajll· ejp· ajlhqeiva" thVn
oJdoVn tou' qeou' didavskei":
 Story, p. 5

heretical halakah.15
A comparison of the three accounts (22:1-16; 26:9-18) reveals some similarities;

1.Paul thrown to the ground on the way to Damascus,

2.,
3.he words, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"
4.The words, "I am Jesus whom you are persecuting"
5., even though the details are
notably different:
9:7--companions hear a voice--see nothing,
22:9--companions see the light--hear no voice,
26:14--nothing is said of reactions--but they fall to the ground.
The effect on Paul's companions in all three accounts makes it clear that this was
not a subjective, but an objective appearance of the risen Jesus. The purpose of the
parallel accounts with the differences in detail may "on the one hand establish Paul's
companions as witnesses, but on the other hand reserve the appearance to Paul alone."16
The light causes Paul to fall to the ground; the effect upon Paul is described as
"being dazed" or "dazzled."17 Haenchen notes, "it seems to follow that Saul saw Jesus
only as he beheld this tremendous blaze of light. As the persecutor, Paul experiences the
same "light/glory" that the persecuted Stephen saw in a vision, immediately prior to his
death (7:55-56). Luke imagined the occurrence in such a way that Saul's companions
saw only a formless glare where he himself saw in it the figure of Jesus."18 Elsewhere
Paul bases his own apostleship on his experience of seeing the Lord.19 p
The hearing of the sound/voice (fwnhv) by others and the appearance establish
15 "But this I admit to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect I do serve the God of

our fathers, believing everything that is in accordance with the Law, and that is written in the
Prophets;
Acts 24:14 oJmologw' deV tou'tov soi o{ti kataV thVn oJdoVn
h}n levgousin ai{resin ou{tw" latreuvw tw'/ patrwv/w/
qew'/, pisteuvwn pa'si toi'" kataV toVn novmon kaiV toi'"
ejn toi'" profhvtai" gegrammevnoii
16 Conzelmann, p. 71.

17 Acts 22:7 e[pesav te eij" toV e[dafo" kaiV h[kousa fwnh'"

legouvsh" moi, SaouVl Saouvl, tiv me diwvkei";

Acts 26:13 hJmevra" mevsh" kataV thVn oJdoVn ei\don,
basileu', oujranovqen uJpeVr thVn lamprovthta tou'
hJlivou perilavmyan me fw'" kaiV touV" suVn ejmoiV
poreuomevnou"
18 Ernst Haenchen, The Acts of the Apostles, (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1971), pp. 321-322.

Haenchen notes a parallel with Deut. 4:12, "you heard the voice of words, but you saw no form."
Deuteronomy 4:12
(BHS) .lwq) yt!l*Wz <ya!r) <k#n+ya@ hn`Wmt=W <yu!m=v) <T#a^ <yr!b*D lwq)
va@h* i=wT)m! <k#yl@a& hw`hy rB@d~y+w^
19 1 Cor. 9:1 Oujk eijmiV ejleuvqero"; oujk eijmiV ajpovstolo";

oujciV jIhsou'n toVn kuvrion hJmw'n eJwvraka; ouj toV

e[rgon mou uJmei'" ejste ejn kurivw/;
1 Cor. 15:8 e[scaton deV pavntwn wJspereiV tw'/ ejktrwvmati
w[fqh kajmoiv. 9 jEgwV gavr eijmi oJ ejlavcisto" tw'n
ajpostovlwn, o}" oujk eijmiV iJkanoV" kalei'sqai
ajpovstolo", diovti ejdivwxa thVn ejkklhsivan tou' qeou':
 Story, p. 6

that the experience was n event The witnesses who hear the voice affirm the reality of
the occurrence. Theto the reality of Yahweh’s revelation to Moses.20
prophetic call that we find in the Old TestamentGod overcomes the human
person, who is then given a prophetic task:

Paul's Call and the OT Prophetic Call

1. Similarity in form
a. Self-revelation of God (Theophany, Christophany)
b. Overwhelming effect--fear (R. Otto--mysterium tremendum)
c. Announcement of mission (verbal)
d. Human objections raised
e. Human objections are overcome
f. (Signs)
The basic form of this prophetic call is found with the following persons:
a. Moses (Exod. 3)
b. Isaiah (Isa. 6)
c. Jeremiah (Jer. 1)
d. Ezekiel (Ezek. 1-3)
e. Amos (1:1-2; 3:8; 7:10-14)
f. Paul (Acts 9; Gal. 1:11-17; I Cor. 15:1-11; I Tim. 1:12-17)
g. John (Rev. 1:9-20

2. Similarities in wording and meaning

Prophetic Call Paul's Call

a) Mention of call from mother's womb a) Mention of call from mother's womb
Judg. 16:17 Gal. 1:15 o{te deV eujdovkhsen
o{ti a{gio" qeou' ejgwV eijmi [oJ qeoV"] oJ ajforivsa" me
ajpoV koiliva" mhtroV" ejk koiliva" mhtrov" mou
mou . kaiV kalevsa" diaV th'"
"because I am a holy one of God from cavrito" aujtou'
my mother's womb 15 But when it pleased God, who separated me
from my mother's womb, and called me by his
Psa. 22:9 9 Yet thou art he who took me from the grace,
womb; thou didst keep me safe upon my mother's
breasts.
Psa. 71:6 Upon thee I have leaned from my birth;
thou art he who took me from my mother's
womb. My praise is continually of thee.
Isaiah 49:1 Listen to me, O coastlands, and
hearken, you peoples from afar. The LORD called
me from the womb, from the body of my
mother (ejk koiliva" mhtroV"
mou ejkavlesen toV
o[noma mou ) he named my name.
2 He made my mouth like a sharp sword, in the
shadow of his hand he hid me; he made me a
polished arrow, in his quiver he hid me away.
20 See Deut. 4:12; Wisdom of Solomon 18:1; Daniel 10:7
 Story, p. 7

3 And he said to me, "You are my servant, Israel,

in whom I will be glorified."
4 But I said, "I have labored in vain, I have spent
my strength for nothing and vanity; yet surely my
right is with the LORD, and my recompense with
my God."
5 And now the LORD says, who formed me
from the womb (Kuvio" oJ
plavsa" me ejk koiliva"
dou'lon eJautw' /) to be his servant,
to bring Jacob back to him, and that Israel might
be gathered to him, for I am honored in the eyes of
the LORD, and my God has become my strength
Jer. 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew
you (proV tou' me plavsai se
ejn koiliva/ ejpivstamaiv
se), and before you were born I consecrated you;
(kaiV proV se ejxelqei'n ejk
mhvtra" hJgivakav se) I appointed
you a prophet to the nations
b) Prophetic ministry to the Gentiles b) Prophetic ministry to the Gentiles
6 he says: “It is too light a thing that you should be Gal. 1:16 was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in
my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to order that I might preach him among the
restore the preserved of Israel; I will give you as a Gentiles, I did not confer with flesh and blood,
light to the Gentiles, that my salvation may reach 16 ajpokaluvyai toVn uiJoVn
to the end of the earth.” aujtou' ejn ejmoiv, i{na
6 kaiV ei\pevn moi Mevga eujaggelivzwmai aujtoVn
soiv ejstin tou' klhqh'naiv ejn toi'" e[qnesin , eujqevw"
se pai'dav mou tou' sth'sai ouj prosaneqevmhn sarkiV
taV" fulaV" Iakwb kaiV thVn kaiV ai{mati
diasporaVn tou' Israhl
ejpistrevyai, ijdouV
tevqeikav se eij" diaqhvkhn
gevnou" eij" fw'" ejqnw'n
tou' ei\naiv se eij"
swthrivan e{w" ejscavtou th'"
gh'".
c)Promise of divine presence and deliverance c) Promise of divine presence and
Jer. 1:8 "Do not be afraid of them: for I am with deliverance
you to deliver you," says the Lord Acts 26:17 delivering you from the people and
MhV fobhqh/" ajpoV from the Gentiles -- to whom I send you
proswvpon aujtw'n o{ti metaV
sou' ejgwV eijmi tou' 17 ejxairouvmenov" se ejk
ejxairei'sqaiVV se levvgei tou' laou' kaiV ejk tw'n
ejqnw'n , eij" ou}" ejgwV
Kuvrio"
ajpostevllw se
Acts 18:9 And the Lord said to Paul one night in a
vision, "Do not be afraid, but speak and do not be
silent;
9 ei\pen deV oJ kuvrio" ejn
nuktiV di· oJravmato" tw'/
Pauvlw/, MhV fobou ',
ajllaV lavlei kaiV mhV
siwphvsh/",
d) Bearing God's name before Gentiles and d) Bearing God's name before Gentiles and kings
king(dom)s Acts 9:15 ei\pen deV proV"
Jer. 1:10 ijdouV katevstakav se aujtoVn oJ kuvrio", Poreuvou,
 Story, p. 8

shvmeron ejpiV e[qnh kaiV o{ti skeu'o" ejklogh'" ejstivn

basileiva" ejkrizou'n kaiV moi ou|to" tou' bastavsai toV
kataskavptein kaiV o[nomav mou ejnwvpion
ajpolluvein kaiV ejqnw'n te kaiV basilevwn
ajnoikodomei'n kaiV uiJw'n te jIsrahvl:
katafuteuvein. But the Lord said to him, "Go, for he is a chosen
. instrument of mine to carry my name before the
Behold, I have appointed you this day over Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel;
nations and over kingdoms, to root out and to
pull down, and to destroy, and to rebuild, and to
plant.

It appears that Paul and Luke apply he OT prophetic call-narratives to Paul's call.
The link illustrates a "renewal of God's will for the salvation of the Gentiles, giving him
a place in the history of salvation in line with those Old Testament figures."21 Paul, like
Jeremiah was (1) chosen before birth for his apostolic office, (2) ina special mission to
the Gentiles, and (3) great opposition from his own people and kings.

Comparison of Moses’ Call and Paul’s Call:

Moses (Exod. 3) Paul (Acts 9)
“appeared” (w[fqh) 3:2 “appeared” (w[fqh) 9:17
“hid his face” 3:6 “fell to ground” 9:4
hears voice from bush 3:4 “hears voice from heaven” 9:4-5
“Moses, Moses” 3:4 “Saul, Saul” 9:4
Identity of person revealed 3:6 Identity of person revealed 9:5
A mission given 3:10 A wide mission—Jew-Gentile, suffering 9:15-16
dthe initiator of the prophetic and apostolic call. of the call-narratives .
The address of Jesus to Saul contains a solemn repetition of his name, "Saul,
Saul," a feature that is often found in theophanies (Gen. 22:11; 46:2; Ex. 3:4; I Sam.
3:10).22 The text of Acts 9:5 makes it clear that Paul does not immediately recognize the
One who has confronted him. He needs to ask the question, "Who are you, kuvrie
(Sir)?"
Jesus fully identifies Himself with His persecuted disciples: "Why do you
persecute me?" Thall three accounts. ncipient doctrine of the body of Christ, wherein
Jesus is identified with His people For Paul, this inaugural experience of the exalted
Jesus leads to the awareness of the close association of Jesus and His people.25 The idea
of the one and the many is expressed in several Pauline texts in which he expresses the
thought of the body of Jesus as one and yet many. In I Cor. 12:1

A. For just as the body B. is one and has many

members, and all the members
of the body, though many, are
one body
Av so it is with Christ Bv (Christ is both one and
many)
21Johannes Munck, Paul and the Salvation of Mankind, (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1959), p.

26.
22 So, "Martha, Martha" (Lk. 10:41), "Simon, Simon" (Lk. 22:31).
25 I Cor. 12:12f.; I Cor. 8:12; Gal. 2:20; Col. 1:27
 Story, p. 9

. 13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves
or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit. 1 Cor. 12:13
Acts 9 is vital for understanding Paul's view of apostleship. Apparently, from
Luke's point of view, Paul does not really meet the qualifications of Acts 1:21, but Paul (I
Cor. 15) seems to say that he does. Note also the connection with I Cor. 9:1 and the
difference between this
TheThe very appearance of the risen Jesus stands in stark contrast to Paul's former
estimation of Jesus and the disciples of the Lord (9:1). Saul had been persecuting the
Christians as misguided adherents of a false Messiah. From his point of view, God had
publicly cursed Jesus: "cursed/accursed [by God] is everyone who hangs upon a tree"
(Deut. 21:23). The very fact of crucifixion was the clearest proof to Saul that Jesus had
been a deceiver. But now, God had Paul see with his own eyes that the accursed one
was the exalted Christ, the Lord of Glory. he doctrine of the resurrection with in seminal
form.

clear contrast between 9:1-2 and 9:8. Saul, who had been so powerful and
aggressive (9:1,2) is andmust be led by the hand. The blindness is not punitive, but
Paul's present helplessness and the power of the risen Jesus. The experience is similar
to other events in the Old Testament when God struck people with blindness to thwart an
evil purpose or to get their attention.26 In 9:6 Paul, learns only what he must immediately
do--go to the city. All other details concerning the future are yet unrevealed. Jesus
Himself brings about the dramatic change and reorientation in Paul's life. It is as if Paul
has no other option. Even the divine passive in 9:6, "it shall be spoken"
(lalhqhvsetai) surely implies that Paul will follow through with obedience to
the Word of God.
In 9:9, the temporal designation is significant, "And he was three days without
sight, and neither ate nor drank". Haenchen notes, "It would be wrong to construe it as
punishment: it is simply the natural consequence of his beholding the heavenly light."27
Luke does not speak of a person whom Paul saw, but of a light and a voice. One of
Paul's cardinal doctrines is that of union with Christ (Rom. 6). While the three-day
blindness may be the immediate result of the shock, it is possible that these three days are
reminiscent of Jesus' death and resurrection (cf. Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:12). Rackham notes,
"He is crucified with Christ, and the three days of darkness are like the three days in the
tomb. But on the third day with Christ, he rises from the dead in baptism; after this he is
filled with the Holy Ghost--his Pentecost."28 "Paul, as it were, plunged below the surface
of his faith to reconstruct it round the new fact, and only after three days was that basic
reconstruction complete enough for him to surface again."29 The motif of fasting may
suggest, "holding oneself in disciplined readiness for further revelation (e.g., Ex. 34:28;;
Dan. 10:2-3)."30

Act II-Jesus and Ananias in Damascus (9:10-16)

26 See Gen. 19:1; II Kings 6:18-20
27 Haenchen, p. 323.
28 R.B. Rackham, The Acts of the Apostles, (London: Macmillan, 1930), p. 133.
29 James D.G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit,
30 James D. G. Dunn, The Acts of the Apostles, (Valley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1996), p. 122.
 Story, p. 10

The new scene narrates the dialogue between the risen Jesus and Ananias. He is
described as a "disciple" (maqhthv"), i.e., "a Christian" and in 22:12-14, he is
introduced as a devout Hebrew.31 Since Ananias had not fledhe may well represent a
conservative Christian Jew who believed that it was possible to be a He is sent by "the
God of our fathers," and speaks of Jesus as "the Righteous/Just One." Ananias' opening
words, "Here am I, Lord" (ijdouv ejgwv) suggest a certain readiness and
attentiveness to the Word of the Lord.32

We can also note a clear divine providence or guidance at work Ananias given
Paul's exact address, "the street called 'Straight'" (9:11), a street which is still the main
thoroughfare in Damascus.
There is a significant contrast with respect to Ananias' posture vis-à-vis SaIn v.
15, to Ananias’ description of Christians whom Saul has persecuted, the Lord counters
with a description of the Saul, whom Ananias is soon to know. "vessel of election" to
bear Jesus' name to Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel.
The Pauline doctrine of election finds its roots in 9:15, "a vessel of election".
Paul's election is then specified in two ways: 1. The Gentile mission, 2. Suffering for
Jesus' name.
Acts 9:15 But the Lord said unto him,
Go thy way:
for he is a chosen vessel [vessel of election] unto me,
to bear my name before the Gentiles,
and
kings,
and
the children of Israel
Acts 9:15 eipen deV proV" aujtoVn oJ kuvrio",
Poreuvou,
o{ti skeu'o" ejklogh'" ejstivn moi
31 Acts 22:12 JAnaniva" dev ti", ajnhVr eujlabhV" kataV toVn
novmon, marturouvmeno" uJpoV pavntwn tw'n
katoikouvntwn jIoudaivwn, 13 ejlqwVn prov" me kaiV
ejpistaV" ei\pevn moi, SaouVl ajdelfev, ajnavbleyon:
kajgwV aujth'/ th'/ w{ra/ ajnevbleya eij" aujtovn. 14
oJ deV ei\pen, JO qeoV" tw'n patevrwn hJmw'n
proeceirivsatov se gnw'nai toV qevlhma aujtou' kaiV
ijdei'n toVn divkaion kaiV ajkou'sai fwnhVn ejk tou'
stovmato" aujtou',
32 Unlike Samuel, Ananias knows the identity of the Lord:

1 Sam. 3:4-5



1 Sam. 3:4-5, kaiV ejkavlesen kuvrio" Samouhl Samouhl:
kaiV eij'pen jIdouV ejgov. kaiV e!dramen proV" Hli kaiV
eij'pen jIdouV ejgov, o@ti kevklhkav" me: kaiV ei'jpen
Ouj kevklhdav se, ajnavstrefe kavqeude. kaiV
ajnevstreyen kaiV ejkavqeuden. (LXX)
 Story, p. 11

ou|to" tou' bastavsai34 toV o[nomav mou

ejnwvpion ejqnw'n
te kaiV
basilevwn
uiJw'n te
jIsrahvl:
The expression, "vessel", skeu'o"" is used in a positive manner, which contrasts with
the expression, "vessel of his wrath" from Jeremiah (50:25=27:25 LXX):
Johannes Munck argues convincingly for a link with Gal. 1:15, in that the
revelation of Christ is linked to Paul's apostleship to the Gentiles, and the call, prior to
birth through the grace of God.36 In particular, the passage from a Servant Song (Isa.
49:1-6), affirms Yahweh's vhoivr from the womb and a subsequent ministry to the
nations, corresponding to Paul's affirmation in Gal. 1:16.37 Jeremiah's prophetic call is
likewise directed to the nations/Gentiles:
Jer. 1:4 Now the word of the Lord came to me saying,
5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
and before you were born I consecrated you;
I appointed you a prophet to the nations.”
34Articular infinitive of purpose (3:12; 14:18; 15:20; 20:3, 27; 27:1).
36Johannes Munck, Paul and the Salvation of Mankind, (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1959), p.
24.
Gal. 1:15 o{te deV eujdovkhsen (oJ qeoV") oJ ajforivsa" me
ejk koiliva" mhtrov" mou kaiV kalevsa" diaV th'"
cavrito" aujtou'
As Munck notes, the expression, "from my mother's womb" (ejk koiliva" mhtrov"
mou) is found in several places in the Old Testament:
Judg. 16:17 So he told her all that was in his heart and said to her, "A razor has never come on my
head, for I have been a Nazirite to God from my mother's womb. If I am shaved, then my strength
will leave me and I shall become weak and be like any other man."
See also Psa 21:10ff (EV 22:9ff) and 70 (71):6, which likewise affirm the special connection with
God from birth onwards.
37 Gal. 1:15 o{te deV eujdovkhsen (oJ qeoV") oJ ajforivsa" me
ejk koiliva" mhtrov" mou kaiV kalevsa" diaV th'"
cavrito" aujtou' 16 ajpokaluvyai toVn uiJoVn aujtou'
ejn ejmoiV i{na eujaggelivzwmai aujtoVn ejn toi'"
e[qnesin, eujqevw" ouj pros aneqevmhn sarkiV kaiV
ai{mati, Galatians 1:15-16But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's
womb and called me through His grace, 16 to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him
among the Gentiles, I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood,
Isaiah 49:1,5-6 jAkouvsatev mou, nh'soi, kaiV prosevcete, e!qnh:
diaV crovnou pollou' sthvsetai, levgei kuvrio". ejk
koiliva" mhtrov" mou ejkavlesen toV o!nomav mou 5kaiV
n'n ou@tw" levgei kuvrio" oJ plavsa" me ejk koiliva"
dou'lon eJautw/' 6kaiV eij'pevn moi . . . ijdouV

tevqeikav se eij" diaqhvkhn gevnou" eij" fw'" ejqnw'n

tou' eij'naiv se eij" swthrivan e@w" ejscavtou th'" gh'".
(LXX)
Isaiah 49:1,5-6 "Listen, O coastlands, to Me, And take heed, you peoples from afar! The LORD
has called Me from the womb; From the matrix of My mother He has made mention of My name. 5
"And now the LORD says, Who formed Me from the womb to be His Servant, . . . 6 Indeed He
says, . . . I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles, That You should be My salvation to the
ends of the earth.' "
 Story, p. 12

In the call narratives (Paul, Isaianic Servant, Jeremiah), we find several common
ingredients: call, choice from the womb, vocation, ministry to the Gentiles. Martin notes,
“Paul felt responsibility as the key eschatological apostle sent by God in the final time
(Col. 1:24-29; Eph. 3:1-13). Thus, it may be argued that Paul’s commission was
certainly a part of his entrance into new life as a Christian, but it cannot be the sum-total
of it.”38
There is a clear and emphatic repetition of the word "name":
"authority . . .to bind all who call upon thy name" (9:14)
"to bear My name before the Gentiles" (9:15)
"how much he must suffer for My name's sake" (9:16)
It is noteworthy that in Acts, Paul will appear before three groups in the course of his
missionary endeavors:
- Jews (13:5, 14; 14:1; 1613; 17:1-4, 10, 17; 19:8)
- Gentiles (17:22; 18:6-11; 19:10)
- A king (26:1-29)
Another major element in the apostolic call is the vocation of suffering, given
special prominence by Luke:
- suspicion by Paul's companions (9:26)
- attempts on his life (9:29)
- abuse by Jews of the (13:45ff.; 14:2ff, 19; 17:5ff.; 19:23ff.)
- fractured relationships with fellow workers (15:37ff.)
- scorn and persecution by Gentiles (16:19ff.; 17:32f.; 19:23ff.)
Elsewhere, Paul regards such sufferings as sharing the sufferings of Christ (Phil. 3:10)
and as a sign of his apostleship.39 Such suffering counters the triumphalism of his
opponents (I Cor. 4).
The sharpest contrast can be seen in Paul's understanding of apostleship. The
apostolic call is without the intervention of any human agency. He is called an apostle by
the will of God, sent not from men, nor by a man but by Jesus Christ and God the Father,
who raised Him from the dead.41 The weaker the human Paul is (undistinguished in
appearance, unimpressive in speech, stricken by illness, persecuted by his own
countrymen), the more certain it is that all the strength that goes out is God's strength and
not human strength. That is why he says that he possesses "this treasure in earthen
vessels" (II Cor. 4:7). Therefore, he expresses the paradox of life in the midst of death:
"For I think that God has exhibited us apostles as last of all, like men sentenced to death,
because we have become a spectacle to the world, to angels and to men . . . We have
become, and are now, as the refuse of the world, the off scouring of all "things" (I Cor.
4:9, 13).42
Paul's understanding of sin likewise finds root in the Damascus Road experience.
Paul sees that he had blasphemed the Messiah, had persecuted His flock, and had
participated in murder. The most pious intentions had brought Paul into the deepest sin
and guilt. "For I am the least of the apostles, who am not fit to be called an apostle,
because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and
38 Ralph P. Martin, Reconciliation: A Study of Paul’s Theology, (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1981.
39 See II Cor. 11:23ff.; Gal. 6:17.
41 See Gal. 1:1; I Cor. 1:1; II Cor. 1:1; Rom. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1.
42 Martin Dibelius and Werner Georg Kümmel, Paul, (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press,

1966), pp. 62, 63.

 Story, p. 13

His grace toward me did not prove vain; but I labored even more than all of them, yet not
I, but the grace of God with me." (I Cor. 15:9,10).
Corresponding to the doctrine of sin, we can also observe a seminal understanding
of ivine grace. The risen Jesus does not confront Saul with judgment, but with grace.
"Luke constantly drives home the idea that Christ himself brought about this change of
front. Paul did not dream of becoming a Christian or a missionary. The idea that Luke
wanted to suggest a psychological explanation such as modern psychology would offer is
completely wrong; on the contrary, Luke wishes to show that no human evolution is
responsible for the change, but an act of God--and that alone!"43 This certainly lies at the
heart of Paul’s argument about the futility of (which he calls confidence in the flesh), the
one human trait that stands in utter antithesis to active trust in the grace of God.
Act III--Saul and Ananias in Damascus (9:17-19)
When Ananais greets Paul, he addresses Paul as "brother" (ajdelfov"),
quite possibly "simply hailing his fellow Jew with the word of racial kinship . . . putting
Paul at ease--telling him that his past was not held against him, something which may
well have worried Paul . . ."44
Paul's understanding of the person and work of the Holy Spirit, likewise finds
roots in Paul's experience in Damascus:
"so that you may regain your sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit" (9:17)
It is the gift of God that incorporates Paul into the early church. By virtue of the
reception of the Spirit, everything else follows. The reception of the Spirit is mentioned
prior to and independent of baptism. The Holy Spirit is linked with Saul’s baptism (v. 19)
Ananias explains to Paul that he is not only sent to restore Paul's sight, but also that he
may "be filled with the Holy Spirit." This last phrase is the same used in Luke's
description of the first Pentecost: "and all were filled with the Holy Spirit." It is
noteworthy that Paul's filling with the Spirit is mediated by Ananias, who is not one of
the apostles. It appears that Paul's experience was a three-day event, encompassing the
time from the Damascus Road to his baptism. According to 22:16 "in Ananias' eyes Paul
had yet to take that step which would clinch his committal and forgiveness."45
The reader is made aware that this is the Pauline Pentecost, so that by virtue of his
reception of the Spirit, Paul stands equally with the twelve. When Paul is then baptized,
the keynote of his "preaching" (khruvgma) is sounded, in that Paul began to preach
Jesus by saying, "This man is the Son of God" (9:18).
Paul's understanding of eschatology and the light of the dawning new age
similarly finds a root in the Damascus Road experience. We can note the clear
connection in II Cor. 4:6 between creation and the new creation in Christ:
"For God, who said, 'Light shall shine out of darkness.' is the One who has shone
in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of
Christ."
Just as creation was effected by the divine spoken word, accounting for the
43Haenchen, p. 328.
44Dunn, p. 74. Dunn notes that ajdelfov" is used 57 times in Acts--36 times equivalent to
'my fellow Christian(s)' (leaving aside 9:17 and 22:13), and 19 times in reference to the
national/spiritual kinship of Jew to Jew."
45 Dunn, p. 74. Acts 22:16 kaiV nu'n tiv mevllei"; ajnastaV"
bavptisai kaiV ajpovlousai taV" aJmartiva" sou
ejpikalesavmeno" toV o[noma aujtou'.
 Story, p. 14

change from darkness to light, so with Paul; the divine light which shone upon him on the
Damascus Road caused an initial blindness, subsequently removed through the light of
the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ. Paul compares his experience to
a new creation (II Cor. 5:17) in which the recreating light of God shines into his darkness.
Elsewhere Paul speaks about a revelation within himself:
Gal. 1:16 to reveal His Son in me (ajpokaluvyai toVn uiJoVn
aujtou ejn ejmoiv), that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did
not immediately consult with flesh and blood.
In Acts 9:19b-31, Paul immediately begins to fulfill his new role to the sons of
Israel (promised in 9:15--fulfilled in vss. 20, 22, 27-29), experience suffering (promised
in 9:16--fulfilled in vss. 21, 23, 29), and preaching in Jerusalem (9:15-16--fulfilled in vss.
26-29). Paul then preaches Jesus as the Son of God (v. 20), the Messiah (v. 2), and Lord
(v. 29)--all of which become central themes of his later sermons.

Implications:
In many ways, Pauline theology is dependent on this unique experience; many of
the major themes, which are subsequently unfolded in his epistles, find point of
connection or root in this pivotal eventlanguage of “brother,” guidance. Grace is so
evident in that the Risen Jesus briefly sketches the dark part of Saul’s life, only to hasten
on to stress the divine invitation to a new life and the promise of what God will do
through Saul. The accent is on the positive aspect of Jesus’ grace. Paul’s theology did
not come to fullness or maturity , many elements were implicit in the experience. He an
altogether new perspective on all of his former experience and training. Formerly his life
had revolved and been organized around the central thrust of the Law. Bruce says,
“When the revelation of Jesus Christ showed him the bankruptcy of the law, the law
could no longer be the magnet which drew all those elements together in a well-defined
manner. With the removal of the magnet they would have been dispersed and
disorganized, had the law not been immediately replaced at the center by the risen Lord,
around whom Paul’s life and thought were reorganized to form a new pattern.” 47
Invariably,
As the gospel proceeds into the vast Gentile world with all of its moral
bankruptcy, Acts 9 simply says, “Nobody need be discouraged.” The patience and grace
and power of God and of His Risen Jesus-towards the greatest enemy set a pattern (I Tim.
1:16) describing the gracious ways in which God will work wherever the good news
goes.
Dunn remarks, "This was not a slight transaction of a few seconds—otherwise,
blindness would not have been so severe. It was not like rounding a sharp corner, but
like running into a solid object while in full flight. Time was necessary to let the pieces
of his shattered life reassemble themselves around this central new fact."48 Paul is one of
those people whose lives have been torn in two by a single event. We call it conversion--
but that term is misleading. Paul's experience was not like that of one who is saved at a
Salvation Army booth. Paul was not converted from a life of "sin" to a life of
righteousness. Rather he turned from a religion of righteousness to a religion of the
sinner.
47 F.F. Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1977), p.
80.
48 Dunn, p. 76.
 Story, p. 15

The very fact that the change occurred in the middle of persecutions explains its
radical nature; Paul redirects his former zeal to Jesus with the same intensity that drove
him to persecute the Church. The Lord Jesus transformed Paul from a zealous and
bigoted Pharisee to the first Christian theologian.
The greatest shock that that realization gave him was in its negative side:
he could not help seeing that with the best will in the world to serve God,
one can pass him by. That was what had happened to him--in his zeal for
the Law, in his devotion to the God of the Law, he had become a
persecutor of the Christians and had almost come to ruin.49
This encounter leaves a powerful effect on Paul which his theology, self-understanding
and kerygma. The life that Paul subsequently lives is an outgrowth of this powerful
initiating event.

49 Kümmel, p. 63.5
 1

Luke's Instructive Dynamics for Resolving Conflicts:

The Jerusalem Council

Abstract
This essay argues that in the lengthy case-study of the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:1-35), Luke
provides several instructive dynamics that are important for resolving conflicts in a way that
actually leads to an advance of the gospel (Acts 15.36-16.5). Luke intends that his readership
both understand and embrace the story as a model for the Early Church to follow as it encounters
conflicts. Dynamics include the divine initiative, the inclusionary and saving activity of God,
commitment to unity, shared stories of experience and precedent, the Holy Spirit, Scripture,
decisions, compromise and clear communication. He helps the early communities to relive the
event and its nuances, to embrace and to adopt his point of view in the process of
conflict-resolution in an ever-changing landscape.

Key Words:
Conflict-Resolution
Acts 15
The Jerusalem Council
The Holy Spirit

Introduction
The aim of this paper is to explain the instructive dynamics that Luke brings into play in
resolving the decisive conflict of the Jerusalem Council, which leads to an advance of the gospel
(Acts 15.1-16.5). Luke intends his readers to understand and embrace the story as a model for
the nascent church.
In a helpful way, Joseph Tyson links this story with several other narratives in Acts that
follow his suggested pattern: 1) peace, 2) threat, 3) resolution, 4) restoration.1 I suggest the

1 Joseph B. Tyson, "Themes at the Crossroads: Acts 15 in its Lukan Setting," Forum, New Series 4, 1 (Spring,
2008), 110. Tyson cites a pattern in Acts 1.12-26;4.32-5.11; 6.1-7; 6.8.6-13; 8.14-25, which also includes 1.12-26
(choice of a replacement apostle); 9.19b-21, 26 (Paul's credibility); 10.1-11.18 (Cornelius' story) ; 18.24-28
(Apollos' inadequacy).
 2

pattern of: 1) conflict, 2) resolution, 3) advance. My term, 'advance,' means an extension of a

resolution that Tyson calls 'restoration.' Luke's case-studies, including the lengthiest story of the
Jerusalem Council, narrate how the process of conflict-resolution actually advances the witness
of the gospel through the strengthening of the Church and the numerical growth of believers.2
Others, such as Luke Timothy Johnson devote valuable attention to issues such as discernment
and the importance of the 'story'3 in making decisions. I intend to enumerate the intertwined
elements by which the Jerusalem Council resolved the conflict raised in Acts 15.1, 5. For Luke,
the story is a 'lived-theology' that is instructive for the community as it seeks the will of God in
changing circumstances, in new geographical areas with new ethnic groups, pressing issues and
conflicts.4 Of particular note is Luke's understanding of the work of the Holy Spirit in resolving
the conflict.
The various elements that surface in the conflict5 are fundamentally issues of exclusion
and inclusion, the terms of admission for Gentile salvation, including circumcision,6 adherence to
the Law of Moses (15.1, 5) and table-fellowship (15.20, 29; 21.25). The story may reveal other
implicit problems: the potential divide between two geographical centers (mother-church in
Jerusalem and daughter-church in Antioch), and a possible separation between apostolic leaders.

2 Advances also occur in 5.11-14; 6.7-8, 13-7.53; 9.31; 11.18, 21; 18.27-28.
3 Luke Timothy Johnson, The Acts of the Apostles (Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical, 1992), Decision-Making in
the Church (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983).
4 My purpose is not to reconstruct the historical events (Acts 15 & Gal 2) but to probe the transformative value of
the story. and its appropriation by various faith-communities.
5 Luke uses numerous nouns and verbs to accentuate the conflict: "dissension" (sta/siv) and "sharp debate" (zhth/siv ou0k

o0ligh/--litotes 15.2; see 14.27) in Antioch, "this controversial matter" (zh/thma) in Jerusalem (15.3), "this

matter/question" (o( lo/gov ou{tov 15.6) and "much dispute" (pollh/ zhth/siv 15.7). Luke expresses the demand as a "yoke

(zugo/v 15.10), expressed in v. 28 as a "burden" (ba/rov) which amounts to challenging God (ti/ peira/zete to\n qeo/n; 15.10), a

form of harassment (parenoxlei=n 15.19) in which "they disturbed" (e0ta/racan) you and were "troubling" (a0naskeua/zontev)

your minds by what they said" (15.24). The verb, "to become silent" (siga=n 15.12-13), contrasts with the previous

heated discussion.
6 The Christian Jews may look to their commitment to circumcision in the OT (Gen. 17.9-14; Exod. 12.44, 48), the

Maccabean era (1 Macc. 1.48, 60-61; 2.46), and possibly Jesus' own circumcision with no apparent abrogation of the
"everlasting sign" (Gen. 17.13) in his teachings.
 3

The very unity, peace and future of the Church are threatened.
When I speak of conflict and resolution, I do not mean the various external threats that
the Early Church encounters, e.g., the 'savage wolves that will not spare the flock' (20.29).
Clearly resolution is impossible with such groups. Rather, my focus will embrace the internal
conflict of the Jerusalem Council, when Christians seek to be Christians together in the midst of
diversity.

Instructive Dynamics
Luke tells the story of how the various points of conflict are resolved and he does so in a
persuasive way to instruct the early communities of how they should go about seeking the
communal will of God. Many of Luke's indicative statements in the narrative become
paradigmatic for his readers.

a) Acknowledge the divine initiative. Luke consistently affirms the divine initiative in Gentile-
inclusion7 noted through verbal forms:
· 'everything God had done' (o#sa o( qeo\v e0poi/hsen) 15.4

· 'God made a choice' (e0cele/cato o( qeo\v) 15.7

· 'God . . . witnessed' (o( . . . qeo\v e0martu/rhsen) 15.8

· '[God] by giving the Holy Spirit' (dou\v to\ pneu=ma) 15.8

· 'He made no distinction'8 (ou0qe\n die/krinen) 15.9

· '[God] by cleansing their hearts' (kaqari/sav ta\v kardi/av au0tw=n) 15.9

· 'the miraculous signs and wonders God had done' (o#sa e0poi/hsen o( qeo\v shmei=a kai\ te/rata

e0n e!qnesin) 15.12

7 God's purposeful activity is also intimated in Acts 13.47 (Isa. 49.6), "I have made you a light for the Gentiles, that
you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth."
8 The verb with its negative, "he made no distinction" (ou0qe\n die/krinen) expresses the divine determination of the

divine/human story of the former vision (Acts 10.9-16, 20; 11.2-17). Through the visionary-lesson, Peter interprets
God's decision.
 4

· 'God . . . showed his concern' (o( qeo\v e0peske\yato labei=n 9) 15.14

· The quote from Amos (15.16-17) uses 3 verbs in four expressions in the first person
singular, where God is the speaker: 'I will return' (a0nastre/yw); 'I will rebuild'

(a0noikodomh/sw) twice; 'I will restore' (a0norqw/sw) 15.16. Further, the last line also

affirms the divine initiative, 'says the Lord who does these things' (le/gei ku/riov poiw=n

tau=ta) 15.17

Thus, Luke provides a total of 13 expressions that affirms the divine initiative and activity in
Gentile-inclusion. Human figures acknowledge God's prior initiative and action. In highlighting
the divine activity in the Council's deliberations, Luke suggests that the nascent community 'catch
up' with God's purposeful activity.
b) Celebrate the inclusionary and saving-activity of God. Whereas the objectors argued for an
exclusive salvation (15:1), Luke argues for an inclusive salvation, 'No! We believe that it is
through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved,10 just as they (Gentiles) are' (15.11).11 The
reversal of language is both surprising and revealing; it is a new paradigm that the Gentiles'
salvific experience becomes the gauge by which Jewish Christians are measured.12
In the deliberations, Luke highlights the legitimacy of Gentile-inclusion; there are seven
positive references to the Gentiles (Acts 15.3, 7, 12, 14, 17, 19, 23). Earlier in Acts, Luke prepares
the reader for the theological and practical issue raised in the Jerusalem Council. Luke narrates the
story of receptive Gentiles on the Day of Pentecost (2.5-12), the Ethiopian eunuch (8.26-40), Paul's
ministry to the Gentiles (9.15) and most importantly for Acts 15—the detailed Cornelius story
(10.1-11.18). Acts 11.19-30 includes a substantial witness among the Gentiles at Antioch and is
followed by Barnabas and Paul's missionary tour in which Gentiles receive the Christian gospel

9 An infinitive of purpose, again reinforcing the divine initiative and action.

10 The aorist infinitive "to be saved" (swqh=nai) may be rendered "we shall be saved" as a statement of purpose.

Johnson, Acts of the Apostles, 263

11 Walker notes the remarkable similarity, both ideational and verbal, between Peter's speech as a whole (Acts 15.7-
11) and Paul's report regarding the Jerusalem Conference (Gal. 2)." William O. Walker, "Acts and the Pauline
Corpus Revisited: Peter's Speech at the Jerusalem Conference," Ed. Richard P. Thompson, Thomas E. Phillips,
Literary Studies in Luke-Acts: Essays in Honor of Joseph B. Tyson (Macon, GA: Mercer, 1998), 79.
12 See Johnson, Acts of the Apostles, 263.
 5

(13.1-14.28), well expressed by the statement, 'now we turn to the Gentiles' (13.46). Charles
Talbert observes that 'the extension of the gospel to the Gentiles is followed by an episode of
Jerusalem approval.'13 The issue of Peter's table-fellowship with Cornelius and its significance is
thoroughly narrated; the various pericopes serve as introductory material for the issue of Gentile-
inclusion, so important for Acts 15. Luke also refers to the Gentile ministry sixteen times in the
second part of Acts (16.6-28.31) as a settled matter; the conclusion of Acts expresses the certainty
that 'God's salvation has been sent to the Gentiles and they will listen' (28.28).
Luke does not advocate a 'replacement theology,' wherein Christianity replaces Judaism or
that the Church is a 'completed Judaism.' Instead, the unfolding mission couples Jewish restoration
with the conversion of Gentiles, called by God's name—but not converts to Judaism (15.16-19
including the quote from Amos 9.11-12); the divine initiative includes both groups. Thus, the
community should not make it difficult for Gentiles, who turn to God (15.28).
Luke reveals his fundamental commitment to the mission of offering salvation to all. In
between Pentecost and the Parousia (or 'the times of regeneration' in 3.20), the Church is Spirit-
empowered for responsible and faithful witness to all. Jesus would 'continue to do and to teach'
(1.1) through the witness of the ever-expanding church.14 Further, it is significant that Luke
concludes his book in open-ended fashion, crowned by God's universal offer of salvation, the
Kingdom of God, and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ (28.28-30). Graham Twelftree notes
that Luke 'expects readers to take up in their lives what has become Paul's story. Though Paul
dies, he lives in their ministry; the end of his mission is the beginning of theirs—to the ends of the
earth (1.8).'15 Through people, the descriptive narrative of Jesus' saving-activity becomes the
prescriptive 'marching-order' for the church of Luke's day. The witness of Jesus is to be constantly
on the move, never satisfied with the status quo of a past era, geographical place or an
exclusionary group.
c) Be committed to unity. During the Council's deliberations, Luke underscores unity, which is

13 Acts 11.18, 22-24; 15.1-29; 18.22; 21.17-25. Charles H. Talbert, Reading Acts (New York: Crossroad, 1997),
136.
14 Luke's summaries (2.42-47; 4.32-37; 5.12-16; 6.7; 12.24; 16.5; 19.20 often stress the numerical growth of added

disciples (3000 in 2.41; "more and more men and women believed" in 5.14; "grew and multiplied" in 12.24). See
Graham H. Twelftree, People of the Spirit: Exploring Luke's View of the Church (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2009), 178.
15Twelftree, 178.
 6

initially expressed through the numerous people involved in the deliberations who come to a
common consensus:
· Apostles and Elders (15.2, 4, 6, 22, 23)
· Apostles (15.33)
· Church (15.3, 4, 22)
· Whole body of members (plh=qov16 15.12, 30)

· Brothers (15.1, 3, 7, 13, 22, 23 twice, 32, 33)

· Men (15. 7, 13, 'leading men' in 22 twice, 25)
· Certain ones (15.1, 2, 5, 24)
· Key individuals by name (Paul and Barnabas-15.2 twice,12, 22, 25, 35);
Peter/Simeon (15.7, 14); James (15.13)
· Prophets (Judas and Silas 15.32)
· Divine persons (God-15.4, 7, 8, 10, 12, 14, 18, 19; Lord Jesus-15.11, 26; Holy
Spirit-15.8, 28)
The numerous 'stake-holders' (both human and divine) affirm a communal search for the will of
God in this particular conflict; the forum demonstrates respect for people holding different values
and opportunity is given for personal expression from all parties.17 It implies a shared willingness
to find common ground. The process uses the leadership structures that were somewhat
formalized by this time, specifically with the repeated mention of the apostles and elders and an
apostolic leader (James). To be sure, within this group, certain individuals 'carry more weight,' but
this does not negate the communal participation and approval of the decision. Although James'
argument and decision are climactic, the entire church is engaged in the decision and its
implementation (15.22).
For Luke, unity is essential for communal life and witness and is well expressed by one of
Luke's favorite terms, 'of one accord' (o(moqumado/n 15.25). The term is found almost exclusively in

Acts18 and is frequently found in Luke's summaries (Acts 1.14; 2.1; 2.46; 4.24; 5.12).19 Another

16 A technical term of religious communities . . . fellowship, community, church. BDAG, 668.

17 However, there are two pejorative statements: 1) Peter's rebuke of the Jewish Christian objectors, "Why do you
challenge God?" in v. 10, 2) the disavowal of the objectors by James, "some went out from us without our
authorization" in v. 24.
 7

related Lukan expression (not found in Acts 15) is 'to be\come together' ('at the same place' e0pi\ to\

au)to/),20 which is also found in Luke's summaries (Acts 1.15; 2.44, 47; 4.26). The terms reflect

Luke's idyllic and idealized portrait of the early Christian communities. Tyson (2008) links these
expressions with the 'internal harmony of the community.' 21 In Acts 15, the expression, 'of one
accord,' means that the decision and its implementation reflect harmony, peace, wholeness and
agreement by all the parties concerned in the conflict. No word of dissension is heard at the time
of the decision or the letter's composition. Delegates from the Jerusalem Council are sent to
Antioch and then return to Jerusalem; this course of action highlights the continuing positive
relationship between the mother-church in Jerusalem and the daughter-church in Antioch. Further,
concord is well expressed by the three-fold use of the verb, 'to think, seem, consider' (doke/w) with a

following infinitive. BDAG translate the impersonal use of the verb by 'it seemed best to . . .':22
v. 22 'it seemed best (e1doce) to the apostles and elders . . . . . to send (pe/myai).'

v. 25 'it seemed best (e1doce) to us . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . to send (pe/myai).'

v. 28 'it seemed best (e1doce) to the Holy Spirit and to us . . . not to lay upon (mh\ e0piti/qesqai).'

Reasoned communication is communal and involves the whole church, its leadership and the Holy
Spirit, which leads to James' decision. The decision does not read 'as a power play by one faction
dictating its will to the rest.'23 Only two imperative verbs are used ('listen to me' a)kou/sate mou 15.13;

'farewell' e1rrwsqe 15.29); therefore, the decision is set within the context of politeness, respect and

fairness.
d) Value the 'stories' of others. Shared experiences play an important role in resolving the conflict.
The shared stories are not incidental or accidental but are vital for Luke's purpose. Stories reveal a
'lived theology.' In the broader Lukan context, the story of Jesus (Luke) is incomplete without the
various stories of individuals, who advance the Christian message (Acts).
Barnabas and Paul's story is initially introduced in Acts 14.27-28, as a precursor for the
Jerusalem Council. The text states that the pair arrived in Antioch and stayed there a long time.

20 Literally, "at one place," BDAG, 288.

21 Tyson, 109.
22 BDAG, 202.
23 James D. G. Dunn, The Acts of the Apostles (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity, 1996), 208.
 8

There are four stories told using identical or similar language:

· In Antioch, upon their arrival, Luke states that they narrated their story to the 'gathered
church' and 'were rehearsing all that God had done through them and how he had opened the
door of faith to the Gentiles' (a0nh/ggellon o#sa e)poi/hsen o( qeo\v met 0 au0tw=n kai\ o#ti h1noicen toi=v e11qnesin

qu/ran pi/stewv) 14.27

· In Phoenicia and Samaria, the pair are 'describing the conversion of the Gentiles (e0dihgou/menoi

th\n e0pistrofh\n tw=n e0qnw=n)'; the report is met with great joy. 15.3

· In Jerusalem, 'they rehearsed everything God had done through them' (a)nh/ggeilan te o#sa o( qeo\v

e)poih/sen met 0 au0tw=n) 15.4

· In Jerusalem, during the deliberations, the pair are 'telling the story about the miraculous
signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them' (e0chgoume/nwn o#sa e0poi/hsen

o( qeo\v shmei=a kai\ te/rata e0n toi=v e1qnesin di ) au0tw=n) v. 12.

All four verses include a verb of telling (a0nagge/llw used twice), the substantive, 'all that' (o#sa) is used

three times, the verb, 'to do' (poie/w) and its subject 'God' are used three times, the prepositional

expression, 'with them' (met 0 au0tw=n) or 'through them' (di ) au0tw=n) is used three times and there is

mention of Gentiles (e!qnh) in three verses.

Luke stresses the happy welcome of the pair in Phoenicia, Samaria and Jerusalem (15.2-4).
Although Peter and James are more prominent in the Council itself, the pair's story provides a steady
support for the inclusion of the Gentiles,24 before and during the Council. The pair's story needs to be
told—not minimized and possesses an implicit power to convince. No propositional or theological
argument is offered for Gentile-inclusion. 'Their position is communicated best by the recountal of
their experience of God's work.'25
The pair's 'story' is not only their story alone, but an interpreted story and part of the
corporate memory of the Council. The narrative recounts 'what God has done through people on
behalf of the Gentiles.' In 11.17, Peter had raised the rhetorical question, 'Who was I to think I could

24 Luke uses Isa. 49.6 in Acts 13.47, to authorize Paul's Gentile-mission, "I have made you a light for the Gentiles,
that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth."
25 Luke Timothy Johnson, Decision-Making in the Church (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983), 80.
 9

oppose God?' Luke's readership must ask the same question: 'Who do we think we are who could
oppose God's patent saving-activity for the Gentiles?' In the shared story, both Jewish and Gentile
persons and groups find their identity, meaning and calling to be Christians together. The shared
memory of the past contains an implicit meaning for both the present deliberations of the Council
and the future opportunity of the community as 'the opened door of faith to the Gentiles' (14.27)
advances in the second portion of the book of Acts.
While the pair's story is general in nature, Peter's story is particular in the Cornelius episode
(Acts 10.1-48) and its retelling in Jerusalem (11.1-17) prior to the Council. In the Council (Acts 15),
this is the third telling of the story in summary form by both Peter and James; Peter's introductory
statement, 'you know' (e)pi/stasqe) affirms that the audience is already familiar with Peter's experience.

Peter's statement, 'some time ago' (lit. 'from the days of old' a0f 0 h(merw=n a)rxai/wn 15.7), refers to the

Cornelius episode (especially 10.44-46; retelling in 11.1-17). What did the Cornelius story convey?
The story highlighted the divine activity for Gentile-inclusion, by orchestrating two complementary
visions, one to Peter and the other to Cornelius, in different places and its climax when the two
persons come together. While Peter's vision was first puzzling to him, he understands the vision's
significance when he encounters Cornelius and his friends. He now knows that he is not to
discriminate (10.28—'I should not call any man impure or unclean'; see 11.9), that 'God does not
show favoritism but accepts men from every nation' (10.34), the Holy Spirit had been poured out
even on the Gentiles (10.45) and that God has cleansed their hearts by faith (15.9)—without
adopting the Jewish way of life, including circumcision. Thus, the story becomes a 'classic
prototype,'26 by which Peter transposes a personal story into a vigorous theological affirmation in a
communal context.
The tellers of the stories imply that this is their own story of God working through them. The
conflict arose in Jerusalem over the issue of table-fellowship with the Jewish Peter and the Gentile
Cornelius, 'You went into the house of uncircumcised men and ate with them' (11.3) and concludes
with the apostles' and brothers' affirmation that God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto
life' ['without circumcision'] (11.18). The personal narratives of Barnabas, Paul and Peter witness to
a united and shared story that contributes to a common affirmation by the entire Council. Three

26 Hans Conzelmann, Acts of the Apostles (tran. James Limburg, Thomas Kraabel, and Donald H. Juel; Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1987), 116.
 10

stories coalesce into one common witness that divine grace, met with human trust is the only means
of salvation for both groups, 'we in just the same way as they' (15.11); it leads to Peter's summative
statement of corporate belief, 'We believe . . .' (15.11).
A sub-text may be inherent in Luke's narrative of Peter's story. Peter had been a reluctant
missionary in his vision. In the vision Peter was strongly 'religious' in his emphatic refusal, 'No way
Lord' (Mhdamw=v ku/rie—10.14; 11.8),27 which may be the reason for why the vision of the sheet

occurred three times (10.16). His prejudicial attitude needed to be overcome and is done so; he
learned and lived a new way of thinking and behaving. Correspondingly, the objectors express
exclusionary attitudes that Peter had once felt. Thus, the objectors who share affinity with Peter's
initial reluctance may be encouraged to overcome their own prejudice as well.
James, the leader of the apostles and brother of Jesus,28 puts his stamp of approval on Peter's
experience with Cornelius and its bearing upon the present decision as well as its future implications
(15.14). Two aorist tenses refer to a particular point in time with respect to the Cornelius-story:
'Simeon rehearsed' (e0chgh/sato) and 'God concerned himself with' (e0peske/yato).29 The adverb, 'first'

(prw=ton) hearkens back to Peter's speech as well ('some time ago' a0f 0 h(merw=n a)rxai/wn 15.7). James'

argument affirms Peter's experience and its clear announcement of the divine purpose of 'taking from
the Gentiles a people for himself' (15.14). In the expression, 'from the Gentiles, a people for his
name' (e0c e)qnw=n lao\n tw=| o)no/mati au0tou=), there is a contrast between the 'Gentiles' and 'a people.'

Hitherto, the Gentiles ('no people') did not constitute God's people by way of race or racial mark.
However, God has done the paradoxical thing in the Cornelius-story, to make 'a people' for his name
(i.e., for himself), from what was regarded as "no-people."30 Thus, James along with Peter confirms
that God's purpose of calling the Gentiles parallels God's calling of the Jews; they belong together.
Peter's story has convinced James of the implications of Peter's precedent.
e) Discern the activity of the Holy Spirit. Luke emphasizes the role of the Holy Spirit in the
deliberations (15.8, 28). In 15.8, Peter compares Cornelius' story and the apostles' experience of the
reception of the Holy Spirit; Pentecost is linked with the Cornelius story and the experience of the

27 "by no means, no, certainly not" stating a negative reaction. BDAG, 517.
28 Acts 1.14; Mk 6.3; Gal 1.19.
29 Also parallel with the aorist, "God chose" (e0cele/cato v. 7)

30 The clearest OT link is Zech. 2.11[2.15 in Heb], "many Gentiles . . . will become my people."
 11

Council:
· "by giving the Holy Spirit to them just as he did to us" (dou\v to\ pneu=ma to\ a#gion kaqw\v kai\

h(mi=n) 15.8

· "the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message" (e)pe/sen to\ pneu=ma to\ a#gion e0pi\

pa/ntav tou\v a0kou/ontav to\ lo/gon) 10.44

· 'that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out had been poured out even on the
Gentiles' (o#ti kai\ e)pi\ ta\ e!qnh h( dwrea\ tou= a(gi/ou pneu/matov e0kke/xutai) 10.45

· 'They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have' (oi#tinev to\ pneu=ma to\ a#gion e!labon w(v

kai\ h(mei=v) 10.47

· 'the Holy Spirit came on them just as he had come on as at the beginning' (e)pe/sen to\

pneu=ma to\ pneu=ma to\ a#gion e)p ) au)tou\v w#sper kai\ e)f 0 h(ma=v e)n a)rxh=|) 11.15

· 'God gave them the same gift as he gave us' (th\n i!shn dwrea\n e!dwken au)toi=v o( qeo\v w(v kai\

h(mi=n) 11.17

Four of the six references draw comparison, 'just as' (kaqw\v, w(v, w#sper), between the experience of

Cornelius and friends with the encounter of the earliest community on the Day of Pentecost, 'All of
them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit was enabling
them' (kai\ e)plh/sqhsan pa/ntav pneu=matov a(giou= kai\ h!rcato lalei=n e(te/raiv glw/ssaiv kaqw\v to\ pneu=ma e0di/dou a)pofqe/ggesqai

au0toi=v 2.4). The experience of Cornelius and his friends' 'speaking in tongues' (10.46) provides a

tangible link with the Day of Pentecost. Luke's readers understand that the brief references in Acts
15 to the coming of the Spirit upon Cornelius and friends (Acts 10-11) are of one piece with the
recipients of the Spirit in Acts 2.1-4. Paul Elbert draws attention to the links between Pauline
expressions concerning the reception of the Spirit and Luke's stories, 'Luke provides the narrative-
rhetorically expected examples and precedents.'31 Dunn notes, 'As elsewhere in Acts, the Spirit is
the central feature in the process of conversion-initiation,'32 understood by Dibelius as a 'regularizing

31 Paul Elbert, "Possible Literary Links Between Luke-Acts and Pauline Letters Regarding Spirit-Language," Ed.
Thomas L. Brodie, Dennis R. MacDonald and Stanley E. Porter, The Intertextuality of the Epistles (Sheffield:
Phoenix, 2006), 241.
32 Dunn, 201.
 12

tradition 'of a good while ago.'33 Previously Peter substantiated his freedom in sharing
table-fellowship with uncircumcised through the shared experience of the Spirit. As a result of the
Spirit's activity, the apostles and brothers had concluded that God was now granting life to the
Gentiles on the basis of faith (11.18).
Luke also forges an implicit link with the Holy Spirit, expressed through Barnabas and Paul's
story of 'signs and wonders' (shmei=a kai\ te/rata 15.12) that are the Spirit's work.34 This favorite Lukan

expression refers to the tangible means by which God witnesses to the Jesus-event and is often found
in Luke's summaries35 and are associated with Luke's idealized community (2.22, 43; 4.16, 22, 30;
5.12; 6.8; 7.36; 8.6, 13; 14.3). In Acts 15, one of the 'signs and wonders' certainly refers to the
coming of the Spirit upon Cornelius and friends. For Luke, the manifest presence of God is itself a
form of preaching; 'signs and wonders' elicit conversion (2.37-42). Just as verbalized preaching
elicits a complex of responses, the same can be said about the preaching value of signs and wonders;
they both attract and repel people, who are either predisposed to reception or rejection of the Jesus-
event. For Luke, the reception of the Spirit is manifest and is recognized by others, who are assured
of their new life and empowered for witness. Luke would have his readership be people of the
Spirit, whose lives are marked by faith, signs and wonders, even as they wrestle with particular
conflicts in their communities.
Luke also says that the Holy Spirit is active in the decision-making process (15.28), 'it
seemed best (e!docen)36 to the Holy Spirit and to us.' Who did it seem best to? In 15.22, it applies to

'the apostles, elders and the entire church,' in 15.25 it is 'to us,' and in 15.28, it refers 'to the Holy
Spirit and to us.' In the first two occurrences, it refers to the selection of certain men to carry the
decision by letter to Antioch; the third use of the verb refers to the decision itself (15.28). By the
similar construction of the three verses, it is reasonable to conclude that the people and their
leadership sensed that the Spirit was at work both in the decision itself and the resolve to send the

33 Martin Dibelius, The Book of Acts (ed. K. C. Hanson; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004), 145.
34 The frequent word "power" (du/namiv) is also linked with "signs and wonders," often in the same context (Acts

2.22; 3.12; 4.7; 4.33; 6.8; 8.13; 10.38; 19.11; "powerful" [du/natov] in 7.22).
35 Through Stephen's speech, "signs and wonders" of the Early Church find their support in Moses (7.36—Exod.

3.12; 4.1-17)
36 See above.
 13

letter through several emissaries. Conzelmann states, 'This verse contains the Lukan concept of
church and Spirit.'37 The text suggests the close engagement of the human and the divine in much the
same way as the commission of Barnabas and Saul, when the Holy Spirit spoke through prophets
and teachers as to the selection of the pair 'for the work which I have called them' (13.2). Through
the entire process, the divine and the human work in tandem. Since the Spirit was active among the
Gentiles (notably in Cornelius) even before an apostle arrives and since the Spirit was at work in
Gentile conversion (Acts 13-14), then the Spirit is also at work in helping the Jerusalem Church and
its leaders to enlarge their ways of thinking, feeling and discerning, 'so they can participate in the
world of God's reign—the world of the Spirit's power—a world, not limited by a particular set of
social, ethnic or religious prescriptions.'38
Readers are not told how the Spirit made its will known; it is interesting that Luke records no
charismatic gifting in the Council's deliberation, e.g., a prophecy or vision, simply the statement that
the Council that is genuinely open to God's will, can generate such an important decision that is
inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Spirit's power is evident in concrete human activities, here in the
context of sharing the stories of others, Scripture, deliberation, debate, compromise, decision-making
and communication. The world of the Spirit is not to be isolated from human thinking, feeling and
acting, especially when there is a commitment to be Christians together.
f) Find direction in the Scriptures. Luke looks to the Scripture as a means by which important
decisions are made.39 The text says that the Scripture agrees (sumfwnou=sin) with the

37 Conzelmann, 120.
38 Lois Malcolm, "Conversion, Conversation and Acts 15," Crux, vol. 22, Number 3 (Summer, 2002), 252.
39 For Luke, the Scriptures reveal that OT prophecies (ca. 40 explicit quotations from the LXX) are fulfilled in Jesus,

the righteous and suffering Servant of Isaiah (Isa. 49.1-6; the eunuch in Acts 8.32-33) and the nascent community
(choice of a replacement apostle in 1.16-20; 2.17-35; 4.26-26; Stephen's speech in Acts 7.2-53) as its mission
expands through its witnesses (13.16-52 with the affirmation of a Gentile mission; leaving the rejecting Jews and
turning to the Gentiles). The numerous quotations express Luke's view of the continued relevance of the Scripture
for the Church, its mission and its human witnesses. Similar to Jesus' Parable of the Wise Householder (Mt. 13.51-
52), Luke provides a continuity with the old and an openness to the new; both parts of revelation constitute the
"treasure." Luke intends that his readership be conversant with the OT word of promise and the new word of
fulfillment found in Jesus and his mission through the Church. The new and the old are inextricably knit together.
The word is old in that it has been hidden since the foundation of the world (Mt. 13.35 = Ps. 78.2); it is new in that
the mystery of the Kingdom of God has been granted to the new community of faith.
 14

narrative/experience of Gentile inclusion (15.15). As Johnson notes, 'He does not say, 'This agrees
with the prophets,' but 'The words of the prophets agree with this.''40 It is quite a reversal, similar to
the way in which the Gentiles' experience of salvation is the gauge by which Jews are measured (v.
11). Current experience finds support in the sacred text. Thereupon, James appeals to the LXX of
Amos 9.11-12 to support the new experience.41 The Hebrew and LXX text of Amos 9.11-12 are at
variance:

Hebrew text of Amos 9.11-12 LXX text in Acts 15.16-18

'In that day, I will restore David's fallen tent. I 'After this, I will return and rebuild David's42 fallen
will repair its broken places, restore its ruins tent. I will rebuild its ruins and I will restore it, so
and build it as it used to be, so that they may that the remnant of men may seek the Lord, and all
possess the remnant of Edom, and all the the Gentiles who bear my name, says the Lord, who
nations that bear my name,' declares the Lord does these things that have been known for ages.'
who will do these things.

The Hebrew text says nothing about Gentile inclusion in the people of God but affirms that
God will restore David's fallen tent, 'so that they may possess the remnant of Edom and all the
nations that bear my name.'43 However, the LXX suggests the inclusion of other people and nations,
the remnant of men may seek the Lord.' The LXX translates 'they may possess' (MT w#ryy) with 'they
40 Johnson, Decision-Making in the Church, 84.
may seek'the(w#rdy)
Perhaps
41
and
opening 'Edom' (Mwd))
expression is drawnwith
from'men' (Md)). and
Jer. 12.15-16 Thethe
similarity of sounds
closing phrase of45.21-23.
from Isa. the two pairs no
42 John Christopher Thomas notes the Lukan concern for
doubt caused the confusion of translation with anDavid
addition
in bothorLuke
transposition of aChristopher
and Acts. John Hebrew radical.
Thomas,
Thus, the LXX text affirms the missionary message of the
"Reading theOT with
Bible fromthe inclusion
within of the Gentiles.
Our Traditions: A
Pentecostal Hermeneutic as Test Case," Between Two
Horizons: Spanning New Testament Studies and Systematic
Theology, (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 2000), 118.
43 Michael A. Braun argues for a Vorglage to James' testimony that was a Hebrew text divergent but superior to the
MT. Michael Braun, "James' Use of Amos at the Jerusalem Council: Steps Toward a Possible Solution to the
Textual and Theological Problems," JETS (1977), 113.
 15

James' argument from the OT is clearly at odds with the Jewish Christian critique of 15.1, 5. On
Luke's use of Amos 9.11-12, Robert Wall suggests, 'Gentile conversion does not annul God's
promise of a restored and redeemed Israel, but rather expands it; nor does faith (rather than Torah
observance) as the condition of Gentile conversion contradict God's plan of salvation, but rather
confirms it. The second half of Acts provides a narrative that supports and explains this theological
consensus reached at Jerusalem.'44
The Spirit is at work in Luke's reinterpretation of the Amos text. 'Once again, we cannot fail
to be impressed by the extent of his sources and his ability to make effective use of his scriptural
material.'45 As Thomas states, 'It appears that the experience of the Spirit in the community helped
the church make its way through the hermeneutical maze.'46 Thus James' appeal to an OT precedent
clearly 'trumps' the Jewish-Christian precedent.
Luke's use of the OT is positioned within a context of Christian experience, the believing
community, stories and the interpreting Spirit. The personal and communal experience of the early
Christians with Jesus, coupled with the interpreting person of the Holy Spirit, gave them the clue to
understanding and interpreting the Old Testament in a community context. 'This approach does
make room for illumination in the Spirit's work, but it includes a far greater role for the work of the
Spirit in the community as the context for interpretation, offering guidance in the community's
dialogue about the Scripture.'47 The use of Scripture is also noted in 15.21, 'For Moses has been read
in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.' Mention of the
Scripture, including Amos and Moses, here paves the way for the decisive prescription that follows
(15.19-21).
g) Be sensitive to the need for compromise in making decisions. The communal search for the will
of God leads to a consensus with a sensitive compromise so that Christian Jews and Gentile
Christians can live as Christians together. If the community fails to make a decision or makes a

44 Robert Wall, "Israel and the Gentile Mission in Acts and Paul,", Witness to the Gospel: The Theology of Acts (ed.
I. Howard Marshall and David Peterson; Grand Rapids: Wmm. B. Eerdmans, 1994), 449-450.
45 Anthony Tyrell Hanson, The Living Utterances of God: The New Testament Exegesis of the Old, (London:
Darton, Longman and Todd, 1983), 87.
46Thomas, 118.
47 Thomas, 119. See also F. L. Arrington, "Hermeneutics," Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements

(ed. Stanley M. Burgess and Gary McGee; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988), 387-388.
 16

decision without compromise, the consequences would surely be negative. Indecision would lead to
confusion and divisiveness; if there is no compromise, the backlash from the Jewish Christians
might be substantial. If there is a casual or offhanded dismissal of the problem, then the failure to
deal with the issue might well lead to increased tension, demoralization or a festering hostility.
James' speech begins with the logical result, 'therefore' (dio/), that refers to the preceding

discussion and is followed by his statement, 'It is my opinion/judgment' (e)gw\ kri/nw 15.19). The

experience of Christian Jews and Gentile Christians is finally what matters most. Both groups must
give and take so as to create a consensus that will mean a 'win-win' decision for both groups; the
voice of each group has been heard and respected. Consensus is highlighted in 15.25, 'So we all
agreed . . .' (e1docen h(mi=n). The final decision does not come by way of advice or suggestion; the

decision stands good since it is authorized by the Jerusalem Council (leaders and church). The
decision is made from the Jewish perspective as to: 1) how Jewish Christians are to celebrate Gentile
inclusion based on divine grace and Gentile faith, 2) how Christian Jews are not to harass Gentiles
(3rd person in 15.19) and how the Jews are not to burden 'you' [Gentiles] (2nd person in
15.28—Gentiles in Antioch) with anything more than a few essentials. The Gentiles are to be
sensitive to Jewish sensibilities. Since there are at least three versions48 of the decision, discussions
abound as to the exact minimal restrictions that the Gentiles must concede and their nature, ritual,
moral or a combination of both:
Acts 15.20 (discussion) Acts 15.29 (letter) Acts 21.25 (later narrative)
Pollution of idols Idols Idols
Sexual immorality Blood Blood
Strangling of animals Strangling of animals Strangling of animals
Blood Sexual immorality Sexual immorality
Charles Savelle, along with others, provides extended discussion for each of these terms.49 It

48 Textual traditions offer varied forms of this four-fold list. The Western text ethicizes the items (idolatry, sexual
immorality, bloodshed and the negative form of the Golden Rule, "and not to do to others whatever they do not wish
to be done to themselves"), while the uncials B and ) combine both the ritual and ethical (food sacrificed to idols,

sexual immorality, meat of strangled animals, eating blood—no mention of the Golden Rule).
49 Charles H. Savelle, "A Reexamination of the Prohibitions in Acts 15," Bibliotheca Sacra 161 (October-December

2004), 449-68. Marcel Simon, "The Apostolic Decree and its Setting in the Ancient Church," BJRL, no. 52 (1969),
437-460.
 17

is unlikely that Luke would have concerned himself with minute distinctions between ritual and
moral stipulations. Suffice it to say that the items on the list are practices that would have been
abhorrent to Jewish Christians, meat that had been offered to idols (pagan worship), sexual
immorality (obvious) and the eating of meat of animals that had been strangled, since the blood was
still in the meat. Since blood was associated with life, it was reserved for God alone (Lev. 17.10-
12). This concession represents the will of the Spirit and these stipulations are not overly
burdensome for the Gentiles (15.28). Even though the restrictions are labeled as 'essentials,' they are
not 'essential for the salvation of the Gentiles' (15.11); they are 'essential' for table-fellowship
between Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles. Dunn calls them 'minimum terms for mutual
recognition and association . . . rules of association.'50
The Council tries to make things uncomplicated for the Gentiles (15.19, 28). Christian Jews
are to accept Gentile salvation without circumcision and the Jewish way of life, while the Gentiles
concede to restrict their behavior that would be offensive to Jewish Christians An inclusive
community will lead to a common table. Indeed, the initial accusation from 'apostles and brothers' to
Peter, was directed to Peter's table-fellowship with uncircumcised Gentiles (Acts 11.3). Later, the
Council's decree concludes with the statement, 'If you keep yourselves free from such things, you
will do well' (15.29). The statement suggests that Gentile sensitivity to Jewish sensibilities is in
concert with the will of the Holy Spirit and would be relationally beneficial for both groups. Talbert
observes, 'although Gentiles are free from the Law in the sense of ethnic markers like circumcision,
they are expected to refrain from selected things required of resident aliens in Leviticus 17.'51 Craig
Blomberg notes that the four abstentions are of an ad hoc nature52 and is supported by Weiser's
understanding of them as 'a cultural phenomenon.'53 Such sensitivity to Jewish concerns
(compromises) is also borne out by Luke's later narrative of Paul: Paul circumcises Timothy (16.3),
Paul takes a Jewish vow (18.18), continues to quote the Law (23.5) and shares in the purification of
a group of Jewish men (21.23-26). He remains a faithful Jew, keeps the Law and does not dissuade
other fellow-Jews from keeping the Law.

50 Dunn, 204.
51 Talbert, 142.
52 Craig Blomberg, "The Christian and the Law of Moses," Witness to the Gospel (ed. I Howard Marshall, David

Peterson; Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1998), 409.

53 Artur Weiser, "Das 'Apostelkonzil,'" BZ, 28 (1984), 161,
 18

h) Practice clear communication of decisions (letter and supporting emissaries). The language of
the letter is reciprocal and collegial. It is noteworthy that Barnabas, Paul, Judas and Silas (both
prophets) were not entrusted with the oral report of the decision alone. Although Barnabas and Paul
(with others) were sent from Antioch to Jerusalem with the question, they are not the sole bearers of
the decision. The decision is formalized into a letter from the Jerusalem Council to the Antiochene
church; the four men serve a supportive role in communicating Jerusalem's authoritative decision.
The letter's bearers could no doubt complement the contents or answer possible questions from the
readers. The worth of the four is stated; Barnabas and Saul are worthy, for they have risked their
lives for the name of the Lord, while Judas and Silas are identified as leading men (15.22, 25-27)
and prophets (15.32). They will verbally confirm what the letter says, (lit. 'through a word
announcing the same things' dia\ lo/gou a)pagge/llontav ta\ au)ta/). Perhaps the Jerusalem Council thinks that

since the Antiochene Church would already know where Barnabas and Paul stood on the issue, a
verbal report alone would be clearly biased in nature.

Advance of the Gospel

Taken together, the numerous dynamics lead to a warm reception and happy advance of the gospel,
noted in 15.30-35 and 16.1-5, especially highlighted in Luke's summary (16.5). Luke notes that the
community (plh=qov 15.30) rejoiced for the encouragement (e)xa/rhsan e)pi\ th=| paraklh/sei 15.31), brought

both by the letter and the accompanying prophets who 'said much to encourage'54 and 'strengthen the
55
brothers' (dia\ lo/gou pollou= pareka/lhsen tou\v a)delfou\v kai\ e)pesth/rican 15.32). Doubtlessly, the community is

relieved that their identity and practice are confirmed both by the letter and its emissaries. Gentiles
are glad to make accommodation to Jewish Christians so that they might live together without
tension. In addition, the community is also at peace since they send the two prophets back to
Jerusalem 'with peace' (met 0 ei0rh/nhv 15.33). While the prophets report back to the Jerusalem

community, Paul and Barnabas, with many others remain in Antioch, 'teaching and preaching the
word of the Lord' (dida/skontev kai\ eu0aggelizo/menoi . . . to\n lo/gon tou= kuri/ou 15.35) for a significant period of

54 While Barrett translates the noun, para/klhsiv as "comfort" and the verb, parakalei=n as "to encourage," the close

proximity of the terms would suggest a similar meaning, "encouragement" and "to encourage." C. K. Barrett, Acts
(ICC) Vol. II (London: T & T Clark, 2002), 748. Surely "encouragement" is part of prophetic gifting (1 Cor. 14.3)
55 Same word family in 15.41 and 16.5 noting the "strengthening" of the churches.
 19

time. No doubt, this extended time provided opportunities for further dialogue, input, reflection and
questions.
Even though Paul and Barnabas experience a painful separation, there is still an advance of
the gospel. Barnabas and Mark go to Cyprus, while Paul and Silas travel to Syria and Cilicia,
'strengthening' (e)pisthri/zwn cf. the same verb in 15.32 of Judas and Silas56) the churches (15.41). Paul

then retraces his steps on his first missionary journey—in Derbe and Lystra (16.1-5) before the more
extensive journeys unfold into Europe. Talbert notes, 'Nothing can stop the gospel, not even
divisions among missionaries.'57 Two items stand out: 1) Paul's circumcision of Timothy, 2) Paul's
delivery of the Council's decisions. From Luke's perspective, Paul's circumcision of the half-Jew
Timothy would serve to negate the later charge leveled against Paul in Jerusalem, 'you teach all the
Jews . . . to turn away from Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or live according to
our customs' (21.21). This is supported by the fact that in the same paragraph (21.20-25), the
Jerusalem compromise is mentioned (21.25).
In 16.4, Paul delivers the decisions from the Jerusalem Council, 'they delivered the decisions
reached by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem for the people to obey' (v. 4). The word 'decisions'
(do/gmata) belongs to the same word family as the repeated verb, 'it seemed best to' (dokei=n) of 15.22,

25, 28 and clearly relates to necessary behavior growing out of the Jerusalem Council. Originally,
the extent of the Council's decision involved Antioch, Syria and Celicia (15.23), but now the
decision extends beyond these places.
Luke makes another summary statement in 16.5, which highlights the advance of the word of
God as a result of the Jerusalem Council, 'So the churches were strengthened in the faith and grew
daily in numbers.' The imperfect verbs 'continued to be strengthened' (e)sterou=nto) and 'continued to

grow' (e)peri/sseuon) affirm the ongoing growth in the community's inner life and numerical growth.

Implications
Although Luke does not definitively voice his opinion or speak in his own name, he does
provide an instructive episode of the Jerusalem Council for the benefit of his readers. It is a

56 Luke does not seem to be aware of the apparent discrepancy of Silas' return to Jerusalem (15.33) and his travel
with Paul congruent with Paul's choice of Silas (v. 40).
57Talbert, 145.
 20

theological narrative that says much about the joint involvement of the divine and the human, as
the community of faith seeks to discern God's will in changing circumstances. He provides
numerous dynamics that are vital for the process of resolving conflicts: acknowledgement of the
divine initiative, celebration of the inclusionary saving-activity of God, commitment to unity, the
important role of peoples' stories, discernment of the Holy Spirit's activities, direction in
Scripture, decision and compromise and clear communication of decisions. These dynamics are
important considerations as the Spirit-filled Church makes its witness in an ever changing
landscape. Since the various 'case-studies' in Acts arise from different issues, it is difficult to
conclude that Luke has in mind any one conflict that he sees looming on the horizon.
As the Early Church resolves its various conflicts, Luke intends that his readership be
aware of how the Holy Spirit works. The Spirit is to be found in unity, salvation, precedents,
stories, attitudes of inclusion, reasoned discussion, leadership, Scripture, decisions,
compromises, clear communication and peace.
The Jerusalem Council represents a great moment in Salvation History. In the search for
Gentile identity, the Jewish community rediscovers and redefines its own identity.58 Luke shifts
from the threats or costs to both groups to the benefits for all Christian groups. Perhaps Luke
might say to the Church, 'When conflicts arise, do not avoid them, but welcome them and take
them seriously. Be dependent upon the person and work of the Holy Spirit and look to the
positive potential of resolving conflicts by which the Christian witness will advance through the
inner and numerical growth of the Christian community.' Through the story, Luke invites his
readers to experience and feel the various points of tension, to see how the conflict was managed
and indeed, advanced the Christian message—to be changed and then return to their own
communities with this instructive paradigm. He helps the community to live and relive the
event and its nuances and thereby, adopt and embrace his point of view in changing thoughts,
attitudes and behavior as to how the Church ought to discern the will of God as it encounters
fresh challenges.

58Michael Enyinwa Okoronkwo, The Jerusalem Compromise as a Conflict-Resolution Model(A Rehetoric-

Communicative Analysis of Acts 15 in the Light of Modern Linguistics (Bonn: Borengässer, 2001), 279.
1

An Inclusive Olive-Tree

(Rom 11.11-24)

Abstract.

This article explores the issue of Christian and Jewish joint engagement in the course of

Salvation-History. Through the use of ten conditional sentences, expressed through a

three-staged scheme, Paul stresses the eschatological consummation, which is yet to

come. The solid hope for the future is expressed as unimaginable riches, life from the

dead, and a solid guarantee of final restoration of both religious communities. Through

the agrarian image of the olive-tree, Paul develops an allegory of Salvation-History that is

even "contrary to nature" (Rom 11.24) in a most comprehensive manner; it includes the

past, present and future of the people of God (Jew and Gentile).

Key Words: Olive-tree, Rom 11.11-24, Gentile, Jew, Inclusion, Salvation-History

Introduction

Paul makes special use of the agrarian image of the olive-tree in a highly

developed allegory. 1 The olive-tree imagery develops salvation history in a unique and

comprehensive manner, emphasizing the Gentile mission to which Paul is committed. It

will be argued that Paul provides a new understanding of God’s plan for the Jew

(cultivated olive-tree) and Gentile (engrafted wild olive-branches) that points to the

grand eschatological consummation.

1 Although the specific genre is variously identified, the point-by-point nature of the argument suggests

"allegory" as the best term. Robert Jewett, Romans (M inneapolis: Fortress, 2007) 669.
2

Recent scholarship suggests that Paul uses the persuasive language of the diatribe

throughout his letters, most notably in Romans. 2 Since Paul is not personally known by

the Roman Christians, he speaks in an indirect and rhetorical manner to allay possible

fears, misunderstandings or misgivings. Paul does not directly accuse Roman Gentile

believers for religious bigotry but uses the imaginary opponent to make his point about

possible wrong attitudes towards the Jews. He expresses great passion regarding the

issue of Jewish and Gentile incorporation into the same people of God and presses his

readers to sense the eschatological and corporate fulfillment that is yet in store for the

inclusive people of God. Tobin‘s suggestion that Paul develops his argument in three

stages, will be argued for in this article. 3

The paper gives special attention to the broad structure of the passage noted by

the following diagram: (insert chart here).

The chart lays out salvation-history in three interdependent stages. In the threefold

scheme, Paul builds the force of his argument through ten conditional sentences, which

carry each element of the argument further. The interpretive comments will successively

look at each ―slice‖ of the chart, keeping in mind the way that each ―slice‖ contributes to

the argument of the whole—expressed through the various developments in the three

2 Thomas H. Tobin, SJ, Paul's Rhetoric in its Context (Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendricksen, 2004).

Stanley Kent Stowers, A Rereading of Romans: Justice, Jews, and Gentiles (New Haven: Yale, 1994).

Tobin notes some of the features of the diatribe. rhetorical questions, apostrophes (addresses to imaginary

interlocutors), refutations of objections, comparative speech, examples. e.g., "O Man" a)/nqrwpe "What

then ?" ti/ ou} n, "May it never be" mh\ ge/noito 3.

3 Tobin, 101-2.
3

stages. We have not found anything similar in early and recent scholarship. Scholarly

works on this text often fail to keep the broad structure in mind in their discussion of the

individual verses.

Paul preaches no "replacement theology" in which the Church replaces Judaism,

to the effect that God has "had it" with the Jews. Instead, Paul portrays the goal of

salvation history, and in doing so, delineates three organic stages of God's interaction

with humanity (Jews and Gentiles).

"This age" "The age to come"

The First Stage The Second Stage The Third Stage

God's choice of Israel and God's choice of the Eschatological fulfillment

her subsequent history  Gentiles  for the people of God, Jew

and Gentile

The unbelief of some of the old people of God in the first stage continues in the

second stage as a partial hardening (pw/rwsiv a0p o\ me/rouv —11.25, "some broken off,"

"hardening has come upon part of Israel"—not the whole ), which will be removed when

"the fullness of the Gentiles has come in" (11.25), at the "age to come" when there will be

eschatological fulfillment for the people of God (Jew and Gentile). 4 In the second stage,

4 )/ a)/xrij ou{ to\ plh/rwma tw=n e)qnw=n ei)se/lqh| . This exp ression parallels Luke 21.24,

--"and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gent iles until the times (a)/ xri ou{ . . . kairoi\) o f the

Gentiles be fu lfilled." Müller finds parallels for this structure in the OT and inter-testamental literature, and

calls attention to the way in which one stage will close and the other begin . Zech 12.3 (LXX); Dn 9.27

(LXX)--the handing over to the Gentiles is limited by a)/xri ou| . Test of Zeb 97-9 Test of Ben 10.8-9; 4
4

the believing people of God live in continuity with OT Israel and the final goal of

eschatological fulfillment embraces believing Jews and Gentiles.

Paul uses salvation history to encourage a Gentile faith-response to God that

includes Gentile attitudes of humility, dependence and appreciation for the Jews and their

rich heritage. Therefore, the unfolding instruction is based upon the meaning and

involvement of both Jew and Gentile within Salvation-History. God‘s purpose is

inclusive. ―From the trunk of the holy tree of the OT Israel, some branches had been

broken off; and the Gentiles, shoots of a wild, alien tree, have been grafted into the trunk

of the holy tree. But this makes it perfectly clear that the Church of Jesus Christ lives

from the root and trunk of OT Israel.‖5

In the diatribe, the primary audience for the allegory is the Gentile constituency of

the Roman Church. The Jews and Gentiles are treated in vss. 11-12 in the third person.

However, in v. 13, the real purpose of this third-person address comes to light with the

second person, ―But I am speaking to you who are Gentiles.‖ Through the allegory, the

persons addressed are spoken to in the second person, usually in the singular (collective).

While the Jewish example and future hope is repeated at several points through the

conversation, they are always referred to in the third person. Further, we find the

personal pronoun ―you‖ (su//u(mi=n ) in vss. 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24. Even the verbs

are all found in the second person singular:

―you became‖— e0ge/nou (v. 17)

Ezra 523 9.26-10.58; Wis 48.10. Christian Müller, Gottes Gerechtigkeit und Gottes Volk (Gottingen.

Vandenoeck und Ruprecht, 1964) 42.

5 H. J. Kraus, The People of God in the OT (New Yo rk: Associated, 1958) 87-89.
5

―do not be arrogant‖— mh\ katakauxw= (v. 18)

―if you are arrogant‖— ei0 katakauxh=sai (v. 18)

―you who supports‖— basta/zeiv (v. 18)

―you will say‖— e)rei=v (v. 19).

Since Paul is the apostle to the Gentiles by divine mandate, he is vitally concerned

with Gentile believers that they not misread the meaning of God‘s dealings with Israel.

Since God is not finished with Israel, Gentile attitudes are to reflect God‘s inclusive

concern and activity. At the same time, he is certain that Jews will be motivated by

jealousy and subsequent faith as they observe the all-encompassing purpose of God.

Thus, we find that there is only one Israel into which the Gentile believers are

now engrafted. One people is grafted into another—while that other is not now "one,"

for some branches were broken off. "Paul's exclamation, 'I too am an Israelite' (Rom

11.11) reveals how firmly he holds to the fact that the Christian ecclesia is the continuing

body of OT Israel." 6

Structural Analysis

The structure of the argument in the allegory is expressed through ten conditional

sentences in a diatribe (11.12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24), composed of both

protasis and apodosis. Most of the conditional sentences are of the type in which both

halves are regarded as true (true-condition). Another important feature of several

6 Earl Ellis, Paul's Use o f the OT (London: Oliver and Boyd, 1957) 137.
6

conditional sentences expresses the minor- major 7 (po\sw| ma=llon) and major- minor

conditional sentences. Paul uses the conditional sentences to express his certainty of

eschatological fulfillment for the people of God (Jew and Gentile). There are a few

verses (11.11, 13, 19, 20) which do not follow the conditional sentence format, but can be

regarded as supplementary parallel concepts. At each point of the argument, Paul builds

the next logical step, and in so doing, he outlines three stages: 1) God‘s choice of Israel

and her subsequent history, 2) God‘s choice of the Gentiles and 3) eschatological

fulfillment for the people of God, which includes the restoration of Israel, all within the

broader context of the Jewish two ages. The Interpretive Comments will detail the

specific argument and analyze each distinct statement of the allegory as it bears upon the

broad structure of the whole.

Inte rpretive Comments

1. Israel's stumbling is not irrevocable ruin (v. 11a).

First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

11
So I ask, have they

stumbled so as to fall? By

no means!

7 In Rabbinic studies, the terms "light" and "heavy" (qal wāḥômer) are used for this type of argument (see

how the second statement is more significant than the other (2 Co r 3.7-11).
7

Verse 11 introduces the issue of Israel‘s stumbling. The negative, "not" (mh/) with

the question, leads to the translation, "they did not stumble so as to fall, did they?"

evoking the clarion answer, "By no means!" The combination of the rhetorical questions

with no or not and the strong answer, By no means! makes it clear that stumbling is not

the final word; it does not indicate a "falling" or "irrevocable ruin," from which there is

no recovery. 8 "The deepest ground of this ‫( חלילה‬by no means) springs from Paul's

Jewish faith in the faithfulness of God, who cannot revoke covenant, law and election."9

Paul‘s thought develops in the following verses, illustrating the positive note of hope that.

a) Israel's rejection is not complete and final, b) Israel's present rejection results in the

conversion of the Gentiles.

2. The result of Israel's stumbling has been salvation for the Gentiles, which in turn, will

provoke the Jews to jealousy (v. 11b).

First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

11
But through their salvation has come to the so as to make Israel jealous.

stumbling  Gentiles, 

8 Hermann Ridderbos, Paul. An Outline of His Theology (Grand Rapids: W m. B. Eerd mans, 1975) 357.

9 H. J. Schoeps, Paul (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961) 241-2.

8

In v. 11b, Paul highlights the positive benefit 10 of this stumbling for the

Gentiles—now blessed with salvation, and the indirect positive result for the Jews, who

will be motivated by jealousy to make a faith-response. The reference to Rom 10.19

(LXX-Deut 32.21) is clear; just as Israel stirred God to jealousy by what is no god,

(idolatry), so God would provoke Israel to jealousy by what is no people, meaning the

Gentiles. Jealousy has a salvific purpose, which Paul envisions in the third stage,

subsequent to the fullness of the Gentiles (v. 25).

3. The assured riches for the Gentiles in Israel's restoration are predicated upon the

riches to the Gentiles (v. 12).

First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

12
Now if their stumbling riches for the world, how much more will (be

means   the riches accompanying)

and if their defeat means  riches for Gentiles,  their full inclusion!

This, the first of the true, conditional sentences (minor-major), embraces all three

stages and underscores the message of v. 11—the positive results from a negative failure.

10 The conjunction, " but" (a)lla/), has a strong adversative force, contrasting Jewish stumbling with

beneficent results.
9

The riches in the third stage will be immeasurably greater than the present riches

for the Gentiles in the second stage, conditional upon Israel's positive response. These

riches, which will accrue to the Gentiles, are "an abundance of benefits."11

In view of the fact that the remnant (lei= mma—v. 5) and the rest (loipoi/v— v. 7)

were mentioned earlier, the term full inclusion (plh/rwma—also v. 25) means the filling

up of this remnant as a whole from all of those who have come to faith.

4. Paul applies himself directly to the Gentiles and indirectly to the Jews, and desires for

the Gentile constituency to feel the same burden for the Jews (vss. 13-14).

First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

13
...I am an apostle to the  (so as to make Israel

Gentiles, jealous). (v. 11b)

I glorify my ministry
14
in order to make my own

people jealous, and thus

save some of them.

The Gentiles must not misinterpret Paul's role as an apostle to the Gentiles.

"Contrary to what you may be inclined to think. . .[Paul's]…labors as an apostle of the

Gentiles have an Israel-ward significance—of good for Israel." 12

11 BA GD, 217.
10

Paul longs for his own flesh 13 (sa/rc), his brethren and kinsmen. This

commitment reflects Paul's bond of identity with his people, 14 and his hope that Gentiles

will recognize the same line of continuity with Israel. They are dependent upon Israel

despite the unbelief of many Jews; "God grants no mercy to Israel without the

Gentiles…neither does he do so to the Gentiles without Israel." 15

Paul's direct ministry to the Gentiles is an indirect ministry to the Jews—

provoking them to jealousy (11:11). The eschatological thought of the restoration of

Israel, prompted by jealousy, is a driving force in his ministry.

5. The assurance of the end, acceptance = life from the dead, are predicated upon the

reconciliation of the Gentiles (v. 15).

First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

12 C.E.B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh: T & T

Clark, 1979) 559. See Sanday and Headlam, 323 for a lengthy discussion. William Sanday, Arthur

Headlam, The Epistle to the Romans (Ed inburgh: T & T Clark, 1977, reprint 1926) 323.

13 Ro m 9.3 ―For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off fro m Christ for the sake of my own

people, my kindred according to the flesh.‖

14 See the corresponding use of sa/rc for kindred in Ro m 9.3 and the LXX of Gen 37.27; Lev 18;6; 25.49;

Judg 9.2., T.W. Manson, ed. by Matthew Black Peake's Commentary on the Bible (London: Thomas

Nelson, 1962; reprinted in 1976), 949. For a critique of Wheeler Robinson's "corporate personality," see J.

W. Rogerson, "Corporate Personality" The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. by David Noel Freed man, 1 (New

Yo rk: Doubleday, 1992) 1156-57.

15 Ridderbos, 360.
11

15
For if their rejection  is the reconciliation of the what will their acceptance

world,  be but life from the dead!

This minor-major form verse, builds toward the climax, depicting the happy state

of Israel‘s acceptance as life from the dead. Paul's argument demands a climax of far

greater importance than the reconciliation of the world. 16 The meaning of life from the

dead is found in the last act of salvation history, the Parousia, wherein resurrection- life

will prevail, "the universe must wait for its final destiny of blessedness until Israel has

been brought to God. " 17

God intertwined the histories of the Jews and the Gentiles making their

consummation interdependent. Israel's rejection is linked to the reconciliation of the

world, and her acceptance will be the harbinger of the final consummation."18

6. Israel's restoration is guaranteed in spite of Jewish unbelief (v. 16).

16 See the references in Judais m in wh ich the idea of the Resurrection is connected with the inauguration of

the Messianic Age. Jub 23.29; Enoch 51.1. Others cited by W.D. Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism

(London: S.P.C.K., 1948) 293-323 and Ulrich Lu z, Das Geschichtverständnis des Paulus (München:

Kaiser, 1968), 393.

17 Dodd, The Epistle 128.

18 Jewett, "global reconciliat ion," 681. Anders Nygren, Commentary on Ro mans, (Ph iladelphia:

Muhlenberg, 1949) 397. See David Michael Stanley, Christ's Resurrection in Pauline Soteriology (Romae:

E. Pontifico's Istituto Bib lico, 1961) 197. Diter Zeller, Juden und Heiden in der Mission des Paulus,

Hoffman follows Michel in his estimat ion of this term "life fro m the dead" as a popular tradition. Paul

Hoffman, Die Toten in Christus (Münster: Aschendorff, 196) 184.

12

First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

16
If the part of the dough then the whole batch is A guarantee of final

offered as first fruits is holy;  restoration in spite of

holy, Jewish unbelief in First and

and if the root is holy,  then the branches also are Second Stages

holy. 

Verse 16 reveals a three-fold purpose: 1) confirmation of Israel's acceptance in the

third stage, 2) rationale for Israel's acceptance, 3) preparation for the olive-tree metaphor

with the mentioned metaphor of the root and branches. 

The holiness, which the dough /first- fruit and root possess, is transferred to the

whole batch and branches respectively. The root, in which the Gentile believers have had

a share, is the rich root of the cultivated olive-tree (Jews) (v. 17). This dependent

relationship is the rationale for the enjoinder for Gentile humility for the Jewish root

supports them, who are externally engrafted wild olive-branches (v. 18).

The point of comparison in both metaphors is the quality of transferred holiness.

The dough/firstfruit and root are consecrated to God in their entirety, which will

guarantee a holy batch and holy branches. The holiness of the dough/first- fruit and root

denotes a choice (kata\ de\ th\n e0klogh\n —v. 28), through which holiness was conferred

19 So me scholars (C. H. Dodd, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1938)

173, Sanday & Headlam, 326) separate this verse fro m vss. 17-24.
13

upon the fathers and is then transferred to Israel. The equation of the root with the

patriarchs, particularly Abraham, can be found within Judaism. 20

Some branches were broken off (v. 17), yet these same branches are holy; since

God planted a holy root, the branches then are necessarily holy. Drawing upon the

Semitic concept of solidarity, 21 Paul makes it clear that the character of the root or

dough/firstfruit carries over into the tree‘s branches and the full batch of dough; it will

mean an outgrowth of that which was latent in the root or dough/first- fruit.

7. Through an "unnatural" process, the Gentiles share a rich legacy with the Jews and

are to feel a dependence upon God and the Jews (v. 17)

First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

20 "The pious of the Lord shall live by it forever. The paradise of the Lord, the trees of life, are His pious

ones. Their planting is rooted forever; They shall not be plucked up all the days of heaven." Ps of Sol

14.3; "And he (Abraham) b lessed his Creator who had created him in his generation, for He had created

him according to His good pleasure; for He knew and pereceived fro m him would arise the plant of

righteousness for the eternal generations and from him a holy seed, so that it should become like Him who

made all things." Jub 16.26; See also Jub 21.24; Eth Enoch 10.16; 93.10--Israel is the race of the elect root

(Eth Enoch 93.5,8), cited by Christian Maurer, "r(i/za" TDNT, VI 987. Maurer also cites several

references in Rabbinic literature wh ich equate the fathers (Abraham) with this root.

21 A.R. Johnson, The One and the Many in the Israelite Conception of God (Card iff: Un iv. of Wales, 1942).

See Herbert Gale, The Use of Analogy in the Letters of Paul (Ph iladelphia: Westminster, 1969) 207, "Israel

is thought of, not as a series of individuals each with his own personal responsibility to God, but as a solid

whole."
14

17
But if some of the and you, a wild olive shoot,

branches were broken off, were grafted in their place

to share the rich root of the

olive tree,

The negative "cutting off" is replaced by the positive "engrafting" with the second

action dependent upon the first. This horticultural grafting procedure Paul describes is

contrary to nature (para/ fu/sin e)n ekentri/sqhj –v. 24); in horticultural practice, one

grafts cultivated-slips onto wild trees, not wild slips onto cultivated olive-trees. We

should allow the absurdity of this process to be the strength of Paul's point. "Paul

describes God's dealings in salvation history by means of a metaphor as strange as the

reality it represents."22 He is asserting something miraculous. 23

The olive-tree (v. 17) suggests that the people of God are one and the same

throughout the successive stages. It is true that branches may be cut off, due to unbelief,

and other branches may be grafted onto the trunk, but these operations take place on the

same tree. The new Israel of the Church is thus the continuation of the original Israel and

engrafted Gentile believers share (―fellow participants‖ sugkoinwno/j ) in the same rich

legacy that Israel has received (9.1-5).

22 Johannes Munck, Christ and Israel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967) 129.

23 Co mpare to John the Baptist‘s pun about God's ability to raise up fro m stones (eben), children (ben) to

Abraham (Matt 3.9).

15

8. Instead of becoming proud, the Gentiles are to remind themselves of their dependence

upon the legacy of the Jews (v. 18).

First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

18
do not boast over the

branches.

If you do boast, remember

that it is not you that

support the root, but the

root that supports you.

Verse 18 concerns the Gentile attitude of humility toward Jews. Three

imperatives reveal Paul‘s thought and intensity ("do not brag" v. 18; "do not be

conceited" v. 20; "fear" v. 20) to forbid that which the Gentiles are already doing. 24

Either Paul is speaking from his own missionary activity or had learned from others of

some exclusionary Gentile attitudes in the churches.

The Gentile believers are entirely dependent upon the holy root which supports,

nourishes and sustains them. "Paul's symbolism is doubly deliberate. It suggests not

only his high estimate of Israel, but also his low estimate of the spiritual attainments of

the Gentiles."25 They have nothing to bring to the salvation event, but everything to gain.

24 Present imperatives that are negated express the stopping of something already in process.

25 William Davies, "Ro mans 11.13-24. A Suggestion" Paganisme, Judaïsme, Christianisme. (Paris: E. de

Boccard, 1978) 134.

16

Paul expresses the sober reminder to a Gentile audience. "You owe all you are and have

to the race that you despise."26

Gentile arrogance is a roadblock that hinders Israel's necessary jealousy.

Berkouwer noted, ―We cannot overestimate the extent to which contempt for the Jews—

even in the Church—has broken down—and hindered this ‗jealousy,‘ and closed off the

way that Paul saw opened.‖27

9. The same temptation of complacency and unbelief to which Israel succumbed

constitutes a grave danger for the Gentiles. Faith, coupled with fear is the only criterion

for Jew and Gentile alike (vss. 19-20).

First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

19
You will say, "Branches

were broken off 

20
That is true. They were

broken off because of their

unbelief, 

26 Danell has succintly summarized this attitude of pride, a persistent theme in the OT and NT, wh ich marks

the conclusion of successive stages in the history of the people of God. G.A. Danell, "The Ide a of God's

People in the Bible" The Root of the Vine, ed. by Anton Fridrichsen (Westminster: Dacre, 1953) 23-36.

27 G.C. Berkouwer, The Return of Christ (Grand Rapids: W m. B. Eerd mans, 1963) 357.
17

Some Gentiles stated that unbelieving Jews had been cut off to make room for the

Gentiles. Paul answers their statement with concession, i.e., "in a way that is true"

(kalw=j), "but taken in isolation it is a dangerous half-truth." 28 Israel had fallen into

unbelief by trusting in her own advantages and privileged position—she was not able to

maintain her ongoing dependence on the grace of God. This same temptation confronts

the Gentile. As Nygren says, ―The Jew says, ‗I belong to God's own people.‘ He puts his

confidence in . . . the promises to the fathers. In his complacency he refuses faith . . . in a

similar manner, the Christian is tempted to say, ‗I belong to the spiritual Israel.‘ He is

tempted to put his confidence in . . . his Christianity.‖29 "Faith is genuine eminently in

Christ and as it fears by realizing that it will remain in God's kindness only as it continues

to trust in what God has promised." 30 Failure to respond to God‘s inclusive kindness is

tantamount to unbelief.

10. God's judgment upon his unbelieving peoples serves as a warning and example to the

Gentiles as well as the rationale for Gentile awe (v. 21).

First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

21
For if God did not spare (Gentile pride) neither will he spare you

the natural branches

28 Cranfield, II, 568.

29 Nygren, 401.

30 Daniel Fuller, The Unity of the Bible, an unpublished syllabus for Fuller Theological Seminary, XX -8.

See also 12.16; 1 Tm 6.17; Ro m 11.20.

18

The major- minor warning provides support for the preceding imperative, "fear"

(v. 20). The second half of the conditional sentence expresses the inevitable judgment of

God for Gentile pride in the second stage, which will lead to their exclusion in the third

stage. If God has not spared the "natural branches" neither will he spare complacent,

exclusive and arrogant Gentiles.

11. The above salvation history reveals God's character of severity and goodness, which

is to evoke Gentile gratitude and fear (v. 22).

First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

22
...severity toward those but God's kindness toward

who have fallen, you, provided you continue

in his kindness; otherwise

you also will be cut off

God's character is revealed in the first stage as severity, to the Jews who fell.

During the stage of the Gentiles, God's character is revealed as "kindness."31 The

Gentiles are to be particularly mindful of his severity as they celebrate God‘s kindness.

31 Jeremias draws attention to the ab/ba chiasm, kindness severity and severity kindness, which is not simp ly

a literary device, but serves the theological point Paul wishes to make. Joachim Jeremias, Abba (Göttingen

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966), 279.

19

The only basis of confidence for Jew and Gentile alike is the goodness of God, his free

grace and the sovereign will of his love.

12. The reverse process of Jewish inclusion is based on God's power (v. 23).

First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

23
And even those of Israel,

if they do not persist in

unbelief, will be grafted in,

for God has the power to

graft them in again.

The same grafting- in process, which applied, to the Gentiles in the second stage

will be applicable to the Jew. "It was unbelief that excluded them; when unbelief is gone,

exclusion is at an end."32 In support of Israel's restoration, Paul affirms the power of God

to graft them back onto the tree from which they were cut off. 33 Paul's affirmation of

God's power offsets erroneous Gentile conclusions and expresses God's ability to

overrule human limitation; he is powerful enough to abrogate exclusionary attitudes.

32 C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (New Yo rk: Harper & Ro w, 1957) 219.

33 Ro m 4.21 kai\ plhroforhqei\j o(/ti o(\ e)ph/ggeletai dunato/j e0stin kai\ poih/sai.
20

13) The restoration of Israel is predicated upon the more difficult "unnatural" inclusion

of the Gentiles. In short, it will mean eschatological fulfillment for the people of God (v.

24).

First Stage Second Stage Third Stage

24
For if you have been cut how much more will these

from what is by nature a natural branches be grafted

wild olive tree and grafted, back into their own olive

contrary to nature, into a tree.

cultivated olive tree,

This minor-major verse sums up the main argument of the allegory, expressing

Paul‘s certainty of Jewish restoration in the third stage. Jewett suggests a helpful chart,

which encapsulates the parts of the same tree:

Gentiles were cut out Jews were cut out

From wild olive tree From domestic olive tree

Gentiles were grafted in Jews will be grafted in

(unnatural status) (natural status)

Both share in the same olive-tree. 34

Here Paul characterizes eschatological fulfillment by natural branches grafted

into their own olive-tree. If Gentile Christians (wild olive-branches) could be assimilated

34 Jewett, 692.
21

to the cultivated olive-tree, then how much easier a process will it be, to restore the Jews

(cultivated olive-branches) to the trunk from which some were broken. 35

Summary-Implications

As Paul continues in vss. 25-36, he makes it clear that Salvation-History is a

mystery (musth/rion), something formerly hidden but now revealed by God. This

mystery can be expressed as an eschatological duet, wherein both parties recognize the

role of the other and celebrate God‘s inclusiveness. It includes: a) the partial and

temporary hardening of Israel (pw/rwsij a)p o\ me/rouj tw=| 0Israh\l ge/gonen a)/xrij ou{),

b) the inclusion of the fullness of the Gentiles (toV plhvrwma tw'n ejqnw' n) and c) Israel's

restoration (pa=j )Israh\l swqh/setai — v. 26), which will mean eschatological

fulfillment. Insight into this mystery is inaccessible to natural investigation but can only

be mediated through revelation. The mystery leads to Paul‘s praise, ―O the depth of the

riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and

how inscrutable his ways!‖ (v. 33).

In the allegory, the special area of concern is the Jewish and corresponding

Gentile attitude that reflects a common, intertwined and mutually dependent history.

Thus, Paul deals with the problem of pride in the Gentile constituency of the Roman

Church; such arrogance and derogatory attitudes amount to unbelief. He provides

instruction to the Gentiles concerning faith, humility/lack of boasting, gratitude,

dependence, hope and a sharing in Paul's driving missionary concern.

35 Theodor Zahn, Der Brief des Paulus on die Römer (Leip zig : A. Deichert, 1910) 518-19.
22

Paul's major thrust to the Gentiles is the certainty of the eschatological fulfillment

for the people of God, which includes Israel's restoration; the whole of the people of God

(Jew and Gentile) is enjoined to sense the continuity of God's redemptive activity. He

argues that God is vitally involved with people who are not yet his. The whole people of

God (Jew and Gentile) are invited to understand, appreciate and participate in God‘s

redemptive and inclusive activity. God does not cut down the whole olive-tree and plant

another, but grafts wild branches onto the original root and trunk.

In our day, both Church and Synagogue are called upon to respect and celebrate a

common and intertwined history with the certainty of an eschatological consummation

yet to come. Each community will profit from attitudes of inclusion trust and humility—

not arrogant posturing and demonization of the other. When people are grateful, they can

become grace- full and find their anchor of dependence upon God; they can experience a

solid hope, and a respectful sharing of missionary concern. Such attitudes will lead to

recognition of "others" and the healing of alienated communities. It remains for various

faith-communities to implement forms of shared history in local communities.

 The Parable of the Strong Man and the Stronger One
(Matthew 12:22-32; Mark 3:22-30; Lk. 11:14-23)

Introduction
In the temptation narrative (Matt. 4:1-11), Jesus experiences a victory over Satan;
thus, this narrative sets the pattern for His subsequent ministry. Jesus' response to the
various temptations demonstrates that Jesus aims to elicit faith in Himself quite apart
from any outside pressure. Whereas God's first son (Israel) had disobeyed, Jesus
demonstrates obedience by His submission to the Father's will and thereby experiences
triumph over the power of Satan. The texts that Jesus uses from Deuteronomy in the
temptation account, clearly point us back to a similar situation and to parallel threats to
faith that Israel experienced on her wilderness journey. In the narrative, Jesus refuses to
work spectacular signs for Himself; later in His ministry, He likewise refused to effect
signs, which would cause amazement, but fail to engender genuine faith. On more than
one occasion, His critics will seek a sign from Him (Matt. 12:38; Jn. 2:18; 6:30; Lk.
23:8).
His avoidance of the popular "press" carries over into His encounter with demons;
the "silence" of Jesus with demonic forces is striking. He commands silence from the
demons and from those who are cured as well. At the same time, we discover a
remarkable contrast between the popular and the demonic estimate of Jesus. The crowds
wonder if He can possibly be David's son.1 The Pharisees swear categorically that His
work is inspired by Beelzebul, the Prince of the demons. But the demons themselves
clearly know who He is. Yet, Jesus silences their confession. Why? A genuine response
of faith can never issue from demonic forces nor should their confession be allowed to
compel human confession; it can only come from people as free agents. "Genuine"
means that it is not forced, but spontaneous. Jesus is a “hidden” Messiah, who elicits and
draws out the response of trust, but will not force faith upon the beholders.
We come, therefore, to the actual conflict that Jesus carries on with the unclean
spirits during His public ministry. The Synoptic Gospels portray Jesus as a prophet,
teacher, miracle-worker and also as an exorcist. In the exorcism narratives, we sense
something of the mystery of "spiritual" evil as we witness the havoc and devastation that
demons wreak upon possessed people. It is clear that Jesus' power over unclean spirits
proclaims the nearness of the Kingdom of God. His conflict with the demoniacs is not
accidental or incidental, but is a vital part of His concern for the wholeness of the human
person.
At this point, a host of questions come to the surface: How bound was/is Satan?
How did Jesus' exorcisms differ from the exorcisms of others? What occurred in the
Gospel exorcisms? How can Christians today avoid both an apathy concerning Satan's
existence or an undue preoccupation with Satan's existence and destructive power in the
lives of others? How do we recognize the way or ways in which he works today? What
role does exorcism have in the life of the Church?
1Normally the question with mhvti expects the negative answer, i.e., "This can't be the Son of David,
can he?" However, as Robertson notes, "It is only the expectation that is presented by ouj or mhV."
Robertson draws the parallel with the woman at Jacob's well (Jn. 4:29), "She refused to arouse opposition
by using ouj and excited their curiosity by mhV," ("Can (mhvti) this be the Christ?"). A. T.
Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, (Nashville:
Broadman Press, 1934), p. 917.
beelzeb.doc
6/25/2010
©J.Lyle Story
 A text that may help us answer these questions is the Parable of the Strong Man
and the Stronger One, found in a paragraph where the source of Jesus' power is under
attack by the Pharisees (Matt. 12:22-30). This paragraph also offers a revealing picture
of how Jesus understands His exorcisms.

The Larger and Immediate Context

The paragraph is found within the larger context of Book III2 of Matthew, which
extends from 11:2-13:52. Book III builds upon Jesus' Galilean ministry including several
controversy stories. Throughout the pericope, the Kingdom of God is announced in
action (12:2-50) and by word (13:1-52). A clear distinction is drawn between the
disciples and Jesus' critics. The people who seize the Kingdom are aggressive in their
faith response (11:12) and are able to hear the Baptist's message (vss. 14-15). In sharp
contrast, the critics play make-believe, like spoiled children, berating both John and
Jesus. Jesus proceeds to pronounce fearful judgments upon the cities of Chorazin,
Bethsaida, and Capernaum (vss. 20-24) because of their unbelief, yet, He praises the
Father for revealing Himself to the "little ones," a description which certainly includes
the disciples (11:25). Disciples are receptive to God's Word. Contrariwise, the Pharisees
("the wise and understanding") are intent upon burdening others with regulatory laws
(11:28a) while Jesus is the burden-bearer (11:28b-30), who promises an easy yoke and a
light burden. The distinction between disciples and critics occurs again in ch. 12:l-8;
disciples are accused of plucking grain on the Sabbath and Jesus for healing on the
Sabbath (vss. 9-13), and Jesus' life is put in jeopardy (12:14).
After healing the man with the withered hand, Jesus withdraws from the
synagogue (12:15-21). Matthew uses the Servant Song (Isa. 42:1-4) to affirm the quiet
and unobtrusive nature of Jesus' ministry, and to announce His inclusion of the Gentiles.
The parallel section in Mark 3 occurs in the context of Jesus' tremendous popularity.
Amidst His miracles and the confession of His identity by demons (3:7-12), Jesus
formally appoints the twelve for a three-fold purpose, expressed through three infinitive
clauses: 1) to be with Him, 2) to be sent out to preach, and 3) to have authority to cast
out demons.
Matthew relates how accusation and division are immediately followed by a sharp
break with opponents concluding with the accusation that Jesus uses the power of
Beelzebul to exorcise demons (12:22-32).
The theme of contrasting responses is carried through Book III with a discussion
of good and evil fruit (12:33-37), the demand for a sign (vss. 38-42), and with the
comparison of the present generation to the last state of a man who had formerly been
exorcised. The concluding paragraph of ch. 12 contrasts the physical family of
Jesus—standing outside, wanting to speak to Jesus with those eager persons around
Jesus—seated inside (v. 49; Mk. 3:34). The final sequence of Book III is comprised of
seven parables (ch. 13) of the Kingdom of Heaven (God), explaining both the nature of
God's reign/rule and the intended response to it. A broad parabolic teaching is offered to
the crowds, but a precise explanation is shared only with disciples. The contrast between
the insider and the outsider is hereby underscored again.

Structural Analysis of the Parable

The following outline reflects the structure of Matt. 12:22-32, the paragraph
2 Book I (3:1-7:29); Book II (8:1-11:1).
beelzeb.doc
6/25/2010
©J.Lyle Story
containing the Parable of the Strong Man and the Stronger One.
Introduction and occasion--an exorcism (Matt. 12:22)
Response of the crowd to the exorcism (v. 23).
Response of Jesus’ family (Mark 3:21)
Response of the Pharisees to the exorcism--accusation (Matt. 12:24).
Jesus' refutation of the accusation (vss. 25-26)
By the divided Kingdom principle (vss. 25-26).
Jewish exorcists (v. 27).
Meaning and source of Jesus' exorcisms (v. 28).
The Parable of the Strong Man and Stronger One (v. 29).
Severe pronouncements upon the accusers (vss. 30-32).

Translation
Introduction and occasion—an exorcism (v. 22). "Then, there was brought to him
a demon-possessed man, blind as well as dumb, and he healed him, so that the dumb man
spoke and saw."
Response of the crowd to the exorcism (v. 23). "And all the crowds were
amazed, and said, 'Can this be the Son of David?'"
(Response of Jesus’ family (Mark 3:21). "And when his family heard it, they
went out to seize him, for they were saying, 'He is beside himself.')."
Response of the Pharisees to the exorcism--accusation (Matt. 12:24). But when
the Pharisees heard it they said, 'It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons that
this man casts out demons.'"
Jesus' refutation of the accusation.
By the divided kingdom principle (vss. 25-26). "Knowing their thoughts, he
[Jesus] said to them,
'Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste,
and no city or house divided against itself will stand;
26 and if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself;
how then will his kingdom stand?'
Jewish exorcists (v. 27). 'And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do
your sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges.
Meaning and source of Jesus' exorcisms (v. 28). But if it is by the Spirit of God
that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.'
The Parable of the Strong Man and Stronger One (v. 29). 'Or, how can one enter a
strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man?
Then indeed he may plunder his house.'
Severe pronouncements upon the accusers (vss. 30-32). 'He who is not with me is
against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters. 31 Therefore I tell you,
every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the
Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 And whoever says a word against the Son of man
will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven,
either in this age or in the age to come.'"

Interpretation
Introduction and occasion—an exorcism (v. 22). The specific occasion for the

beelzeb.doc
6/25/2010
©J.Lyle Story
accusation that Jesus is possessed by Satan is an actual exorcism in Matthew (see Mk.
3:22) of a man who is both blind and dumb. Few of the healings and exorcisms in the
Gospels are told as quickly as this one. We read that Jesus "heals" the man, that is, He
exorcises the demon(s), with the result that the man is able both to speak and hear.
Mark's context differs; Luke states only that the man was dumb (Lk. 11:14).
Response of the crowd to the exorcism (v. 23). A miracle has occurred but the
response to it is varied. The crowd asks, "Can this be the Son of David?"3 The
Messianic title "Son of David" occurs eight other times in Matthew’s Gospel.4 While the
crowd does not make a clear verbal confession, nonetheless the question of Jesus’
identity as "Son of David" is raised. The title "Son of David" is used in a Messianic
sense and may also convey an allusion to David as an exorcist who, by means of music
on his lyre, drove away the evil spirit from Saul:
"And whenever the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, David took the lyre and
played it with his hand; so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit
departed from him" (I Sam. 16:23).
Luke’s Gospel does not provide the question, but simply narrates the response of
the people—marvel (Lk. 11:14).
(Response of Jesus’ family [Mk. 3:21]). Although Mark's Gospel does not relate
an actual exorcism, it does imply that an actual exorcism occurs (cf. Mk. 3:22). It does
record, however, that Jesus' preoccupation with the needs of others suggests to His family
that He has lost his mind, and accordingly, "they sought to seize Him." This lesser
concern and charge of Jesus' family is used as a foil to introduce the far more severe
charge of the scribes "who had come from Jerusalem."5
Response of the Pharisees to the exorcism--accusation (Matt. 12:24). The
stinging charge against Jesus' character issues from the Jerusalem Scribes (Mark 3:20-
22). They make a double accusation against Jesus when they say: 1) Jesus is possessed
by Beelzebul6 and 2) He effects exorcisms by Beelzebul's power. The second charge is
the main accusation. The critics cannot doubt the reality of the cure (the man can speak
and see), but they assign the source of Jesus' power to the Prince of demons. In the
phrase "by Beelzebul," the preposition "by" (ejn-v.22) corresponds in usage to the
Hebrew inseparable preposition B+. It expresses the means by which they claim Jesus
performs the cure. The preposition can also convey the sense of "by the help of," "in the
name of," "under the authority of." Frequently in exorcisms, it was necessary to adjure
the demons by the name of the Greater One—God, whose name is also a means of cure.
Mark's account is preceded by the response of the demoniacs, identifying Jesus as "the
Son of God" (Mk. 3:11); His exorcisms proceed from the fact of His Divine Sonship.
The accusation is a strange one—that Jesus casts out demons with demonic help.
In ancient magic, it was well-known that a conjurer could drive out weaker spirits by his
own power. But here it is stated that Jesus is possessed by Beelzebul and expels evil
spirits with his aid. Thus, Jesus is accused of collusion with Beelzebul, wherein both the
3 The question is rhetorical.
4 1:20; 9:27; 15:22; 20:30; 20:31; 21:9, 15; 22:42; there are seven other occurrences of the proper name,
"David" (1:1, 6, 17--twice; 12:3; 22:43, 45).
5 presumably to ascertain the credibility of Jesus so as to report back to the Sanhedrin.
6 The name Beelzebul, Beelzebub has been variously rendered as “Lord of the flies,” i.e., as the "Lord of

the dung-heap" where flies congregate. But in view of Jesus' parable on the house of the Strong One, the
more appropriate rendering of the name is, “Lord of the Dwelling.” In two of the Synoptic Gospels, the
term, "house" (oijkiva) is used (Matt. 12:29; Mk. 3:27).
beelzeb.doc
6/25/2010
©J.Lyle Story
exorcist and demon(s) work together to deceive the onlookers. Ostensibly, the purpose of
such collusion would be to inspire confidence in the power of the exorcist; therefore, the
chief demon would be the master of Jesus and not his servant. Thus, the Scribes accuse
Jesus of enhancing His reputation as a miracle worker and exorcist through “staged”
exorcisms. In their logic, Beelzebul then misleads people to believe that Jesus is the
master over the demons, when, in fact, Jesus is Beelzebul’s passive and obedient servant.
Jesus' refutation of the accusation (Matt 12: 25-29). By a series of logical
statements, Jesus points to the foolishness of their accusation and to the utter absurdity of
their thoughts. For the sake of clarity, Jesus' argument may be outlined under several
headings:
By the divided kingdom principle (Matt. 12: 25-26). The argument that Jesus uses
is called in Latin logic, reductio ad absurdum, i.e., "reasoning to the absurd," which
involves taking a faulty premise and explicating its logical inferences to the point where
it becomes obviously absurd. Three parallel clauses are laid out, using four different
subjects, which are objects of "in-house" fighting, which lead to a negative result, which
is not the case.
Subject "In-house" fighting Negative result
25 "every kingdom "divided against itself "is laid waste,
city or house divided against itself will [not] stand
26 if Satan casts out he is divided against how then will his
Satan," himself;" kingdom stand?"
Jesus' question in v. 26 is rhetorical and serves as an explicit statement as to how
His exorcisms are not done. In effect, Jesus says, "I am accused of using demonic power
for the expulsion of demons. But this clearly would involve the break-up of the demonic
world, in accordance with usual human experience of seditious activity. Now it is clear
that the empire of Satan still holds sway (this assumption is necessary to the argument):
therefore I do not cast out demons by Beelzebul, but in some other way."7
Human experience usually shows that any kind of social organization ("kingdom,
city, or house") is threatened ("will not stand") when there is factionalism ("in-house"
fighting—against itself"). Jesus assumes that Satan's empire still stands (v. 26)—a view
shared by Jesus' critics. After all, sin, sickness, demon-possession and death continue to
be present realities. Since Satan is not interested in bringing about his own demise, the
exorcism by Jesus cannot be by Satan's power for Satan is not such a fool as to do
himself in.8
Satan's kingdom is strong; it still stands strong and is controlled by a strong man
within, but it also shows very real signs of weakening, notably in Jesus' exorcisms.
However, the point of Jesus' argument is that the break-up and demise of Satan's kingdom
does not occur from internal factions, i.e., "in-house" fighting.
Jewish exorcists (v. 27). Another point of Jesus' argument lies in the current
practice of the Jewish "sons," i.e., the Pharisees' disciples. Exorcism is not a new
phenomenon with Jesus. In the Rabbinic literature, there are many allusions to demons
and their harmful activity among people. According to Acts 19:13-14, exorcism is carried
out by the sons of Sceva:
13 "Then some of the itinerant Jewish exorcists undertook to pronounce the name
of the Lord Jesus over those who had evil spirits, saying, 'I adjure you by the Jesus
7 C.K. Barrett, The Holy Spirit in the Gospel Tradition (London: S P C K, 1947), p. 61.
8 Manson, Major, Wright, Mission and Message of Jesus, (New York: E. P. Dutton, 1938), p. 377.
beelzeb.doc
6/25/2010
©J.Lyle Story
whom Paul preaches.'"
14 Seven sons of a Jewish high priest named Sceva were doing this.
Josephus makes a comment about King Solomon and his ability as an exorcist:
He left behind him, the manner of using exorcisms, by which they drive away
demons, so that they never return and this method of cure is of great force unto this
day.9
Josephus then proceeds to describe an exorcism which he had seen performed by a Jew in
the presence of the emperor Vespasian. The demon gave evidence of his departure by
upsetting a bowl of water.
In the legendary book of Tobit, a demon succumbs to the smoke of the heart and
liver of a fish, applied under the direction of the angel Raphael (Tobit 8:1-3).
Jesus' critics do not question the validity of exorcism as if this were something
altogether new. They attack the source—not the practice.
Meaning and source of Jesus' exorcisms (v. 28). Jesus then affirms the truth
about the source of His exorcisms. His exorcisms are accomplished by the Spirit of God
and signify the presence of God's Kingdom:
28 "But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of
God has come upon you" (Matt. 12:28).
20 "But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the
kingdom of God has come upon you" (Lk. 11:20).
It is not the fact of exorcisms per se that distinguishes Jesus from Jewish exorcists, but
the fact that He, as Messiah ("I"), is casting out demons by the Spirit of God.10 Since He
is the anointed Messiah, exorcism becomes a manifestation of His Messianic activity.
Thus, His exorcisms are not magical wonders or haphazard miracles in answer to the
prayer of a holy man, but are signs that Jesus is doing His Messianic work. In Mark 1:27,
when Jesus casts out demons in the Capernaum synagogue, the people are amazed at His
exceptional authority over demons. The context suggests that He possesses such power
by virtue of His identity, "the Holy One of God" (1:24).
The authority vested in Jesus comes from the Spirit of God (Matt. 12:28). Luke's
text says that He exorcises demons by the "finger of God." That Luke's form may be
more original lies in the fact that Luke is the Evangelist who emphasizes the person and
work of the Holy Spirit. Thus, he would doubtless have retained the reading, "the Spirit
of God," if it had been in the source he used. If the expression "finger of God" (Luke), is
the original reading, it can only serve as a metaphorical expression for the Spirit of God.
For understanding the "finger of God" metaphor, T. W. Manson suggests an
allusion to Exodus 8:19, wherein Moses is contrasted with the Egyptian magicians and
the finger of God is contrasted with the power of demons. Upon beholding Moses'
miracle, the magicians said to Pharaoh, "This is the finger of God." This notion
connecting divine power with a finger that touches the human world can be found in
Egyptian culture. Flinders Petrie, for example, points to an Egyptian inscription of "a
wood carving of a finger springing from a falcon's head. The head was a symbol of Ra
and Horus . . .a familiar image in Egypt."11
9 Flavius Josephus, Antiquities, VIII, 2, 5.
10 A similar thought is present at the Baptism of Jesus. The presence of the Kingdom does not rest with
Jesus alone, since He is now thirty years old, or the Spirit alone, since the Spirit of God was active in
Israel's history. Since He is anointed by the Spirit and confirmed by the voice from above (Mk. 1:10-11), it
is not surprising that Jesus' first word in public proclaims, "The Kingdom of God is at hand" (Mk. 1:14-15).
beelzeb.doc
6/25/2010
©J.Lyle Story
 Jesus' exorcisms are not isolated or incidental invasions into the kingdom of
Satan; rather, they express the present and powerful reality of the Kingdom's presence.
They also mark the beginning of the end, the annihilation of Satan and a sobering
realization which the demons acknowledge.12 As Jeremias notes, "Every occasion on
which Jesus drives out an evil spirit is an anticipation of the hour in which Satan will be
visibly robbed of his power. The victories over his instruments are a foretaste of the
eschaton."13 Thus, in Matthew 8, as the Gadarene demoniacs confront Jesus, they cry out
in terror:
29 "And behold, they cried out, 'What have you to do with us, O Son of God?
Have you come here to torment us before the time?'" (Matt. 8:29).
They sense clearly that Jesus is the instrument of their final destruction.
The Parable of the Strong Man and Stronger One (v. 29). Jesus then speaks a
parable that affirms the reality of both the Strong Man and Stronger One and the real way
in which He destroys the power of Satan—through external aggression originating from
the outside. In essence, Jesus says, "You should have realized that no one can enter the
Strong One's house and ransack his goods, unless He first binds the Strong Man." This
can only happen through an exercise of superior strength by a still stronger man, one who
is able to overpower and tie up the strong man. In brief, Jesus is the Stronger One who
has come and bound up Satan. Strangely enough, the strong man, though bound, still
exercises power.
We may see in this parable a word of confirmation to the people who are asking
the question whether Jesus is Messiah, i.e., "the Son of David." The term "Stronger One"
is also a Messianic designation, since John the Baptist had promised that "One Stronger
than I is the Coming One14 who will baptize in the Holy Spirit and fire" (Matt. 3:11). In
the Fourth Servant Song of Isaiah, we also find a link between the Servant of the Lord
and the idea of sharing booty with the strong:
12 "Therefore I will divide him a portion with the great,
and
he shall divide the strong ones15 as spoil
because he poured out his soul to death,
and
was numbered with the transgressors;
yet
he bore the sin of many,
and
made intercession for the transgressors" (Isa.
12 Mk. 1:24 and he cried out, “What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy
us? I know who you are, the Holy One of God.”
13 Joachim Jeremias, New Testament Theology,(New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1971), p. 95.
14 The term, "the Coming One" is also a Messianic allusion:

Matt. 3:11 "I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than
I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry; he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.
See also Matt. 21:9 where the term "Son of David" is also linked with the "One who Comes in the name of
the Lord:
21:9 And the crowds that went before him and that followed him shouted, "Hosanna to the Son of
David! Blessed is He who Comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!"
15 The Hebrew text includes the sign of the direct object, which the RSV and NRSV interpret as a

preposition, "with the strong."

beelzeb.doc
6/25/2010
©J.Lyle Story
53:12).
The influence of this and other Servant Songs is strong in Jesus' self-understanding and
mission. Indeed the language of a Servant Song (Isa. 42:1-4) is used in the passage that
immediately precedes our exorcism narrative (12:18-21) and is especially reflected in the
quiet and unobtrusive way in which Jesus carries out His ministry of healing. He may
well indicate here, "I am the Servant of the Lord who accomplishes the work of binding
up the Strong One and dividing the spoil—ransacking the house of the Strong One."
Every occasion of exorcism, as in Matt. 12:23, is an occasion of ransacking the property
of the Strong One. The Strong Man exercises His dominion over sin, sickness,
possession and death. The mission of Jesus means that the Messiah (Stronger One) has
come, overcoming and plundering the spoils of Satan. He frees those, who are enslaved
by Satan, and in so doing, He destroys the power of the evil one. Satan's defeat, clearly
evident in the exorcisms of Jesus, means freedom and wholeness for the demon possessed
persons. But it is all the work of the Messiah, who will also be the agent of the demons'
final destruction.
Severe pronouncements upon the accusers (vss. 30-32). The narrative of the
exorcism, accusation and response lead to very severe pronouncements. The following
chart illustrates how the present condition results in a corresponding judgment:

Condition Judgment
30 "He who is not with me is against me,
and he who does not gather with me scatters.
31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and will be forgiven men,
blasphemy
but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.
32 And whoever says a word against will be forgiven;
the Son of man
but whoever speaks against the Holy will not be forgiven, either in
Spirit this age or in the age to come"

Through the antithetical clauses, Jesus underscores the severity of the Pharisees' charge
against the Holy Spirit. Yet, He affirms openly that blasphemy, i.e., abusive speech
against Himself, the Son of Man, will be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit
will never be forgiven. His critics, the Jerusalem Scribes, reveal a blindness that cannot
distinguish between the work of Jesus that brings wholeness and the work of Satan that
brings destruction and death.
In another context, Jesus speaks openly of sins of sensuality and other evil acts
(Mk. 7:21-23). What evil is more heinous than the malignant moral blindness which
affirms that good is evil? This warning is perhaps the strongest word that Jesus ever
speaks. The direct context, found in the tradition of all three Synoptic writers shows
clearly the charge against Jesus—that He accomplishes exorcisms by the power of
Beelzebul. For those who hold this view, there is, says Jesus, no hope. One whose moral
vision is so confused and distorted as to see no difference between good and evil or one
who knowingly calls good—evil, is beyond remedy.

Application

beelzeb.doc
6/25/2010
©J.Lyle Story
 We need to sense the tension inherent in the idea of Satan being bound and yet
strong. Jesus won a victory in the Temptation but this does not mean that Satan's power
is finished. Luke's account states that the Devil left Him until "a more opportune
moment" (Lk. 4:13). Likewise in the above parable (Matt. 12:29), Jesus clearly infers
that Satan's power is still strong. Even after the Cross, Resurrection and
Ascension—when the victory is complete, the grip of Satan, even though broken, is still
powerful. Therefore, a tension appears similar to that which appears when the claim, "the
Kingdom of God has come upon you" (present in Matt. 12:28), is set in contrast to the
prayer, "Let your Kingdom come" (future in Matt. 6:10). These tensions will not be
resolved till the Parousia. To be sure, victory over the evil one occurred during the
ministry of Jesus and His disciples. When the seventy return from their short-term
missionary trip, Jesus says, "I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning" (Lk. 10:18). His
words affirm that victory occurs and the end of Satan's power is now in sight. Satan's
judgment is decreed and his temptations and power against Jesus cannot prevail.
Judgment in full, however, has not yet been carried out. Only with the Parousia will
there be an end to all evil.
During this intermediate period, the activity of the enemy will continue to
increase. Not only did Jesus hold this view, but the Early Church held it as well. In fact,
the Church believed that demonism would attain its greatest manifestation before the
final crisis (II Thess. 2). Jesus sensed that the activity of Satan would increase not only
in clear-cut demonic responses, but in the lack of receptivity on the part of the people,
including a hostility that would bring about His death. Satan's power was clearly
operative during the ministry of Jesus:
3 "Then Satan entered into Judas called Iscariot" (Lk. 22:3),
31 "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you
like wheat" (Lk. 22:31).
53 "When I was with you day after day in the temple, you did not lay hands on
me. But this is your hour, and the power of darkness" (Lk. 22:53).
The dark powers are on the move; they plan to destroy the fruits of Jesus' Messianic
ministry. Jesus goes to meet His death with the conviction that Satan inspired the enmity
against Him (Jn. 8:44) and that Satan's triumph would mean his undoing (Jn. 12:31-32;
16:11).
Accordingly, it is only through Jesus' death that the enemy's power could be
broken. It was to be an incredible paradox that He, who was Stronger than the Strong
Man, should apparently, be found in the power of the Strong Man. He is the object of
temptation and trial and yet, it is He who speaks and casts out demons with authority.
We find a balance between the active and passive elements in the life of Jesus. His
strength lies in His submission to the will of His father even in His apparent failure.
Lest we think that the parable about binding the strong man refers only to the first
century, a student of mine, Gopal Kunji Kanan from Malaysia tells the following story.
As a child he was exposed to witchcraft and spirits, who kept his people in constant fear.
Often, people became upset with others by envy, misunderstanding, etc. They sought a
witch doctor to cast a spell on their opponent. Gopal’s mother was a Hindu at that time
and possessed many family idols, i.e., "gods." One day, she told Gopal that someone had
cast a spell on their family and explained to him the process, which includes binding the
"gods" in the house before the spirits or spells could gain entrance and wreak destruction

beelzeb.doc
6/25/2010
©J.Lyle Story
in the Kanan household. Gopal was deeply puzzled about his prior instruction in
Hinduism which affirmed an all-powerful "god," yet, his household gods (“idols”) were
really impotent in the face of a shaman’s paid services. After Gopal became a Christian,
a witch doctor came to his house and spoke to Gopal about spells, the binding of spirits,
and the customary procedure. When the witch doctor prayed for a sick person or anyone
affected by the spell, he instructed the spirit that worked for the witch doctor to negotiate
with the spirit that caused the sickness, and thereby provide relief for a short period. The
witch doctor was paid for his services. Normally, after a short lapse of time, the sickness
returned worse than before; therefore, the ritual was to be repeated with additional
payment to the shaman, and so on. The parable was perfectly understandable and natural
to Gopal upon his reading of the text of Matt. 12:22-30.
The narrative—paragraph of Matt. 13:22-30 underscores the importance of
exorcism in Jesus' ministry, an emphasis that is common to other texts as well.16 His
work as an exorcist belongs to the bedrock of the Gospel tradition. Exorcism is not
simply introductory to the Kingdom of God, but is a powerful sign of the presence of the
Kingdom, bringing wholeness of life to those who are possessed by the power of Satan.
As the people of God we need to be alert to the reality of Satan's destructive
power and sensitive to the way in which we can cooperate with the Spirit of God to bring
new life to those individuals who are possessed. The fact that Jesus entrusts His disciples
with a mission similar to His (Mk. 3:15) and that the early Church continued with a
ministry of exorcism (Acts 5:16), confirms the role of the Church in delivering people
from the power of the Strong One. Paul clearly affirms the rise of demonism in the "last
days" when he warns the Church against those who "abandon the faith and follow
deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons" (I Tim. 4:1). Christians within the Church,
gifted with discernment, are enabled to recognize the alien forces that take up residence
within people. Through a ministry of exorcism, the Church can create wholeness and
freedom that signifies the presence of the Kingdom of God.

16A warning to Herod is found which notes almost incidentally Jesus' exorcisms:
32 "And he said to them, 'Go and tell that fox, 'Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today
and tomorrow, and the third day I finish my course" (Lk. 13:32).
We also find the record of the strange exorcist who uses Jesus' name but is not one of the twelve:
49 "John answered, 'Master, we saw a man casting out demons in your name, and we forbade him,
because he does not follow with us'" (Lk. 9:49)
In a similar way, Paul uses the name of Jesus Christ to perform exorcism:
Acts 16:18 And this she did for many days. But Paul was annoyed, and turned and said to the
spirit, “I charge you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And it came out that very hour.
beelzeb.doc
6/25/2010
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 1

Central Themes of Pauline Theology

Introduction

As we wrestle with Paul and his message, we need to understand something about
the way in which Paul goes about his task of letter writing. Paul was not a systematic
theologian in our sense of the word, a fact that can easily be overlooked in our attempt to
organize his thought into a meaningful whole. Even the book of Romans, which is the
most systematic of his writings, is far from being a textbook on Christianity. He writes
out of a pragmatic and pastoral concern, to justify the place of the Gentiles in the
economy of God and to prepare for his visit there on his way to Rome; he seeks to build a
relationship with a church and community he has not yet visited. Paul's theology is
"occasional" in that he responds to "pressure-points" in the life of the early Christian
communities. He does not begin with a metaphysical or philosophical background or
superstructure. Christianity is not a system of ideas or values. For Paul, Christianity is a
drama, not a theory. Paul describes what God has done (past), what He is doing
(present), and what He will do (future) on the stage of world-history. That drama gives
us a clue as to the meaning of the universe. Although Paul is a theologian, he is also a
missionary, and he is oriented towards a theology of change/conversion (hb*WvT=).
Human beings turn from idols to serve the living God. Paul's dramatic encounter with
Jesus on the Damascus Road is no less radical from a fervent devotion to Judaism to a
committed fellowship of the Risen Christ. The change is reflected in his theological
constructs as well.

The Gospel

Paul calls his message "the gospel" (toV eujaggevlion). However, Paul
does not call himself an evangelist, but an apostle, "a called/sent one," with a prophetic
call that is similar in nature to the prophetic call of the OT prophets. He is sent by God to
preach the good news of God's salvation. That message (eujaggevlion) becomes
the driving force of his life for he solemnly announces, "Woe to me if I preach not the
gospel.''1 The noun "gospel" (eujaggevlion) and the verb "I preach the
gospel/good news" (eujaggelivzomai) refer to the public announcement of good
news that leads to joy, praise and celebration. Often a runner or messenger would be
dispatched with the charge of proclaiming the good news (birth of a son, victory at sea,
etc.). The good news would, inevitably bring great joy to a family or community. We
can readily think of Isa. 52:7, in which a courier is sent with the good news that the exile
is over and the Jews are allowed to return to Jerusalem and repopulate the city. Thus we
read,
"How beautiful . . . upon the mountains
are the feet of him who brings good news who announces peace;
who brings good news of happiness, who announces salvation,
and says to Zion, "Your God reigns."
The word eujaggevlion appears some 60 times in Paul's letters. He uses the
1 1 Cor. 9:16 e*aVn gaVr eu*aggelivzwmai, ou*k e!stin moi kauvchma:

a*navgkh gavr moi e*pivkeitai: ou*aiV gavr moiv e*stin e*aVn mhV
eu*aggelivswmai.
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 2

term in a variety of ways: 1) "the gospel of God" (Rom. 1:1; II Cor. 11-:7), 2) "the
gospel/good news of'2 Christ" (Rom. 15:19; I Cor. 9:12), 3) "my/our gospel" (Rom. 2:16;
II Cor. 4:3).
Paul speaks of the gospel in both an objective or subjective manner:
Gospel--objective content. When Paul speaks of the "gospel"
(eujaggevlion) and the related verb, "preach the good news," in I Cor. 15:1-8, he
refers to the content of the gospel message—the early Christian kerygma: Christ died for
our sins, in fulfillment of the Scriptures, he was buried, he arose, and then successively
appeared to various witnesses, the last of whom is Paul. Statements such as these echo
the early church's kerygma, the content of the message.
Gospel--subjective power. The gospel is more than content. For Paul, the gospel
is also God's power that effects salvation. The message reaches out in saving power to
the one who trusts. Paul's message is revolutionary and decisive. It is in no way a
religious suggestion for better living or another alternative alongside the cults and
mystery religions of the day. The apostle confesses, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel,
for it is the power of God unto salvation." To be sure, the gospel means the
announcement of a saving event. But it is not simply information about the event. It is a
message that has inherent power wherever it is believed; as such "the gospel" is a
powerful event that embraces the messenger, the content and the one who hears and
responds with utter trust. In other places, Paul speaks of the way in which there are
"powerful manifestations of the Spirit among those who accepted the gospel"(II Cor.
12:12).3 In the same passage in which Paul speaks about the content (objective content)
of the Gospel (I Cor. 15:1-8), the Gospel is also subjectively, an inner power, the means
by which people are being saved (I Cor. 15:2).

The Gospel's Center.

Is there an umbrella, a centrum Paulini, which can hold together the various
aspects of Paul's message, which provides a sense of coherence to his theology? A
number of structures have been suggested:
Justification by faith--Käsemann, Luther, Taylor (other Lutheran scholars)
In-Christ-mysticism--Schweitzer, Deissmann, Stewart4
Apocalypticism--Wrede, J. C. Beker ("cosmic triumph of God and
contingencies")
Salvation-history--Cullmann, Ladd, O. A. Piper
Transformation of time and the gift of grace--C. J. A. Hickling ("new age--new
life")
Existential call to decision—Bultmann
Jesus is Lord, who provides salvation and Paul is the apostle to the Gentiles
(Sanders)
Reconciliation--Martin, Manson, Ridderbos
"Life under the Lordship of Christ"--Dunn
Salvation--Hunter, Scott
2 The term is an objective genitive, "the message whose content is Christ."
3 2 Cor. 12:12 "The signs of a true apostle were performed among you in all patience, with signs and wonders and
mighty works." These signs confirmed the power of the message that had indeed transformed their lives.
4 James Stewart, A Man in Christ

salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 3

The diverse opinion is very real and reflects something of the far-reaching dimensions of
the Apostle's thought. Plevnik notes, "Any center of Pauline theology must therefore
include all those components of the apostle's gospel: his understanding of Christ and of
God, his understanding of God's salvific action through Christ, involving the Easter event
and its implications, the present Lordship, the future coming of Christ, and the
appropriation of salvation."5 As Martin notes, "not surprisingly, the conclusion is then
drawn that "the center is thus not any single aspect of Christ . . . but the whole Christ."6
The various approaches also reflect various criteria that are brought to bear upon the
question. What is suggested below is an attempt to integrate the various word pictures
into a coherent whole that may assist us in organizing the several aspects of his theology.

The Pauline Center

Justification Redemption
Gospel of
Salvation
Word of God Hearer

Reconciliation In Christ
Salvation

The good news of salvation. The distinctively Pauline emphasis on the gospel
announces that it is a salvific force let loose in the world. It is not a simple set of
propositions which people must intellectually apprehend and give their mental assent to.
It is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes. The good news for
Paul is a life-force that spreads to people as it makes its appeal and seeks a response of
faith. Paul calls it "the power of God," just as he had called Christ crucified "the power
of God": "But to those who are the called, Jews and Greeks, Christ is the power and
wisdom of God" (I.Cor. 1:24). The apostle demonstrates the close relation between
confession, trust in the gospel message, and the resultant salvation. He does so with a
5J. Plevnik, "The Center of Paul's Theology," CBQ, 51 (1989), pp. 477-478.
6Ralph P. Martin, "Center of Paul's Theology," Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, (Downers Grove: InterVarsity
Press, 1993), p. 93.
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 4

carefully balanced parallelism:

confess  mouth  Jesus is Lord  salvation
believe  heart  resurrection  salvation
believe  heart   righteousness
confess mouth   salvation
(Rom. 10:9-10)

The all-embracing term is "salvation" (swthriva). A number of other noun/verb

forms highlight a particular facet of the divine activity, e.g. redemption, a buying back of
one, who is not free. The term "salvation" acts as an umbrella, under which various word
pictures and metaphors emphasize one or another particular aspect of salvation. For
instance, the idea of justification/righteousness is borrowed from the courtroom and is
used to express the forensic aspect of salvation. The other metaphors look at the
salvation event from different angles or perspectives. When Paul speaks of the gospel, he
calls it the power of God unto salvation to everyone who believes (Rom. 1:16). The
theme of universal salvation is carried through with the addition of the explanatory
clause, "to the Jew first and also to the Greek." Salvation for the Gentiles through the
gospel was part of the great vision of the risen Christ. Thus, Paul affirms, "that I might
preach the good news of Him to the Gentiles" (Gal. 1:16). The fundamental question of
religion is the Philippian jailer's question, "What must I do to be saved?" (Acts 16:30).
The word "salvation" parallels the broad use of the Hebrew uv^y*, meaning "to be
broad," "to become spacious," "to enlarge." Its opposite is that of confinement,
compression, and constraint. The term swthriva signifies wellbeing in all of its
forms, from soundness of body to the highest ideal of spiritual health. For the Jew, the
word "salvation" meant primarily a deliverance from sin and the enemies of the people of
God. For the Greek, salvation meant deliverance from all the slings and arrows of
fortune, deliverance from bad luck, and all the insecurities of life. For the Greek way of
thinking, the way of salvation is that of knowledge. For instance, Socrates argued that if
man only knew what was good, then all would be well. In Plato's Republic, he argued
that true welfare of the ideal society was an elaborate system of education, culminating in
the highest form of metaphysical contemplation. For the Stoic, the way of salvation was
to see through the deceptions imposed upon humanity via the senses, emotions, desires
and passions. Knowledge or metaphysical (in)sight was the prized route to salvation.
By way of contrast, the Hebrew emphasizes hearing. Orthodox Jews confess their
faith in the Shema, "Hear 0 Israel..." (Deut. 6:4). The heavenly voice at Jesus'
transfiguration says, "This is My Beloved Son, Hear Him" (Mk. 9:7). Further, the
Hebrew verb "he heard" (um^V* shama) is often linked with the preposition and noun,
"to the voice of" (loql=) and comes to mean "to obey." As in Greek, the verb "I have
seen" oi\da comes to mean "I know" so in Hebrew thought, the verb "he has heard"
um^v* comes to mean "he has obeyed." In both Judaism and Christianity we are
concerned with two centers of an ellipse, the Word of God and the human positive
response to that selfsame Word. Thus, the OT repeats the prophetic challenge "choose."'
Moses summons the people of God to a choice prior to their entrance into Canaan.7
7Moses--Deut. 30:19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before you life and
death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that you and your descendants may live,
Joshua--Josh. 24:15 And if you be unwilling to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 5

Elijah also forces conscious and deliberate choice on Israel in the midst of her encounter
with the rain-god Baal (I Kgs. 18). Ostensibly, it appears that the human person is
neutral, standing midway between two opposing kingdoms, freely able to choose the
kingdom to which allegiance will be rendered. However, for Paul, the human person is
not neutral and able to dispassionately judge, determine, and decide. The human heart is
itself the battleground. Thus Paul says that human beings find themselves in a terrible
predicament. The one decision that matters the most is the one decision that unaided, the
human person is unable to make. In Paul's words, "The good that I would (i.e., what I
really want to do), I do not do, and the evil that I would not (i.e., what I really don't want
to do), that is just what I do" (Rom. 7:19).8 For Paul, the grim fact remains that the
human person is unable to choose and is in bondage to the horrible reality of sin. People
do not need good advice, better resolutions, more rules, good examples or formulas for
success. People need salvation; the power of the intruding Evil One must be broken;
people need salvation. The good news of salvation is not simply good advice or a
remedial system.

Frequency of the "save-" word family in Paul

Paul uses the word-family concerned with salvation more than any NT writer:
· "to save" (swvzw): 29 times
· "savior" (swthvr): 12 times
· "salvation" (swthriva): 18 times
· "saving" (swthvrion): 1 time
· "saving" (swthvrio"): 1 time
· "rescue" (rJuvomai): 11 times
Sometimes, the OT used the verb "to save" to signify deliverance from enemies in
a time of war, healing of disease, travel-safety or preservation. In the Gospels, frequently
the term is used in connection with healing, e.g., "Daughter your faith has saved you, i.e.,
made you whole" (Mk. 6:34). There are a few occasions where Paul uses it to refer to
physical safety, "Yet women will be saved, i.e., kept safe/preserved" through childbearing
(I Tim. 2:15). Generally, however, the major thrust of the "save"-word family refers to
the supreme saving deed, which God has effected in Jesus Christ and the result, which
believers now enjoy in the present and will enjoy in the future. Salvation is indeed the
central purpose of the incarnation of the Son of God, "The saying is sure and worthy of
full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners. And I am the
foremost of sinners;" (I Tim. 1:15).
For many Christians, "Salvation" has been understood to simply refer to "life after
death", and is expressed in so many hymns as such, "May we go where he has gone," and
"rest and reign with him in heaven." And salvation is a rescue from a terrible future fate.
But as N.T. Wright notes, "Precisely because the resurrection has happened within our
own world, its implications and effects are to be felt within our own world, here and
now."9 Salvation, which does include the future, nonetheless points to the present aspects
of salvation—to a vision of the present that includes social justice, care for the poor, sick,
lonely, homeless. Christ does not save his people as souls but as wholes, and as wholes,
people are called upon to see to the improvement of life in the present for others in all
8 T.W. Manson, On Paul and John, (London: SCM Press, 1963), p. 32.
9 N.T. Wright, Surprised by Hope, (New York: HarperOne, 2008), 191.
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 6

dimensions of human life and concern. Social concern is a part of salvation in the here
and now as the people of God respond in saving ways to people in the various situations
of human need. Most people think of salvation in terms of a personal, private, and
mystical experience of the forgiveness of sins and release from guilt, wherein a person
will be rescued from the corruption and decay of the world and then, judgment on the
Day of Judgment. Rather, salvation needs to be looked at from a holistic perspective,
wherein people deal with the urgent present and the Divine concern for people in holistic
ways—water sanitation for peoples, health concerns, peace and stability in the world,
care for the vulnerable poor, and is expressed through things like racial or gender
reconciliation. What people do in the world will find their place in the future. Salvation
is not a conversion or rescue from the world to some sort of spiritual existence but a call
to live fully and responsibly as whole people to a world that needs to experience
wholeness.
The divine initiative in salvation. For Paul, salvation finds its origin in God and
in His Son Jesus, who have acted on behalf of a dying humanity. Paul refers to the death,
resurrection and ascension of Jesus together as the one great act of salvation in which
God has acted to deliver people from death and give them new life:
1 Thess. 5:9 For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation
through our Lord Jesus Christ,
1 Thess. 1:10 and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead,
Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.
2 Tim. 1:9 [God] who saved us and called us with a holy calling, not in virtue of our works but in vir
Christ Jesus ages ago,
2 Thess. 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, b
through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth.
The idea of the divine origin of salvation is also expressed through the titles "God our
Savior" (I Tim. 1:1; 2:3; Tit. 1:3; 2:10; 3:4) or "Christ our Savior" (II Tim. 1:10; Tit. 1:4;
2:13; 3:6). In several texts, the divine origin of salvation is also expressed through verbs
such as "called," "predestined," and "destined."
Since the initiative lies solely with God, human effort is excluded from the
salvation event, but it is also an event in which people are charged with a new way of life.
Paul regards humanity in a death-condition, dead in sin, since the wages that sin pays is
death (Rom. 6:23). People bring nothing to the saving event since all are sinners. The
only acceptable condition for persons is to recognize their utter bankruptcy, be they Jew
or Gentile. That sense of utter bankruptcy in sin is vital for one's openness to the
message; the admission of bankruptcy surely belongs to the needed faith response to what
God has done. Faith's opposite is an attitude of bragging, wherein one looks to human
effort and achievement which should pay a reward. In passages where Paul deals with
the salvation event, he gives no hint that human effort counts for anything with respect to
salvation.
Eph. 2:5 even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive
together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God—9
In this text, the human condition is that of death through sin and the wonder of all
wonders is that God has extended grace through His gift; his "gift" also includes the
human response of trust. In other texts, where Paul is dealing with the tension between

salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 7

law and Gospel (Rom. 4; Gal. 3-4), he makes it crystal clear that the saving event is not
comprised of Gospel and law ("human performance"). In Rom. 4, using the example of
Abraham, Paul makes it clear that even "faith" cannot be regarded as one "work" that is
prized above all others thereby rewarding the merit of the believer. He expresses his
thought through antithetical parallelism between the "one who works" and the "one who
does not work":
Worker (antithesis of faith/trust)
Now to one who works,
his wages are not reckoned as a gift but as his due.
Non-worker (faith/trust)
And to one who does not work but trusts him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reck
People, therefore, are not saved by their own efforts or achievements:
Tit. 3:5 he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness,
but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit,
True, there are persons who are involved in the salvation event. For example,
Paul speaks about his own role in the conversion of Jews:
Rom. 11:14 [I magnify my ministry] in order to make my fellow Jews jealous,
and thus save some of them.
Paul has a role to play in the conversion of the Jews through his preaching efforts, but he
does not suggest that the initiative for their salvation resides in himself, but is found in
God. Elsewhere in Romans, Paul speaks about the role of the evangelist in the
proclamation of the Good News, but through a balanced step-parallelism,10 traces the
origin of the salvation-process to God (call upon  believe  hear  preacher  sent
[by God]:
Rom. 10:14 But how are men to call upon him in whom they have not believed?
And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard?
And how are they to hear without a preacher?
15 And how can men preach unless they are sent?
As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach good news!”
The extent of salvation. Through his correspondence to the churches, Paul
expresses the inclusive love of God that reaches out to all of humanity, Jew and Gentile.
His accusation against the Jews is pointed in that their concern was exclusive and
restrictive of Christian proclamation of salvation. A driving concern in several of Paul's
letters is his defense of proclaiming the Gospel to the Gentiles, beyond the confines of
Judaism.
1 Thess. 2:16 [the Jews] by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved—so as a
has come upon them at last!
Paul negates such Jewish exclusivism, since this attitude counters the divine intent, which
is clearly inclusive in scope:
1 Tim. 2:3 This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
In this text, God is both the Savior and the One who desires that all people be saved.
Salvation does not belong to a "favored nation" nor to a special interest group nor to an
enlightened group who alone is privy to such an experience. In v. 6, the inclusive
concern of God is again underscored by the statement that Jesus Christ gave himself as a
10Step-parallelism denotes balanced lines in which the second member of each line becomes the first member of the
next line.
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 8

"ransom for all." The inclusive concern of God is expressed by Paul's personal practice
of "becoming all things to all people, so that they might be saved" (I Cor. 9:22). Salvation
is inclusive, not exclusive, and overcomes all of the various "isms" of our day—racism,
classicism, sexism, et. al.
While the divine intent is for an all-inclusive salvation, it is also clear to Paul that
not all will be saved. At this point, Paul uses the idea of Isaiah's doctrine of the remnant
to express the truth that the inclusive concern of God is limited by unbelief:
Rom. 9:27 And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: “Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the
The faithful remnant constitutes the real people of God who are responsive to the divine
initiative. While Paul's ministry is primarily directed to the Gentiles, there is an Israel-
ward significance to provoke the Jews to jealousy, thus, leading them to the experience of
salvation:
Rom. 11:13 Now I am speaking to you Gentiles.
Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles,
I magnify my ministry
14 in order to make my fellow Jews jealous,
and thus save some of them.
His direct ministry to the Gentiles and indirect ministry to the Jews is part of the
eschatological activity of God. This ministry awaits a glorious future when "all Israel
will be saved" (Rom. 9:27).
For Paul, salvation is a past event, present experience and future hope:
"we were saved" (Rom. 8:24)
"we are being saved" (I Cor. 15:2)
"we shall be saved" (Rom. 5:9)
Salvation in time. In Romans 5:1 we find all three tenses (past, present, future)
which interplay with each other and build towards clear resolution in the future:
Rom. 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith (past), we have peace (present) with God through our Lord
this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope (future) of the glory of God.
Biblical faith, whether it is expressed in the Hebrew Bible or Christian Bible is
essentially a faith in God as savior, who is in the business of saving people from
destruction and saving them to a new way of life—directed to the present. Moreover, His
goal is positive in that He fulfills His purposes for them.
Salvation as a past fact. Through the use of the aorist tense (past time--point
aspect), Paul expresses the truth that salvation is a matter of the past record. He looks
back to the past event of the cross and the way in which sinners were united with Jesus at
His death.
Titus 3:5 he saved (aorist) us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own
Holy Spirit,
Eph. 2:5 even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive (aorist) together with Christ (b
Col. 1:13 He delivered (aorist) us from the dominion of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of h
Rom. 8:24 For in this hope we were saved (aorist). Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes fo
The reference in Rom. 8:24 links the past action to the beginning of the saving event in
the life of individual Christians. Yet, the past saving event also looks ahead to the
certainty and consummation of a future hope when Christians will experience the
consummate blessedness when hope gives way to sight.
Paul also uses the perfect tense (past action with extended results) to express both

salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 9

the facticity of the saving past coupled with the enduring results:
Eph. 2:5 even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace y
8 For by grace you have been saved (perfect tense) through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is th
Salvation as a present experience. The saving activity of God is revealed in the
Gospel, which is explained as "the power of God unto salvation" (Rom. 1:16). In the
Gospel, the "righteousness of God is being revealed" (Rom. 1:17) and is viewed against
the negative backdrop of the "wrath of God, which is similarly being revealed" (Rom.
1:18). Salvation is a present fact and experience, which depends upon the revelation of
God. Present salvation is conveyed through the Gospel, "by which [the Gospel] you are
saved, if you hold it fast—unless you believed in vain." To the Corinthians who prize
"knowledge" (gnw'si"), Paul affirms that the Gospel is "the power of God to us who
are being saved" (I Cor. 1:18; also II Cor. 2:15). A person "confesses unto salvation"
(Rom. 10:10) and thereby enjoys the experience of present salvation, as one looks upon
others with care and responsibility. In II Cor. 6:2, Paul quotes the prophet Isaiah (49:8)
and refers to God's solid help in the present day of salvation:
2 Cor. 6:2 For he says,
“At the acceptable time I have listened to you,
and helped you on the day of salvation.” [Isa. 49:8]
Behold, now is the acceptable time;
behold, now is the day of salvation.
The adverb "now" is repeated twice in Paul's commentary on the Isaian text; thereby he
affirms the urgent promise of the present as the day of salvation. The urgency of the
present day of salvation builds on the previous metaphor of reconciliation in which the
audience is summoned to a present reconciliation with God, "We implore you on behalf
of Christ, 'Be reconciled unto God'" (II Cor. 5:20). Salvation also provides the motive for
Christian activity: "Work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who is
at work in you both to will and to work" (Phil. 2:12-13). The present aspect of salvation
is also present in texts where salvation is associated with a piece of the Christian's armor
("helmet of salvation" in Eph. 6:17; "helmet is the hope of salvation" in I Thess. 5:8).
In the Olive-Tree simile (Rom. 11:11ff.), the structure of three time-periods
highlights the present responsibility of the Gentile believers in the second age/aeon. Due
to Israel's rejection in the first aeon (Rom. 11:11), salvation has come to the Gentiles in
the second aeon. A divine purpose of present salvation is at work in this present age,
which looks ahead to third age, after the fullness of the Gentiles comes in. It will mean
untold blessedness for both Jew and Gentile when history is consummated.
Salvation is a future hope. Paul's statement, "in hope we were saved" (Rom.
8:24) includes both the backward look at the salvation event and the forward certainty of
a full salvation. When Paul affirms that the Christians' citizenship is in heaven, he also
expresses the posture of "awaiting a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ" (Phi. 3:20). In Rom.
10:13, a future salvation is yet in store for the people who "call upon the name of the
Lord," following their trust in the proclaimed message of an evangelist. But the hope of
the future is also directly related to the present experience and stewardship of salvation or
wholeness. Moreover, Paul's declaration of relative nearness of salvation orients the
community to the bright prospect of the future:
Rom. 13:11 Besides this you know what hour it is, how it is full time now for you to wake from sleep. Fo
At times, Paul contrasts the position of believers, "those who are being saved"

salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 10

with unbelievers, "those who are perishing" (I Cor. 1:18), those who will be subject to the
divine wrath. Believers will be saved from the divine wrath (Rom. 5:10) by Christ's life.
In passages where Paul speaks of discipline or purification, he orients the
community to act in a responsible way with the future in view:
1 Cor. 5:5 you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that
his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
1 Cor. 3:15 If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only
The exercise of church discipline for the immoral person in I Cor. 5 looks for the
redemptive purpose that the man's spirit might ultimately be saved in the Day; but saving
activity begins in the here and now. The passage in I Cor. 3:15 highlights the importance
of building properly upon the solid foundation since the future will test the scaffolding
that is built on the foundation. Paul intends that the people of God build in such a way
that the scaffolding will not be burnt by the fiery judgment.
As Paul looks to the future salvation, he directs his view to the Jews and envisions
that "all Israel will be saved" (Rom. 11:26). This time of untold joy and eschatological
fulfillment follows the second age, the period when the fullness of the Gentiles will be
grafted onto the olive-tree. In the same passage, Paul uses future tenses to describe the
coming and activity of the Deliverer:
Rom. 11:26 and so all Israel will be saved; as it is written,
“The Deliverer will come from Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”;
In II Cor. 1:10, Paul uses the verb "to deliver" (rJuvomai) in the past (aorist)
and future tenses:
2 Cor. 1:10 he delivered us from so deadly a peril, and he will deliver11 us; on him we have set our ho

Charles A. Anderson Scott, sums up the importance of this word-family for

understanding Paul's theology: "It is in fact hardly too much to say that Christianity was
of interest to St. Paul only because it was a method of Salvation."12 The word-family
embraces every aspect of time: past, present and future. The terms convey the negative
aspect of what people are saved/delivered from: bondage, sin, death, the law, hostility,
unrighteousness and condemnation. Positively, the word-family includes what people are
saved to: freedom, pardon, right standing with God, sonship/daughtership, assurance, a
new quality of life, life in the Spirit, reconciliation, concern for the marginalized, social
justice, and hope. "It makes room for Christ in all the aspects of His saving activity, for
the Holy Spirit as the creating, sustaining and guiding the 'life' to of those who by saving
are being saved."13 Each of these benefits is the result of Christ's life, death, resurrection
and ascension. Frequently people look to some sort of split-level housing, where some on
one level look at salvation of souls for a timeless and secure eternity, while those on
another tier, work for social justice, reconciliation, peace and wholeness. Jesus knew no
such split between the two levels of a house. Thus to a healed and grateful leper, Jesus
says that his faith/gratitude has "saved" him, he reflects his own holistic concern. The
resurrection of Jesus, which is the ground of salvation, is not simply life after death, but a
transformation of existence—that includes all spheres of human existence (social, racial,
11 Many of the manuscripts contain the present tense, "he delivers" (rJuvetai), which thus is part of the past,
present and future aspects of salvation.
12 Charles A. Anderson Scott, Christianity According to St. Paul, (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1961), p. 18.
13 Ibid.

salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 11

economic, justice, emotional, spiritual, and relational), and life in the here and now.. NT
Wright points to the real slogan, "Life before death, not simply life after death." He
states, "As long as we see salvation in terms of going to heaven when we die, the main
work of the Church is bound to be seen in terms of saving souls for that future. But when
we see salvation, as the New Testament sees it, in terms of God's promised new heavens
and new earth and of our promised resurrection to share in that new and gloriously
embodied relation—what I have called life after life after death—then the main work of
the Church here and now demands to be rethought in consequence."14

III. Justification & Righteousness in Pauline Thought

If salvation can be regarded as the most comprehensive term, which captures the
center of Paul's thought, the word-family associated with justification/righteousness
expresses salvation through a metaphor taken over from legal procedure and the judicial
court. While many scholars regard justification by faith as the center of Pauline thought
(Bornkamm, Conzelmann, Käsemann), we suggest that it is one dimension only of God's
salvific activity. Justification by faith expresses what God has accomplished for
believers through Jesus Christ. It expresses God's grace, incorporating God's justice,
pardon, forgiveness and the means by which God has imputed righteousness to believers.
Since the time of the Reformation, many theologians, churches, denominations,
and individual Christians have argued that the doctrine of justification by faith is the
central core of Paul's theology. For example, in Luther's interpretation of the parables,
this doctrine of justification by faith is found in almost every parable. The Hebrew Bible
was pitted against the New Testament in the lawgospel antithesis. And thus, the Jews
are viewed as those who seek to be justified by Torah, i. e, works, while Christians are
those who seek to be justified solely by faith.
However, we need to understand the dynamic and situational aspect of Paul's
teaching in that his doctrine of justification by faith was not worked out in a vacuum nor
a library, but was hammered out in the course of Paul's intense struggle. In Paul's
missionary activity in various local church settings, he wrestled with the place of the
Gentile in the economy of God. Krister Stendahl notes how this doctrine has its
theological context in the relation between Jew and Gentile and is directly related to
Paul's defense of the Gentiles within the divine purpose.
It is important to clear up some of the semantic problems created by the
limitations of the English language. The English words, "righteousness" and "justice" are
used to translate the same Greek word dikaiosuvnh. In English, the word
"righteousness" usually is associated with a personal and moral uprightness, which an
individual person possesses. The term "justice" is usually associated with a corporate
social fairness. Similarly, the English adjectives, "righteous" and "just," translate the
Greek adjective, divkaio". However, when we try to translate the Greek verb
dikaiovw, we only use the Latin word "to justify." There is no English word for
"rightify." Thus, in our language, the verb "to justify" normally means to provide reasons
or excuses for in the interest of self-defense. In our normal English use, the verb "to
justify" does not mean "to make right" or "to declare to be in the right."
14 NT Wright, 197.
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 12

Justification in time. Similar to the word, "save" and its cognates, the terms
associated with justification/righteousness also embrace past, present and future.
Past: And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified,
you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.
Present: Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies; (Rom. 8:33)
Future: For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who w
Paul's language refers to the inauguration of life as well as its final consummation; it
anticipates the final judgment with its clear assurance of the indissoluble bond of the love
of God (Rom. 8:29-34). The justification that believers experience in the present
anticipates, in advance, the final judgment and assures them of their own right standing
with God.
A. Righteousness is conformity with a norm. Although Paul writes Greek, his
Greek vocabulary is usually dependent on the Hebrew words and thought world. The
Hebrew term tsedek qdx and its various forms, refer primarily to a relationship or norm,
not simply an inherent quality that we might call righteous or good. Righteousness or
rightness is alignment with a norm. A person who lives in a sub-division may pay yearly
dues to the homeowner's association and promise to abide by certain norms of that
subdivision. A part of a contractual relationship with the other homeowners would prohibit
painting a house with psychedelic purple. The contractual relationship with the association
would also prohibit pulling an old junk car into a front yard, parking it, putting it up on
blocks, and tearing it apart in the front yard. A person can be pronounced as righteous
within the homeowner's association if the demands of that relationship are satisfied. One's
righteousness will vary from relationship to relationship. Thus, there is a different standard
of relationship that one has with children, parents, work, school, Church, government, etc.
Relationships vary immensely and so do the demands of the different relationships. For
example, in Gen. 38, the widow Tamar dresses up like a cult prostitute in order to seduce
Judah, her father-in-law. According to Hebrew levirate law, he should have arranged for
her to marry the brother of her deceased husband in order to raise up children and carry on
the family name and inheritance. This he failed to do; Tamar, however seduces him and
becomes pregnant. Then Judah, not knowing by whom he was seduced is ready to have
Tamar killed. But she has proof to show that he indeed is the father of the child, which she
(his daughter-in-law) is about to bear. His response is this, "She is more righteous than I"
(Gen. 38:26). The text does not mean that she is a moral person, but that she stood in
proper relationship to the norm, i.e. , the need to raise up the family name; Judah was
"unrighteous" with respect to this very responsibility. To be ts-d-k is to keep faith with
what is right by doing the right thing according to the norm or the persons involved.
The terms, "justification" or "righteousness" are not primarily words of status or
quality, but relationship. An analogy may help. A man may have a certain weight--160
pounds. But that weight is always in relationship to the gravitational pull of the earth. If
he were on the moon, his weight would vary and be far less than if the same earth scale
would be used on the moon. Thus, the weight does not belong to the person as such.15 In
very much the same way, a person does not possess righteousness in and of himself or
herself.
B. Righteous is forensic (judicial). An important form of the Hebrew verb is the
causative Hiphil form, qyD!x=h! (hitsdiq), "justify, vindicate the cause of." In judicial
15 Cf. Whitely, p. 160.
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 13

matters it means to declare to be in the right." This idea is found in Isa. 43:26:
26 Put me in remembrance, let us argue together;
set forth your case, that you may be proved right.
26 suV deV mnhvsqhti kaiV kriqw'men,
levge suV taV" ajnomiva" sou prw'to", i{na
dikaiwqh'/".
The prophet Amos had a vision of a leaning wall, which was doomed to fall because it
was not plumb or upright (Amos 7:7). If the vision included proper alignment of the wall
to the plumb-line, the wall would have been said to be justified. There is one English use
of the word "justify," which is very similar to the biblical sense—a typewriter or
computer justifies the margins, i.e., the margins are aligned. The verb "to justify"
(dikaiovw) does not mean "to make righteous." Neither does the verb simply mean,
"to acquit." The word "acquit" means to pronounce innocent or guiltless. But at the very
core of Paul's thought is the understanding, "there is none righteous, no not one."16
Therefore, if we understand the verb dikaiovw as "acquit" (Moffat, NEB), then the
only result is to make God a liar. The LXX uses the verb dikaiovw as a technical
term in the judicial procedure. The term means to give a judgment in favor of a person,
and is thus used in the synoptic gospels:
Matt 11:19 the Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Behold, a glutton and a drunkard
justified by her deeds, i.e. wisdom is proved to be in the right."
Lk. 10:29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” Here, "the
It is important that the OT prefers to use the verb rather than the noun, signifying
the activity of God wherein a person is declared to be in the right; Paul also has a
preference for the verb.
Luther's personal theological breakthrough in 1515 developed from a fresh
understanding of "the righteousness of God." Originally, Luther believed that the
expression meant God's own personal moral uprightness. Correspondingly, as the
righteous One, God would reward those who were obedient on God's terms and punish
those who were sinners. Since Luther knew that he was a sinner, how could the Gospel
be "good news" for sinners (Rom. 1:16-17)? His breakthrough came when he understood
and appropriated the truth that "the righteousness of God" referred to the revealed
righteousness, which God reckons to sinners, thereby covering their sins and enabling
them to be counted as righteous in God's sight.
C. Righteousness is pardon. Even in a trial, acquittal and condemnation are not
the only two possible verdicts. In almost every country, there is the possibility of pardon.
This is not subterfuge or legal fiction or declaration that a criminal is innocent. As with
Richard Nixon, his guilt had been proven and fully recognized. But in the case of a
16 Rom. 3:10 as it is written:

“None is righteous, no, not one;

Psa. 14:1 To the choirmaster. Of David.
The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”
They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds,
there is none that does good.
2 The Lord looks down from heaven upon the children of men,
to see if there are any that act wisely,
that seek after God.
3 They have all gone astray, they are all alike corrupt;
there is none that does good,
no, not one.
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 14

pardon, a king or sovereign may intervene and declare a pardon for the individual.
Gerald Ford, for his own reasons, looking to the welfare of the country, pardoned Richard
Nixon. And he was restored to his rights within the community. His own guilt could
never be held against him. It is important to note that a judge cannot issue a pardon; only
a sovereign king can. And the initiative can only lie with the sovereign ruler; the pardon
is clearly an act of sheer grace. People cannot claim or demand a pardon; it is a royal act
that comes as a surprise and is motivated by grace. I think of a fellow who was driving
his car DUI and who hit and almost killed a cyclist who was also under the influence of
alcohol. The cyclist almost died and was in a coma for a week, and then began the
recovery process. Clearly, the driver of the car was looking at a felony charge and
possibly involuntary manslaughter of the cyclist. However, the victim also woke up to
his own responsibility (also DUI) in the accident and thus the judge pardoned the driver.
His guilt was established and repented of. But the more serious charge was not filed.
What is reckoned to his account is a misdemeanor DUI charge. What will not be
reckoned is a felony or manslaughter charge. This means that "being justified" is the
same as "having righteousness put to one's credit." It means the non-reckoning or non-
counting of sin. One cannot really acquit a man who is guilty, but one can refrain from
charging him. The result seems to be that the verb dikaiovw defines God's attitude
rather than God's findings or assessment on all the facts. Paul argues for amnesty rather
than acquittal or a legal fiction.
In Rom. 3:21, Paul states, "But now, the righteousness of God has been revealed,
apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it." The
expression, "apart from the Law" (cwriV" novmou) is significant. Paul means
what he says, "apart from the Law." The judicial proceedings are not based upon law.
The law provides only one basis for pronouncing a person just: complete obedience to its
stipulations and provisions. If God is to administer the law He cannot justify but must
condemn. But, if the whole business of justification is removed from the sphere of the
law, then God acts, not as the administrator of the law, but as a sovereign King who
issues an amnesty or pardon. One of the most radical statements about God is found in
Paul. In Rom. 4:5, he describes God as "Him who justifies the ungodly":
Rom. 4:5 And to one who does not work
but
trusts him who justifies the ungodly,
his faith is reckoned as righteousness.
tw'/ deV mhV e*rgazomevnw/
pisteuvonti deV e*piV toVn
dikaiou'nta toVn a*sebh'
logivzetai h& pivsti" au*tou' ei*"
dikaiosuvnhn:
The very thing that is forbidden by God in the Torah is the justifying activity that He
performs.17
17Exod. 23:7 Keep far from a false charge, and do not slay the innocent and righteous, for I will not acquit the
wicked.
Exod. 34:7 keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no
means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children, to the third
and the fourth generation.”
Prov. 17:15 He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous
are both alike an abomination to the Lord.
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 15

Herein lies the problem. This divine activity shocked the Jews to the very core.
For a judge to treat a criminal as if he is innocent is at the height of injustice. How is it
possible for God to justify the ungodly and to remain just? Paul answers, "It was to
prove at the present time that he himself is just and that he justifies him who has faith in
Jesus"(Rom. 3:26). Therefore, the issue for God is not what the ungodly has done but 1)
what Jesus, the Godly One, has done for them and 2) their faith in the Godly one. What
sort of God would we have who justifies only the godly or pious? This God would be
calculable and controllable since He follows an achievement-reward system. God then
becomes the patron God of a particular religious community. However, to say that God
is the one who justifies the ungodly means that He is not beholden to any client, group or
party. If God is the justifier of the ungodly, then His moral integrity is measured solely
by His character and person. "His ways are not our own ways." If God justifies the
ungodly, then as Paul says, "God shows no partiality (Rom. 2:11), and is not the God of
the Jews only?" In Rom. 3:29 Paul says, "Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the
God of Gentiles also? Yes, of the Gentiles also." Since God justifies the ungodly, then
God exercises His sovereignty in freedom. It does not mean that God has a capacity to be
arbitrary, but that He is free to be faithful to Himself and His provision in Jesus.
Correspondingly, He is independent and free from all human control and manipulation.

IV. Redemption in Paul's Thought

Redemption is another word-picture, which Paul uses to illustrate the reality of

salvation. The word-picture comes from the world of slavery and bondage, especially
evident in warfare when a victor would capture prisoners and release them upon the
payment of a ransom-fee. The presupposition, which underlies this language, is that the
human race has been held in servitude/bondage to various powers external to itself. This
is perhaps one of the images in which Judaism and Christianity find common expression.
A. Redemption in the Greek world. The ancient world was built on the ghastly
institution of slavery. Israel, in Egypt, was an enslaved people, in its history that
underwent various experiences of oppression, periods of bondage and exile. Many
members of the Early Church were or had been slaves. The picture of redemption was
central to the experience of the Jews and early Christians. With great effort a slave could
purchase his own freedom. In his spare time, with some "moonlighting," a slave could
earn some extra money, which he deposited in the temple of his god. With passing years,
he finally he accumulates enough money to pay for his freedom. The slave then takes his
master to the temple, and the priest of that temple pays over the deposited money to the
old master. The result is that the slave now becomes the property of a particular god.
There follows a great celebration of joy as the slave stands as a free man. A slave is set
free from captivity by the payment of a price, and the slave passes over into the
ownership of the particular god who protected him.18
18 Deissmann has ammassed a large number of ancient documents in which the manumission of slaves was recorded.
He has noted a number of significant points of similarity between the documents and the. Pauline corpus: "Among
the various ways in which the manumission of a slave could take place by ancient law we find the solemn rite of
fictitious purchase of the slave by some divinity. The owner comes with the slave to the temple, seals him there to
the god, and receives the purchase money from the temple treasury, the slave having previously paid it in there out
of his savings. The slave is now the property of the god; not, however, a slave of the temple, but a protevgev of
the god. Against all the world, especially his former master, he is a completely free man; at the utmost a few pious
obligations to his old master are imposed upon him-" Light from the Ancient East, p. 322.
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 16

The metaphors of slavery, manumission and redemption underlie a number of

Pauline expressions and affirmations:
1 Cor. 6:20 you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.
1 Cor. 7:23 You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men.
Gal. 5:1 For freedom Christ has set us free; stand fast therefore, and do not submit again to
Gal. 5:13 For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not use your freedom
as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be servants of one another.
The word-picture of sacral manumission/redemption is found in various expressions: buy,
buy back, price, freedom, bondage, free, deliverance, ransom and slave/slavery.
B. Redemption in the Old Testament. In the Old Testament, the idea of
redemption was applied to the mighty act of deliverance when Yahweh liberated Israel
from Egypt.
Exod. 8:23 Thus I will set a redemption between my people and your people. By tomorrow shall this sig
Exod. 6:6 Say therefore to the people of Israel, ‘I am the Lord, and I will bring you out from under the
bondage, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great acts of judgment,
Exod. 15:13 “Thou hast led in thy steadfast love the people whom thou hast redeemed, thou
Psa. 77:15 Thou didst with thy arm redeem thy people,
the sons of Jacob and Joseph. [Selah]
Sometimes the verb means, "get back, acquire for its rightful owner something lost to a
foreigner or stranger."
Isa. 51:11 And the ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come to Zion with singing; everlas
gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.
The word "redemption" can be used for the simple idea of deliverance or salvation,
without any idea of payment.19 God is often pictured as the redeemer.(la@G)), the
kinsman to whom fell the duty of buying back the freedom of a lost relative; Israel is
similarly enjoined to redeem impoverished relatives (Lev. 25:47-49) or land (Lev. 25:25-
26). Another notion connected with redemption is that of acquisition or adoption. God
not only freed the people from Egypt and liberated them, but He also acquired a
possession for Himself. Since Israel was regarded as the firstborn (Exod. 4:22), every
first-born male (human or animal) was consecrated to the Lord (Exod. 13:12-16).
C. Redemption in Paul. Christ's death on the cross is understood by Paul as a
buying back, a ransom that sets men and women free. Several Pauline terms express the
idea: redemption, buy, purchase, ransom, and freedom; these are terms which are
juxtaposed with their opposites with different emphases. Redemption is a word-picture, a
metaphor, but is no business deal or transaction between Jesus, God and the Devil, in
which believers are at stake. The metaphor should not be pressed with a crude literalism.
The force of this word-family reveals that the whole business of salvation was a costly
event for God. Paul's major affirmation is that people were bought with an incredible
price. Redemption is a difficult thing, an incredible thing, even an impossible event--the
miracle of all miracles, and the wonder of it should never cease. Just as the Jews are
reminded of God's redemptive activity in the Exodus through confession and liturgy, so
Christians are to be reminded of God's redemptive activity in Jesus Christ through Word
19Psa. 107:2 Let the redeemed of the Lord say so,
whom he has redeemed from trouble
Lk. 21:28 Now when these things begin to take place, look up and raise your heads, because your redemption is
drawing near.”
The Revised Standard VersionThe Revised Standard Version
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 17

and sacrament. Paul often alludes to various bondages, which formerly had enslaved the
people of God:
1. Redemption from the Evil One (Satan) and demons. The first form of
servitude was to spirit-forces, evil demons, or the Evil One. Paul sometimes calls these
forces, "the elements of the world, angels, thrones, thrones, principalities and powers."
For Paul, the whole world has fallen under the power of the evil one; an individual person
might be tyrannized by evil powers, but it is much more serious for Paul that the whole
human race has fallen under the power of the evil one:
Col. 2:15 He disarmed the principalities and powers and made a public example
of them, triumphing over them in him.
a*pekdusavmeno" taV" a*rcaV" kaiV taV"
e*xousiva" e*deigmavtisen e*n
parrhsiva/, qriambeuvsa" au*touV" e*n au*tw'/.
These angels or principalities seem to have posed as a threat, which conceivably could
separate people from the love of God in Christ (Rom. 8:28,29). In I Cor. 2:6-8 these
spiritual beings seem to have formed some sort of hierarchy.
In Gal. 4:3,8; Col. 2:8, 20, Paul uses the expression, "the elemental spirits"
(stoicei'a tou' kovsmou).20 In Greek culture, these elements (ABC's) were
used to refer to the stellar bodies, such as planets and signs of the Zodiac. The very
principle of astrology (then and now) is that what happened on earth was determined by
the shape of the sky, the movements of the planets and stars. Thus, fate was determined
at the moment of birth and eternally fixed. It is the same order of beings elsewhere
described as angels, principalities and powers (Rom. 8:38). God's liberating power is not
simply identified with the forgiveness of sins; God also redeems humankind from
bondage to evil spirits, a world system under the sway and fear of the evil one.
Paul's triumphant affirmation is that of deliverance. In Col. 2:15 Paul says, "He
disarmed the principalities and the powers and made them a contemptible exhibition,
when by His cross, He triumphed21 over them. What was it that Christ "stripped off"
from Himself? G. A. Scott suggests that it was His flesh or physical constitution, which
God originally made, which was good. However, due to the Fall, the flesh had become
corrupt. It is that part of the human persons through which the evil spirits had laid hold.
Scott suggest that it was man's members, his physical constitution wherein Paul
recognized a controlling force that had brought him into captivity to the law of sin. And
thus, Jesus took upon Himself, this "flesh" (savrx), the physical constitution of man,
leading Paul to say, "God had sent him in the likeness of sinful flesh = flesh over which
sin so easily takes control" (Rom. 8:3). Therefore, just as Jesus was made under the law's
jurisdiction to deliver men and women, so He was made in the likeness of flesh so as to
enter into combat with the spirit forces of evil. In the act of dying, He divested Himself
of that flesh, that medium which had become involved in the realm of spirit forces and
powers, which had usurped authority over humanity.
20 Gal. 4:3 So with us; when we were children, we were slaves to the elemental spirits of the universe.
Gal. 4:8 Formerly, when you did not know God, you were in bondage to beings that by nature are no gods;
Col. 2:8 See to it that no one makes a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition,
according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ.
Col. 2:20 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the universe, why do you live as if you still belonged to
the world? Why do you submit to regulations,
21 The verb qriambeuvw means "lead in a triumphal procession" and is used with reference to the triumphal

procession of a captor and his armies over a defeated foe. BAG, p. 364.
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 18

2. Redemption from the power of the law.. Paul also speaks of redemption from
the power of the law. Paul's language and thought perceives the law in more than one
way. On the one hand, Paul exalts the Law and ascribes divine authority to that Law. He
practices that selfsame law, even to the point of external ritual. His affirmation of the
Law is clear:
Rom. 7:12 So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good.
1 Cor. 7:19 For neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the com
1 Tim. 1:8 Now we know that the law is good, if any one uses it lawfully,
From the book of Acts, we learn that Paul caused Timothy to be circumcised (Acts 16:3),
and, to carry out a vow, Paul shaved his own head in Cenchreae (18:18). He also joined
with four other men in ritual purification according to the Law, for the expressed purpose
of communicating to the Jews, "that he walked orderly and kept the law."
On the other hand, Paul describes the Law as a yoke of bondage, something from
which humans need to be redeemed. In redemption they are discharged from its authority
or power.
Rom. 7:6 But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that
of the Spirit.
Gal. 5:1 For freedom Christ has set us free; stand fast therefore, and do not submit again to
Rom.10:4 For Christ is the end of the law, that every one who has faith may be justified.
Those two positions vis-à-vis the law cannot be held at the same time, unless we
understand that Paul used the word "law" in different ways. Two different meanings of
the word "law" are evident: 1) The positive sense of "law" is that of the divine
will/requirement as to the conduct and character of the people of God. In this sense, for
Paul, the law is still in effect and binding, 2) Another sense of the word "law" is negative,
wherein people view the law as a system of merit and thus, think that they can merit
salvation through their relative merit. In the negative sense, the law is thought of as the
means of securing a false sense of security through righteousness by human merit or
reward for religious performance. In this sense, Paul says that the law has come to an
end.
3. Redemption from sin. Put very simply, men and women are enslaved to sin.
The coming of sin into the human sphere has made people slaves to sin (Rom. 6:6). In
Rom. 7:14, Paul realizes that he has been sold under sin and thus, victimized by sin's
power. In Rom. 3: 9, Paul charges that both Jew and Greek are alike under sin's power.22
In several places, sin becomes a personified force that attacks people from without. Sin
invades another person, waging war in the human heart. Sin becomes a master who pays
a wage; that wage is death (Rom. 6:23). Since all have sinned, there is a clear solidarity
of all persons in sin, and a clear relationship with Adam, which connects Jew and Gentile
with the profoundly human problem--sin.
An analogy may help. There are three persons who are passengers on a ship in
the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, and are washed overboard. The reasons for slipping off
may vary from person to person. Each one of the three persons in the water remains a
distinctive person, but they are all in the same cold water in the same deadly predicament.
At that point, it is meaningless to discuss whether one of the three victims is a banker,
school teacher, Rabbi, minister or farmer. The crisis is upon all three persons, and all are
critically affected.
Paul traces the universality of sin to Adam and the consequent universality of
22 See also Rom. 6:6, 20; Gal. 3:22; Rom. 3:23; 5:12; 11:32.
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 19

death to Adam as well. The relationship of man to sin is the relationship of a slave to a
tyrant or a tyrannical master. It is an internal tyranny, exercised by a force, which had
successfully attacked the human person from outside. Paul says, "For what the Law
could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did, sending His own Son in the
likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh" (Rom.
8:3). In the incarnation, which culminated in the cross, Jesus condemned sin in the flesh.
Paul points to the finality of Christ's death in Rom. 6:10: Christ died unto sin, with
respect to sin--once and for all.23
The force of the redemption-metaphors serves to remind the people of God of the
costly event, which procured their freedom and should evoke a heartfelt gratitude,
translated into responsible living:
1 Cor. 6:20 you were bought with a price. Therefore glorify God in your body.
The effect of redemption should be practical freedom, responsible service,24 and living
without slavery to human opinion (I Cor. 7:23).
The language of redemption also looks forward. Christians, who have received
the Spirit are awaiting "sonship/daughtership," which Paul defines as the redemption of
our body (Rom. 8:23). It will be that future moment when sonship or daughtership
becomes manifest for all to see. God's people are "sealed by the Holy Spirit unto the day
of redemption."

V. Reconciliation in Paul's thought

While the metaphors of "justification" and "redemption" picture the salvation

event largely in terms of negatives, the metaphor "reconciliation", from the language of
friendship, expresses the truth of the salvation event in positive form. The verb "to
reconcile"25 and the noun "reconciliation"26 imply the removal of enmity or bridging over
a quarrel. It implies that the parties, which had formerly been hostile to each other, now
stand reconciled. An enemy is not someone who falls just a bit short from being a friend.
An enemy is one who stands in another camp, altogether opposed and hostile. When
enmity is overcome, the root cause of the enmity must be removed. The way to achieve
reconciliation is not by a pretension that everything is "OK." People, who are to be
reconciled, must effectively grapple with the root cause of enmity, e.g. an apology for the
hasty word, restitution for the money that is owed. Reconciliation means the coming
back to fellowship and relationship after misunderstanding and estrangement. We all
have had occasions where relationships have been broken. During the course of time
walls are built and every time that the person is seen another brick is added to the wall.
Finally, the relationship became so strained that both parties realize that something needs
to be done about the broken relationship. It necessitates an effective grappling with the
root cause, the removal of the root cause, the removal of hostility, and the restoration of
fellowship and love. It happens in marriage, in other family relationships, between labor
and management, in the Church and with God. The primary focus of the word family is
23 Rom. 6:16 Do you not know that if you yield yourselves to any one as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one

whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness?17 But thanks be
to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to
which you were committed,18 and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.
24 Paul uses the expression, "redeeming the time" (Eph. 5:16; Col. 4:5).
25 ajlavssw, katalavssw, ajpokatalavssw LXX and NT.
26 katallaghv in the LXX and NT.

salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 20

that of reconciliation with God, then followed by the secondary reconciliation of people
with each other. Paul says in Galatians that differences, which had formerly separated
people, have now been abrogated (Jew-Gentile; slave-free; male-female).
1. God effects reconciliation. In Paul's letters, God is the subject of reconciling
activity while the human person is the object of reconciliation. In His changeless love,
God has taken the initiative and has broken through the atmosphere of hopelessness and
hostility. God is not reconciled; He reconciles, and consequently, people are reconciled Many of the religions o

Romans 5
In Rom. 5:6-8 Paul describes the nature of God's love for us, which is to serve as a proof
that our hope will not disappoint us.
The argument is expressed in two parallel statements in the form of a minor-major form
of argument, called by the Rabbis kal wahomer, i.e.,"light and heavy.28
Rom. 5:9-10
Light:
9 Since, therefore, we are now justified by his blood,
Heavy:
much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.
Light:
10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son,
Heavy:
much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his
life.
Both justification and reconciliation here describe the same saving event. The point of
Paul's logic is this: God has already done the really difficult thing, He has justified
impious sinners: "While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us . . ." (5:8). Since the
difficult saving activity is true, then we may be totally and absolutely confident that He
will do the comparatively easy thing, "save from His wrath, those who are already
righteous in His sight." The enmity, which is removed in the act of reconciliation, is
sinful humankind's hostility to God. And the initiative lies solely with God. There is an
objective condition of a broken relationship that needs to be bridged. The wonder of all
wonders is that God's love is at work, making a new harmony possible; only God could
do this. People are helpless in their condition and can only respond with acceptance of
this wonderful offer that embraces the final state. In this passage Paul's logic seems to
follow a certain sequence:

v. 2—Paul affirms genuine boasting in hope in the glory of God


v. 3—Paradoxically we boast in tribulation . . .why?

v. 4—Because, tribulation produces "proven character"

v. 4—Proven character produces hope

27 See Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, (oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1968), p.
828.
28 See Strack Billerbeck, vol. 3, pp. 223-226.

salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 21

v. 5a-Hope does not disappoint . . . Why?


v. 5b-because the Love of God has been experienced through the Holy Spirit

v. 6--We know the Love of God and the Holy Spirit objectively . . .How?

v. 7--Objectively, in our weakness, ungodliness, and sinful condition,
Christ died for us

v. 9--Results--set right with God. . .we will be saved from His wrath

v. 10-Results--reconciled with God. . . we will be saved in His life
v. 11-Result—we boast in God and our present reconciliation
That is to say, since we have been transferred from enmity to friendship, we are sure
(how much more) of our continuance in salvation to the end. This then evokes a great
sense of joy in this age. Paul says "we exult in our hope" (5:2), "our trials" (5:3-4), and
"our present reconciliation" (5:11).

2. The Cosmic Christ reconciles the universe. The Lycus Valley, which included
Colossae, was infected with a false teaching that was gnostic in orientation. The teaching
was dualistic in that God was set in opposition to the material world. It denied God's
direct contact with, or control over the cosmos. The inter-space between God and the
world was filled with emanations, pulsations or aeons. In gnostic vocabulary these
emanations or pulsations formed the fullness (plhvrwma--pleroma) and acted as
some kind of buffer zone between the transcendent God and the physical universe of
matter, which was regarded as evil. In this scheme of things, Christ was given a place as
one such aeon, and God was far removed in His transcendence. In gnostic vocabulary,
the angels or angelic spirits played the role of mediators."29 They were to be worshipped
as part of the Christian approach to God; only in such religious life could the "fullness of
life" be achieved. Thus, the world, the future and fate were left in the realm of these
spirit-forces. In a hymn of praise about the cosmic and universal Christ (Col. 1:15-20),
Paul debunks the notion of independent powers and authorities. He affirms the total
supremacy and pre-eminence of Christ to fill and reconcile the entire universe. There is
no part left which is untouched by the total sweep of His reconciling work:
Col. 1:20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things,
whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.
21 And you, who once were estranged and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, 22
he has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you
holy and blameless and irreproachable before him,
Col. 2:15 When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having
3. Reconciliation has a social aspect (Jew-Gentile) which also leads to a ministry
29Col. 2:8 See to it that no one makes a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition,
according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ.
Col. 2:18 Let no one disqualify you, insisting on self-abasement and worship of angels, taking his stand on visions,
puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind,
Col. 2:20 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the universe, why do you live as if you still belonged to
the world? Why do you submit to regulations,
salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 22

of reconciling activity. Two passages speak so clearly about the social aspect of
reconciliation. The divine activity of reconciling sinful humanity to God must lead to the
removal of wall of hostility between people. In Eph. 2:12-17, Paul celebrates in the
tearing down and removal of walls of hostility between Jew and Gentile, effected by the
reconciling work of Jesus:
Eph. 2:14 For he is our peace, who has made us both one, and has broken down the dividing wall of ho
commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so ma
body through the cross, thereby bringing the hostility to an end.
This text has in view the hatred between Jew and Gentile. Paul says that Christ has
removed the barrier (2:14) and has slain the hostility, which separated these groups of
people from each other and from God. Gentiles, as well as Jews, find their true life and
spiritual home in the new society.
The other key text is II Cor. 5:16-21 in which Paul affirms the ministry of
reconciliation. There is a clear cause-effect relationship between "being reconciled"
(passive voice) and the resultant ministry of reconciliation (active). The reconciled one
now becomes active in that selfsame activity:
"all things are from God who reconciled us to Himself through Christ"
taV deV pavnta ejk tou' qeou' tou'
katallavxanto" hJma'" eJautw/' diaV Cristou'
"and gave us the ministry of reconciliation."
kaiV dovnto" hJmi'n thVn diakonivan th'"
katallagh'" (II Cor. 5:18)
The word family "reconcile/reconciliation" is central to the paragraph:
a) "all things are from God who reconciled us"
taV deV pavnta ejk tou' qeou' tou'
katallavxanto" hJma'" (5:18)
b) "and gave to us the ministry of reconciliation"
kaiV dovnto" hJmi'n thVn diakonivan th'"
katallagh'"
c) "reconciling the world to Himself"
kovsmon katalavsswn eJautw'/ (5:19)
d) "and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation"
kaiV qevmeno" ejn hJmi'n toVn loVon th's
katallagh'"
e) "we are ambassadors . . . we beg you . . . be reconciled to God"
presbeuvomen. . .deovmeqa. . .katallavghte
tw'/ qew'/ (5:20)
Upon closer observation, these clauses can be subsumed under three categories, which
follow one upon the other:
a) God as the Subject who does the reconciling:
"He reconciled us" (5:18a)
"He was reconciling the world to Himself" (5:19a)
b) The persons (objects) who are reconciled are given the ministry of reconciliation, w
"who gave us the ministry of reconciliation" (5:18c)
"who committed to us the word of reconciliation" (5:19)
c) The words with which the reconciled ones are to discharge their stewardship:

salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 23

"we are ambassadors ... as though God were entreating through us... 'Be reconciled to G
As a Christian apostle, Paul proclaims a clear message about reconciliation which has
been effected for humanity--albeit dead in sin (5:19). Entirely new possibilities are now
opened up for humanity. Jesus entered the sinful human condition (5:21) and accepted
the full consequences, even to the point of actually dying (5:14). As a result,
reconciliation is now made available for all of humanity, Jew and Gentile, indeed the
whole world (5:19). The reconciling activity of God is then extended to the Christian
ambassador, who by word, attitude, and action, embodies the message, "Be reconciled to
God." Paul interpreted his own mission to the Gentiles as modeling the divine attitude
and activity toward humanity. Indeed, his directive to Philemon expresses the message
of reconciliation to a master-slave relationship, which had gone sour. Reconciliation is
intended to make a moral difference in the way people live in relationship with others.
As a nation, we still are struggling with trying to live and learn what
reconciliation means in the midst of so much alienation, fragmentation and hostility—that
cuts across so many lines (socioeconomic, religious, family, power-spheres, gender,
racial, etc.) Synan notes the acclaimed series, "the Civil War, "with movie clips of the
75th anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg in 1938 where 2500 veterans from the North
and the South recreated Pickett's charge. Immediately after the charge, the aged veterans
broke rank and rushed into each other's arms to embrace. It was all over, the past was
dead, love took control. Today, let us do the same. Let the dead bury the dead. Let us
again pick up the same banner, fight under the same flag and win the world for Christ."30

30 Vinson Synan, "The Future: A Strategy for Reconciliation," p. 14.

salvat.doc
10/9/2014
©J. Lyle Story
 1

Christology and the Relational Jesus

Introduction
Looking through the lens of western thought, people often try to understand Jesus
by analyzing Christological titles that Jesus uses for himself or that others use for him,
titles such as the Christ, the Son of God or the Son of Man. The Evangelists, however, do
far more. They tell a story of a person who makes profound impressions upon human
beings and relates to them in unique ways. In the Jesus-story, the Evangelists do not
provide the readers with a simple bare record of what Jesus did and said in a "blow by
blow" fashion; instead, they accentuate his relational approach, his activity, and
teachings, in the context of personal interaction with individuals and groups. The two
Nativity stories (Matt. 1-2; Lk. 1-2) report the virgin-conception only briefly. The
Evangelists’ chief concerns are to narrate how simple human figures relate to the "good
news" of Jesus' birth (Joseph, Herod, astrologers, the Scribes, Zechariah, Elizabeth,
Mary, shepherds, Simeon, Anna). Through these persons, the overall impression,
conveyed by Matthew and Luke is that Jesus is the "good news of God."
The Evangelists offer a portrait of Jesus, not simply a photographic image. In this
portrait, they provide color, depth, and a full and dynamic perspective of Jesus in his
relatedness to others. They open a living window into Jesus' relationships through which
to view Jesus, a view that cannot be captured by mere academic discussions of the
various Christological titles; often the confessional titles express Jesus’ distance from
humanity. Even, in John's lofty Prologue, the Word (lo/goj), who existed prior to creation
and was involved in creation, became flesh (Jn. 1:14) and pitched his tent among people.
The Word is also equivalent with the "Utterly Unique God" (monogenh/j), who resides in a
privileged relationship ("in the bosom,” ko/lpoj) with the Father, and who is thus able to
"tell the story, narrate, exegete" (e'chgei=sqai) the Father (Jn. 1:18). Thus, through his
relationality with the Father, Jesus is empowered to share the story, nature, and
relationality of the Father with others. Similarly, just as Jesus lives in an ever-so-close
relationship with the Father, so the Fourth Evangelist, who is in the privileged position
"at the bosom of Jesus" (13:25 sth=qoj), is able to narrate the Jesus-story through his
gospel.
Not only is Jesus a social person, but he expresses the sociality of God, who
invites people to a new and full relationship with Jesus, as a man, who is gentle and
humble. By way of contrast, religious leaders saddle people with burdensome demands,
expressed through Jewish casuistry (Matt. 11:25-30; 23:4). Jesus' people, however, will
experience relationality with Jesus as well as the Father through a unique camaraderie.
People relate to Jesus in diverse ways. Over the course of time, they realize that
he transcends ordinary human life. Those who experience the Risen Lord also affirm the
close connection with Jesus in his earthly ministry. They do not think of him as a "ghost"
or "angelic being"—instead the Risen Lord is one and the same with the person who had
walked and related with them on the Palestinian countryside. This is the same person
with whom they had shared countless meals. Their concern for continuity between the
earthly Jesus and the Risen Lord leads them to select a twelfth apostle, with the necessary
qualification that this person was one who had been an eyewitness of Jesus and with him,

Christology and the Relational Jesus

01/28/09
 2

from the very beginning of his public ministry (Acts 1:21ff.). What that relationship
implies is admirably articulated in I John.
"That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen
with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled concerns
the Word of Life" (I Jn. 1:3).
Among other things, the Jesus-story includes: 1) The significant relational impressions
that Jesus creates, 2) The varied human responses to Jesus, 3) Titles by which people
address Jesus.

1. Significant relational impressions that Jesus creates:

The superior impression that Jesus makes upon others (disciples, individuals,
crowds, and religious authorities) is variously narrated and cannot be easily categorized
under one heading. Just as Jesus is an exceedingly complex person, the response of the
various people is also exceedingly intricate. Further, the same persons relate in many
different ways to Jesus, based upon the context of his revelation of himself, in diverse
works and his words. Various events elicit an incredible attraction to this person and also
reveal a distancing posture from the same individuals as they grapple with the mystery of
his person.
Impressions of his interest in people. Through stories, explicit teachings, and
parabolic language, Jesus reflects his interest and God's concern with people, illustrated by
the trilogy of parables in Lk. 15 that reflects Jesus' and God's interest in people. Through his
commitment to the marginalized people (Lk. 15:1-2), he acts in concert with God as he
portrays concern through a searching shepherd, searching housewife, and a searching father.
People are of inestimable worth, far more than a sheep or coin. The finding of the lost is
celebrated with a contagious joy, which must be shared, with other shepherds, neighboring
women, or a father's household. In the third parable, the repentance motif uppermost—if
present, it is only minor; the father's joy over the recovered son reigns supreme. The story
emphasizes the priority of God's love for sinners; indeed, it is God's love and grace for all
that makes repentance possible. The father, like Jesus and God, loves both sons with a love
that knows no limits, that forgives without boundaries, and that rejoices with an uncontained
joy.
Jesus points to the ludicrous practice of tithing kitchen spices, without reference to
people; instead, he points to social justice, mercy, and faith—the all-important responses for
treating people (Matt. 23:23-24). God's relationality is expressed in Jesus’ teaching and
practical interest in others. Jesus spends himself upon people. He is accessible to those from
the top to the bottom of society: Nicodemus, the rich young ruler, the twelve, other disciples,
Lazarus, Mary, Martha, fallen men and women, hated tax-collectors, such as Zacchaeus.
Jesus is busy, “non-stop” with the needs of others. He is no recluse or sage who retreats to
some hermit-like existence; instead he is constantly “on the move” in beneficent ways,
expressing his compassion and grace through teaching, responsiveness to the needs of others,
to their healing, and to the reorientation of their lives. He finds it necessary late at night or
early in the morning to be renewed in his relationship with the Father. In the daytime, he is in
constant demand. Everywhere Jesus goes, he looks to relate to people, and thereby relate
them to God, who seeks relatedness with them. Through Jesus, God is bent on a rescue-
mission for people who have lost their way; Jesus' joy in table-fellowship with the
marginalized also reflects the joy of God and his angels

Christology and the Relational Jesus

01/28/09
 3

Impressions of his compelling presence. The effect of Jesus' person, words and
works is clearly expressed through the responses of those around him. The Baptist, who
is the promised forerunner, immediately senses his own inferior position in baptizing the
superior "Coming One"; he tries avoiding the anomalous situation of a mightier one
being baptized by the lesser (Matt. 3:14-15; cf. also Matt. 3:11-19; Mk. 1:7-8; Luke 3:15-
18; John 1:26-27). As the Baptist's ministry winds down, he recognizes the centrality of
the bridegroom; the Baptist diminishes in comparison, since he is simply the friend of the
bridegroom who shares in the joy of the occasion. It is of divine necessity that Jesus will
increase while John the Baptist must decrease (Jn. 3:28-30).
Jesus' command, "follow me," invites relationship and obedience that are coupled
with his faithful promise. People leave their vocations, families, homes and commit
themselves fully to a new uncharted experience, since it is founded on a person and
promise, "I will make you to become fishers of people" (Mk. 1:16-20). The disciples
give themselves without reservation to this one who reorients their lives (cf. also Jn. 1:39,
43). They discover that Jesus lays down conditions and rules for discipleship when he
invites them into relationship (Matt. 8:18-22; Lk. 9:47-60; Matt. 19:16-29—the rich
young ruler, par.). In a fishing context, Jesus commands Peter, the expert fishermen.
And Peter obeys the seemingly absurd command, even though it runs counter to his
savvy as to the right time and place to fish. He will not contradict Jesus' presence and
authority. Thus he says "But at your word, I will let down the nets" (Lk. 5:5). While
Jesus enjoys the company of others, he does not allow for intrusion into his own inner
circle. A paralytic at the Sheep Pool hears his word, "Arise, take up your bed and walk"
(Jn. 5:8), obeys, and is healed of his 38-year paralysis.
Jesus' formal appointment of the twelve begins with the purpose statement, "to be
with him" (Mark 3:14-15). Relationship with Jesus precedes their commission (Mk.
3:14-15; Matt. 10:5ff. Mk. 6:7ff. Lk. 9:1ff.) or the seventy's charge (Lk. 10:1ff.) on their
short-term missions trip. Due to their relationship to him, they obey and venture out into
the hazardous task of proclaiming the Kingdom of God with a "hands-on" approach.
They carry out his charge and are responsive to Jesus in "report-back" sessions when they
are "with Jesus" again (Mark 6:30). Matthew punctuates his gospel in the beginning, the
mid-point, and conclusion by means of the "with"-language" (Immanuel-"God with us,"
1:23, reinterpreting Isa. 7:14; "I am there in their midst" in the Church's decisions, 18:20;
"I will be with you" in the final commission—28:20). The Fourth Gospel advances the
thought to the day of the Paraclete, when a transition will be made from being "with you"
to the wonder of the inner union between Jesus and his disciples, "in you" (Jn. 14:7).
Moreover, his promise, "I come to you" (Jn. 14:18) will be realized in and through the
person of the Paraclete. Jesus makes an amazing promise, "If anyone loves me, he will
obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our
room with him" (Jn. 14:23).1 What a statement! God the Father and God the Son will
both come to a believer and make their "room" with the believer. This is the same
"room" (monh/) noted in Jn. 14:2, "In my Father's house are many "rooms." The purpose
of Jesus' ministry is to bring people to the Father's "house" (oi0ki/a), and yet, within this
"house," there are many "rooms" that consist of divine and human fellowship.
His commanding presence and independence surface when he sets his own
1The word "room/abode" (monh/ in Jn. 14:23) is linked together with the important Johannine verb, "to
abide" (me/nein).
Christology and the Relational Jesus
01/28/09
 4

agenda and time-table for the course of his ministry; he proceeds to the North into
Gentile territory when he determines the need to leave Jewish soil and minister in other
settings (Matt. 16:13; Mk. 8:27; Mk. 7:24-31; Matt. 15:21-29). Correspondingly, he is
independent with respect to the traditions of the elders (Mk. 7:1ff.). Although he is
responsive to human needs, human questions and problems, he does not allow himself to
be dictated by the agendas of other people, e.g., "And after that no one dared to ask him
any question" (Matt. 22:46; Mk. 12:34; Lk. 20:40). Frequently, Jesus' wishes become
commandments. Thus, Jesus' mother, not rebuffed by Jesus' sharp statement, says to the
servants at the wedding of Cana, "Whatever he says unto you, do it" (Jn. 2:5). We find
no instances where people pay no attention to his claims, requests, or demands. When
Jesus sends his disciples to find a donkey, he is certain that the owner of the donkey will
honor his request (Mk. 11:3; Matt. 21:3; Lk. 19:3).
After Jesus' inaugural address in Nazareth, the angry Jews lead Jesus to a cliff, but
dare not touch him, "But he passing through the midst of them went his way" (Lk. 4:30).
When the Jews intend to stone him, "Jesus hid himself and went out of the Temple" (Jn.
8:59; 10:39). Likewise, he single-handedly expels the vendors from the Temple; it seems
that no one possesses the courage to challenge his compelling presence and behavior
(Matt. 21:12-13; Mk. 11:15-19; Lk. 19:45-48). The term "hour" (w{vra) is central to
John's portrayal (26 occurrences); it is similar to an irresistible force that precludes any
premature event that would forestall his "hour" that is predetermined by the Father, e.g.,
"They sought . . . to take him, and no man laid hand on him, because his hour was not yet
come" (Jn. 7:30; 8:20, Jn. 13:1; 17:1; see also 7:44; Mk. 11:19). Jesus is unmoved by
Herod's intent to kill him or the threats of others; Jesus sends a report back to Herod that
he clearly remains the master of his own destiny (Lk. 13:31-32).
The trial scenes are rich in comic and tragic irony. Ostensibly, Jesus is being
judged by various individuals and groups of people; however, the real judge of the trial is
Jesus, who indicts the High Priest, mob, Sanhedrin, Herod and Pilate—indeed, the whole
world for their rejection of him. Someone may ask, “How does he do this?” Certainly by
his powerful presence and word that indicts. He allows the people, inadvertently to
pronounce their own consequential guilt, "His blood be upon us and our own children"
(Matt. 27:25) and their apostasy, "We have no king but Caesar" (Jn. 19:15).
Impressions of Jesus' filial relationality with his Father. Through teaching,
activity, and prayer, Jesus opens a window for others to witness his unique relationship
with his Father. Jeremias states, "We are so accustomed, and rightly so, to make Jesus
the object of religion that we become apt to forget that in our earliest records he is
portrayed not as the object of religion, but as a religious man."2 It is important to
appreciate his "Abba" ("Father, Dear Father") bond (Mk. 14:36). As a man, Jesus prays,
and as a son, Jesus shares in the sociality of his Father. During Jesus' experience in the
baptism or transfiguration, or in times of prayer, what is communicated to him is not
simply the message or ministry but status and relationship. The major focus in his life
and ministry is not based solely on the message of what he says or does, but who he
is—in relationship with the Father. His mission proceeds from his relational experience
with God.
In Jesus' thanksgiving-prayer (Matt. 11:25-30), we note that Jesus possesses an
unshared sonship. Jesus speaks to God and his friends about the unique depth and
intimacy of the relationship he enjoys with the Father. Jesus not only claims to know
2Ibid., p. 101.
Christology and the Relational Jesus
01/28/09
 5

God, but to know the Father in a way that no one else does. The verb, translated, as "I
know" (ginw/skw) parallels the compound verb, "I fully know (e0piginw/skw). The verbal
forms do not mean the possession of theological information, but a profound experience
that involves mind, heart and will. Knowledge of God means sharing in the sociality or
fellowship with God. . Since Jesus is the unique son, who alone stands in an unmediated
relationship with God, he is able to extend a mediated relationship to others with God as
their Father. Jesus makes the Father real to others. The mediated knowledge of the
Father is not abstract theology or propositional learning about the nature or attributes of
God. It means an experience of the fully personal and mediated relationship between the
Father and humankind.
In John 5, the Father-son relationship is comparable to a similar relationship in a
family bond. At birth, an infant is completely subject to the parent, in that the infant does
nothing in and of itself—it is fully dependent (John 5:19, 30). Subsequently, the child
begins to learn from the parental example as the parent "shows all things" to the child,
which the child also does (5:20). Finally, the child becomes a young man or young
woman to whom the parent now "gives authority" (5:27).3 At the same time, it is love
that provides the link between the three life-stages: infancy (dependence), adolescence
(learned exposure), and mature adulthood (independence). Through his dependent
relationship with the Father, Jesus is enabled to see what the Father is doing (5:19) and
thereby, to gauge his actions accordingly. Two items are singled out in this unique
relationship: an authority to administer justice (5:22), an authority to enliven the dead
(5:21). His authority to administer justice is given to him, but from the human
perspective, it is the consequence of conscious rejection or dishonor of both the son and
the Father.
Luke provides the reason for the Lord's Prayer (Lk. 11:1), which begins with "Our
Father"-language. His disciples sense that religious authorities provide a model-prayer,
which would thereby reflect their disciples' attachment to them as leading religious
authorities, like the Baptist; they wish to become disciples of their one true leader. The
request is granted and the disciples are invited into the sociality of family relationship.
The request is positioned by their observation of Jesus' praying activity (11:1). In a
similar way, Jesus prays at Lazarus' tomb in such a public way that people might believe
that Jesus is the "sent-one" from God (Jn. 11:41-42). His prayer begins with Father-
language. In Jesus' High-Priestly Prayer, there are concentric circles of concern, from
Jesus' relationship with the Father (Jn. 17:1-5), to the disciples (17:6-19), and finally, to
the world (17:20-26). Through this opened window, the disciples view and experience
the progressive flow of life and love, from the Father, to Jesus, to them, and their witness
in the world through unity and love. In a meaningful way, Jesus uses the Father-address
at various points in his prayer (17:1, 11, 24, 25).
Impressions of his miraculous power and its effect upon others. Numerous stories
in the gospels narrate Jesus' miraculous power. Jesus does not begin his ministry with
works to demonstrate his superiority over others. Indeed, before he begins his ministry to
others, the Devil challenges Jesus in vain to display his powers such as would coerce
faith—a challenge, which Jesus rejects. People who come to Jesus do not doubt his
ability to effect the miraculous although they may be uncertain about his willingness to
effect a cure/exorcism in their particular instance (Mk. 1:40; Matt. 8:2; Lk. 5:12; also
3Cullen I K Story, The Fourth Gospel: Its Purpose, Pattern and Power, (Shippensburg, PA: Ragged Edge
Press, 2000), pp. 121-132.
Christology and the Relational Jesus
01/28/09
 6

Matt. 8:9ff. Lk. 7:8ff.). Even Jesus' opponents, who challenge him to perform a
conclusive sign from his cross, ostensibly do not doubt his miraculous power.
There is a numinous quality of Jesus that is variously perceived by others,
including his own disciples. They recognize that there is something "different" about
him, expressed by the supplicants' acts of physical prostration before him or by reaching
out to touch his garment for healing (Mk. 5:25-34; Matt. 9:20-29; Lk. 8:43-48). Needy
people kneel before him (Mk. 1:40; 5:22); demoniacs recognize his authority and identity
and cower before his very presence (Mk. 1:24; 3:11; 5:7; 9:20). Even his opponents
recognize his charismatic authority when they question its source, "By what authority do
you do these things?" (Mk. 11:28). As Dunn notes, "The aim of the question was to
expose Jesus' lack of authority; but the very fact that it was put to him demonstrates a
recognition on the part of Jesus' opponents that his words and actions embodied and
expressed a claim to high authority--only it was an authority they could not recognize,
without rabbinic or priestly sanction."4
His hometown folk struggle with Jesus' "otherness," recognized through his
teaching, wisdom, and mighty works, "And on the Sabbath he began to teach in the
synagogue; and many who heard him were astonished, saying, 'Where did this man get
all this? What is the wisdom given to him? What mighty works are wrought by his
hands!'?" (Mk. 6:2). His personal concern is expressed through effective power: the blind
receive sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, demoniacs are set free, the dead are
raised, and the poor and sinful experience his acceptance and power to forgive their sins.
The authority to act in wholeness for others is explicit and is transferred to Jesus'
disciples, who are sent out on short-term mission trips (Matt. 10:1; Mk. 6:7; Lk. 9:1),
"Behold, I have given you authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and over all the
power of the enemy; and nothing shall hurt you" (Lk. 10:19).
Jesus uses his Spirit-given power (Mk.1:11) for the wellbeing of others; he
proclaims the good news of the Kingdom of God (Mk. 1:14-15; Matt. 4:17; Lk. 4:16-30).
He heals the sick (Lk. 4:33-36), exorcises the demon-possessed (Mk. 1:23-27), changes
water into wine (Jn. 2:1-11), feeds the 5000 (Mk. 6:30-44; Lk. 9:10-17; Jn. 6:1-14) and
4000 (Mk. 8:1-10; Matt. 15:32-39) in a miraculous manner so as to meet the real needs of
people. One exception concerns the cursing/withering of the fig-tree (Mk. 11:12-14, 20-
25). Jesus seeks relationship with others before they associate his benefits and gifts with
his person. Even though people come to him with their pressing physical needs, they
learn that he deals with them individually, in a completely personal manner; thereby, they
develop a relationship with his person, not merely as a benefactor. The disciples soon
learn that following Jesus not only means that they become the recipients of various
forms of blessing, but it also enables them to deepen their relationship with him, apart
from certain "benefits." Thus, they will learn what it means to drink his cup of suffering
and share in his fearful baptism (Mk. 10:35-40; Matt. 20:20-23)—quite apart from
personal gain. His gifts and benefits are appreciated in greater ways when people are
joined by faith in him. They are attracted by Jesus' personal interest in them as he also
reveals his concerns through his attendance to needed benefits and gifts.
Impressions of his commanding authority to forgive sins. Jesus' claim to forgive
sins not only causes perplexity, but offence as well. To the religious leaders, his claim
was tantamount to blasphemy in that he assumes God's sole prerogative (Psa. 103:3; Isa.
43:25). In OT practice, the sacrifices of the High Priest would effectively atone for sins,
4 James Dunn, Jesus and the Spirit. (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1975), 77.
Christology and the Relational Jesus
01/28/09
 7

but it is clear that God alone reserves the right to forgive sins through sacrifices.
Unintentional sins could thereby be atoned for, but not sins of "a high hand" (intentional
sins). However, divine acceptance of the marginalized and publicly acknowledged
sinners is symbolized through Jesus' consistent table-fellowship with the religious
outcasts. Thereby, he earns for himself the sneering epithet, "glutton, a drunkard and
friend of tax-collectors and sinners" (Lk. 7:34-35). When four friends lower a paralytic
down through the roof, Jesus initially pronounces the forgiveness of the man's sin,
"Child, your sins are forgiven"5 (Mk. 2:5 par.). He then substantiates his divine
prerogative through the actual healing, "in order that you may know that the Son of Man
has authority on earth to forgive sins . . ." (Mk. 2:10). He forgives the sinful woman's
"many sins," thus inspiring her lavish gratitude ("she loves more"). Conversely, his
opponents are characterized as those who "love less." (Lk. 7:49). Critics question his
claim, but they are unable to deny the facts that are before them.
Impressions of his insight, experience and embodiment of truth. Jesus impresses
individuals and groups with his solid commitment to truth and reality. He demonstrates
penetrating insight into the nature, circumstances, and motives of individuals. There are
occasions when he "reads" the thoughts of people; thus his prophetic insight (not
omniscience) is expressed as human needs arose: to the paralytic (Mk. 2:5 par.), to
opponents (2:8; Lk. 5:22), to a sinful woman and his critics (Lk. 7:39ff.), to Nathaniel
(Jn. 1:47ff.), and to a Samaritan woman (Jn. 4:16-18). He also knows of some events
occurring outside of his own locale (Mk. 7:29; Jn. 4:50-52) that are later confirmed. The
same holds true for his three passion pronouncements (Mk. 8:31; 9:12-13; 10:33-35).
When Jesus speaks, the people perceive that he speaks with "authority" (e'cousi/a),
with a perception of truth that is clearly firsthand, both before and after an exorcism (Mk.
1:22, 27). He claims to embody the truth (Jn. 14:6). His very person confronts people
with truth, rendering them incapable of remaining neutral or objective. His truth cannot
be casually ignored or dismissed. Jesus approaches no one as "elect" or "reprobate";
rather, he addresses them as free moral agents, who make choices and must live with
their consequences, for good or for ill. Thus, his truth confronts people with a critical
decision: Will they become what God desires them to be or will they remain detached
from personal relationship with him? Thus, the rich young ruler is challenged to make a
decision as to his relative commitment to God or his riches (Mk. 10:21; Matt. 19:21). To
give his goods to the poor is only an initial stop. The goal is that he should follow Jesus,
i.e., establish a close relationship to him (Mk. 10:21). Not only does Jesus press for a
decision by unbelievers, but he similarly challenges his disciples as to their own personal
witness, "But who do you say that I am?" (Matt. 16:15 par.). In the light of Peter's later
threefold denial, Jesus recommissions the fallen leader in a threefold manner, for his
pastoral and nurturing role within the new community of faith (Jn. 21:15-17). Peter is
thereby made aware of the implications of his relationship to Jesus. Through numerous
encounters, Jesus articulates that the new life he embodies and offers begins with an
attachment and relationship to his person, to be followed by growth in relationship to him
for their future lives and direction.
Impressions of his courage and vulnerability. Jesus exhibits courage when he
confronts the religious and civil powers of his day. In climates of suspicion and
murderous intent, Jesus aggressively heals a man with a withered hand by urging the man
5 An example of the use of the divine passive, i.e., "God has forgiven your sins."
Christology and the Relational Jesus
01/28/09
 8

to come into the center of the assembly, thereby making his healing both public and
aggressive (Mk. 3:1-6). He speaks numerous parables, which are addressed to people
with certain problems such as religious pride (Lk. 18:9-14), and some, who critique Jesus'
relatedness to the marginalized, through table fellow-fellowship with them (Lk. 15:1-2;
Lk. 19:1-10). When Jesus sets his face like a flint to travel to Jerusalem, he does so with
determination and vulnerability (Lk. 9:51). His travel to Judea to raise Lazarus from the
dead is set in a context of homicidal hostility, well-expressed by Thomas (Jn. 11:16). He
enters Jerusalem with vulnerability (Jn. 12:9-19). The religious climate is filled with
vicious intent, not only for Jesus but for Lazarus as well, who has just been raised from
the dead. Various actions, such as washing the disciples' feet (Jn. 13:1-11) and discourses
in the Upper Room (Jn. 13-17), reveal Jesus' vulnerability as well as his volition. Earlier
in his Mashal of the Good Shepherd, Jesus underscores the truth that in his upcoming
violent end, he is no passive agent; Jesus voluntarily gives his life, which implies that his
accusers are unable to "do him in" (Jn. 10:18).
Impressions of the mystery and paradox of his person (attraction and revulsion).
Blaise Pascal said, "A religion which does not affirm that God is hidden is not true."
Others have pointed to "the elusive presence,"6 which creates an incredible disturbance
for people as they encounter Jesus. Similar to magnetic charges, there is both an
attraction and revulsion in relationship to Jesus, expressed by individuals and groups.
This dual contradictory reaction, in one way or another, suggests the greatness of his
person. When Jesus acts in a saving manner for disciples who believe that they are
perishing out at sea, they respond with amazement, "What sort of man is this that even
the winds and the sea obey Him?" (Matt. 8:26). Peter senses that the authority of Jesus is
far superior to his own fishing expertise and the result is a miraculous catch of fish. His
response is one of utter self-revulsion—"Lord, depart from me for I am a sinful man"
(Lk. 5:8). When the disciples see Jesus walking on the water, "they were troubled and
cried out for fear" (Mk. 6:49-50; Matt. 14:26). Similarly, Jesus' teaching evokes fright by
the crowds (Matt. 9:8). Frequently, the disciples experience a fear of rebuke when "they
did not understand the saying(s): "they were afraid to ask him." They apparently feel
that asking questions or raising issues on their part might incur his displeasure or show
disrespect. In this they sadly fail to sense what is in Jesus’ heart and mind
There are significant moments where the Evangelists convey these dual
responses: annunciation stories, transfiguration and resurrection appearances. Mary is
encouraged as one who has been favored by God and the recipient of the divine promise,
"The Lord is with you" (Lk. 1:28, 30) and summoned to rejoice in Gabriel's message.
However, she is also admonished to "cease being afraid"7 (1:30). The text notes that "she
was troubled and considered in her mind what sort of greeting this might be" (1:29). The
experience of the disciples on the Mount of Transfiguration is unnerving, "they fell on
their faces and were exceedingly afraid" (Matt. 17:6), unthinking (Mk. 9:6 par.), and
silent (Lk. 9:36). Similarly, the appearances of the Risen Jesus, either in Jerusalem, on
the Emmaus Road or in Galilee evoke responses of both joy and fright:
"Cease being afraid" (Matt. 28:5)
"So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy . . ." (28:7)
"And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped Him" (28:9)
6e.g., Samuel Terrien, The Elusive Presence, (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1978).
7The use of the negative (mh/) "no/not" when used with the present imperative, "fear," points to the
cessation of a response or activity that is already in progress.
Christology and the Relational Jesus
01/28/09
 9

"Stop being afraid" (28:10)

"And when they saw him, they worshiped him, but some doubted" (28:18)
"And they went out and fled from the tomb; for trembling and astonishment had
come upon them; and they said nothing to any one, for they were afraid" (Mk.
16:8)
"And as they were frightened and bowed their faces to the ground . . ." (Lk. 24:5)
"And as they were saying this, Jesus himself stood among them. But they were
startled and frightened, and supposed that they saw a spirit" (24: 36-37)
"And while they still disbelieved for joy, and wondered . . ." (24:41)
"the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came
and said to them, 'Peace be with you'" (Jn. 20:19)
"Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord" (20:20)
While the exact chronology, variety, and place of the resurrection appearances are
extremely complex issues, the gospel narratives unite in their witness of the intermingling
of great joy and great fear. At Pentecost, the disciples' response is notably different; it
was now clear to them that Jesus is not only risen from the dead, but is also the Son of
God in power. He is both the savior and heavenly judge (Acts 2:40; 10:42; 17:31).
Through this admixture of joy and fear, various witnesses of the Risen Jesus, express
their great attraction to Jesus that is balanced by their fear/awe of this person. He is like
no other; he also belongs to a "wholly other" sphere. Attraction to Jesus and love for him
are compatible with fear and awe of him. He is familiar, yet strangely unfamiliar.
His acceptance, love, and compassion. People also experience and respond to the
incredible love that Jesus expresses for them. Jesus is the one who knits together love for
God and love for others in an indissoluble bond; such a dual-bond is the supreme
commandment upon which all other commandments depend.
Jesus accepts others where they are; he does not expect people to "get cleaned up"
before he relates to them. In the Middle East, table-fellowship means acceptance,
celebration, and commitment to fellow-participants of a common meal with sacral
implications. His offer of discipleship to one hated tax collector, Levi, issues in Jesus'
table-fellowship with other tax collectors. Here is one who takes them seriously and
accepts them in an unconditional manner. Correspondingly, Jesus answers the charges of
his critics with the metaphor of a doctor with diseased patients. A doctor goes through
medical school and various internships for the express purpose of being with the sick. It
is unthinkable for a doctor to go through necessary training and refuse to be with the
diseased. Thus, Jesus affirms that his place (as a physician) is with sinners (Mk. 2:18-
22); he is constantly found in their presence as he accepts them and relates to them,
where they are. He invites himself to Zacchaeus' home for table-fellowship, before
Zacchaeus' repentance and planned restitution. Through a trilogy of parables in Lk. 15,
Jesus justifies his acceptance, table-fellowship and celebration with tax-collectors and
sinners. He is to be found where they are.
He is aware of profound human problems with all of their various forms of
alienation. He views every person he encounters as possessing inestimable worth (Matt.
6:25-34). He is concerned with the needs of his audience, not with his own agenda,
troubles, or difficulties that would detract his interest away from his social environment.
Even though Jesus experiences incredible agony in Gethsemane, he still has his disciples
in mind, “be watchful and pray; otherwise you might fall into the snares of the Tempter”

Christology and the Relational Jesus

01/28/09
 10

(Mk. 14:38; Matt. 26:41; Lk. 22:46). Similarly, on the cross, where he experiences
physical, emotional, spiritual agony and shame, he nonetheless provides for the future
wellbeing of his mother, the beloved disciple (Jn. 19:20-27), and the needed
encouragement for a dying thief (Lk. 23:39-43).
People genuinely appreciate Jesus' willingness to share in personal dialogue with
them. Powerful patrons often express no such personal interest in the recipients of their
power. Whatever Jesus does or says comes straight from his heart to the heart of others.
Jesus is equally at home with children as well as adults, with women as well as men, with
educated and uneducated, with poor and powerful, or with religious and irreligious. He
seems to have no difficulty in "switching gears" from one group to another. Further, he
often directs conversation away from external issues to matters of eternal importance.
Thus, when Nicodemus introduces himself with a non-committal courtesy, Jesus directs
him to the necessary birth from on high for entrance into the Kingdom of God. The
Samaritan woman makes a flippant remark about "well water" and being greater than
Jacob our father; Jesus instead deals with the misery of her life and the genuine
satisfaction that he alone offers. Martha is introduced as the charming hostess who
becomes irately jealous at her sister; Jesus reminds her of the essence of life, which she
has forgotten in her busy activities.
Jesus deals with his opponents in the same way. In the Parable of the Wicked
Tenants, Jesus expresses himself with vulnerability in the story, since he is the beloved
son, who offers one last chance for the tenants to honor the owner's claim for the
vineyard and its produce (Matt. 21:33-46). Sadly enough, the religious leaders perceive
that this parable was directed to them, thereby leading to a further brutal plot (Matt.
21:45-46). He is desperate to offer them one last chance to turn from their dastardly
plan—to turn and to accept the salvation offered through relationship with him. His offer
of the dipped morsel to Judas appears to be a "last-ditched-effort" to turn Judas from his
betrayal-plan. It is not at all surprising to find that the people en masse flock to him. To
be sure, they are attracted by his powerful deeds, but at the same time, they sense that this
is one who takes genuine interest in them. His spontaneous interest in people enables
them to overcome their inhibitions and approach him. Such interest creates a "safe"
environment for people to confess their sins or venture vulnerable expressions (e.g.,
anointing his feet). It is Jesus who offers his own the special privilege of "friendship"
(Jn. 15:15), "no longer do I call you servants . . . but I have called you friends."
Friendship is defined here as privileged communication with his own.
Compassion is a motivation for Jesus’ teaching ministry. It is shown to the Jews
as he teaches the masses, since they are “as sheep not having a shepherd” (Mk. 6:34;
Matt. 9:36). Compassion goes hand in hand with activity, e.g., his healing ministry,
teaching, and feeding miracles:
“As he went ashore he saw a great throng; and he felt compassion for them, and
healed their sick” (Matt. 14:14)
“And Jesus in compassion touched their [two blind men] eyes, and immediately
they received their sight and followed him” (Matt. 20:24)
“I have compassion upon the crowd because they have remained with me three
days and they do not have anything to eat” (Mk. 8:2; cf. Matt. 8:2)
“And when the Lord saw her [widow of Nain] he had compassion on her and said
to her, ‘Do not weep.’” (Lk. 7:13)

Christology and the Relational Jesus

01/28/09
 11

It is striking that the verb “to feel compassion” (splagxni/zesqai) occurs only in the gospels
(12 times), each time with reference to Jesus’ emotive motivation (two of the occurrences
of the verb are used in parables by Jesus). People immediately sense his compassion for
them and seek him for some evidence of his compassion. They assume that Jesus is
willing to give advice or help them; sometimes they appeal to his will (Mk. 1:40; Matt.
8:2) and lay their requests before Him (Mk. 1:40; Mk. 2:1-12; 9:22ff; Matt. 8:2; 8, 9; Lk.
7:8ff.).
Jesus never demands any reward or compensation for his help nor do the people
respond with remuneration for his help. There are some instances where people express
spontaneous gratitude (Lk. 7:36ff; 17:16). However, Jesus clearly directs their attention
away from the gift to the giver (Mk. 1:44; Matt. 8:4; Lk. 5:14; Lk. 13:10-17). Those who
receive his benefits, but are unwilling to risk acceptance of Jesus' compassion and
relationship with him, soon lose what has been given to them. Jesus pronounces woes on
the Galilean cities that were unresponsive to the benefits that occurred in their midst
(Matt. 11:20-24; Lk. 10:13-15). The love of Jesus is expressed as compassion and grace,
i.e., his attitude and saving activity towards those whom he loves; correspondingly the
recipients bring nothing to the helpful event that would in some way make them
deserving of such blessing.
Over the course of time in the Early Church, people become progressively aware
of the extent of Christ’s love. Thereby, their appreciation grows for the greatness of his
grace, love, and benefits. While other human gifts lose their value to the recipient over
time (e.g., Christmas gifts), Jesus’ gifts and benefits grow in human recipients (I Cor.
15:10; II Cor. 8:9). After the Ascension, the Church more fully appreciates the
immensity and magnitude of Christ’s love than during Jesus’ lifetime. While the Gospel
records narrate particular grace-events, extended to various individuals, the Early Church
comes to appreciate that the whole of Jesus’ life, ministry, death and resurrection express
his love, grace, and compassion for the whole of humankind (Acts 10:38; Eph. 5:21;
5:25; I Pet. 1:8). His compassion is directed to persons, motivated by his deep desire to
accept them and help them in their most pressing needs, irrespective of the relative worth
or position of the recipient(s).
Impressions of his transforming presence and power. The response by Jesus'
followers is not simply external, but they respond in trust and obedience to his call. Their
initial commitment to Jesus also issues in an inner transformation, well expressed by the
significant change in Peter's name (Matt. 16:17-18), which would make clear his future
leadership role in the Early Church. The sinful woman who expresses such lavish
gratitude ("loves more") to Jesus has been transformed by the power of Jesus' forgiveness
of her past (Lk. 7:35-50; see also Mk. 14:3-9; Matt. 26:6-13; Jn. 12:1-8). The power of
Jesus' acceptance, table-fellowship and forgiveness issues in Zacchaeus' distribution of
half of his wealth for the poor and restitution for illegal seizure (Lk. 19:1-10). Regardless
of the type of positive interaction that Jesus shares with others, the effect is the
same—people are filled with strength for their new way of life. The various changes that
occur in individuals are holistic and affect the deepest core of their existence. While we
do not read of the future history of each individual that Jesus touches; several stories
provide ample evidence of typical responses. We find that a person such as Mary
Magdalene, from whom Jesus had cast out seven demons (Lk. 23:49), goes to the tomb
on Easter morning (Mk. 15:19; Jn. 20:1). In turn, she becomes one of the first "apostles"

Christology and the Relational Jesus

01/28/09
 12

of the resurrection. Such changes are wrought by Jesus as the giver of life (Jn. 10:10),
the one who is the resurrection and the life (Jn. 11:25; way, truth and the life Jn. 14:6).
Impressions of his revolutionary approach coupled with accommodation. When
Jesus relates to others, he often comes off as a revolutionary through his words and his
actions. In a score of encounters, he is a great controversialist. He affirms his
commitment to Torah (instruction) and sharply opposes Pharisaic religious tradition
concerning issues such as the "washing" rituals or Corban (Mk. 7:1-23 par.). Apparently,
the Pharisees hold higher regard for their religious "fence," i.e., tradition, instead of
Torah. He argues against the Sadducees and their denial of the supernatural, including
their denial of the resurrection (Mk. 12:18-27 par.). Through encounter with others and
through his parables, he emphasizes the truth that the new relationship that he offers is
not based upon religious performance but upon divine grace for those who own up to
their own bankruptcy (Lk. 18:9-14). His story-parable of the generous employer makes it
clear that God is utterly free to be gracious (Matt. 20:1-16). In the Sermon on the Mount
(Matt. 5-7), Jesus contrasts the language, "you have heard," with his claim, "But I say to
you" (Matt. 5:21-48). The Pharisees stress their withdrawal from the world, while Jesus
reveals an open stance to the world, with his radical inclusion of all persons, particularly
the marginalized.
Concurrently, Jesus speaks and acts with accommodation or qualification of his
controversial approaches. While he affirms the ongoing validity of Torah, he is also
aware that Scripture can become an idolatrous end in itself. Nevertheless, his critics
refuse personal attachment to him, the one who offers life in the fullest sense (Jn. 5:39-
40). He argues that Torah is a means to an end—relationship with him—not an end in
itself. Teachings in the Sermon on the Mount are not to be understood as a set of laws
that bind the people of God. Rather, they offer pictures of the way of life of the people of
God, e.g., words are to be honest, without needed appeal to an oath formula (Matt. 5:33-
37). When oaths are added on, they communicate the telling reality that the people of
God do not always tell the truth.
Jesus argues that the starting point of religious activity is found in the new
relationship with him; he does not abrogate Torah, but expresses the necessary and
responsible conduct in keeping with the new relationship. The Parable of the Two
Builders (Matt. 7:24-27) indicates that the authentic response to Jesus' entire Sermon is
hearing and doing His words.8 In 5:19, Jesus says that whoever does one of the least
commandments and teaches others shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven. The
language of doing/practicing presupposes the new relationship that he offers. There are
occasions where Jesus honors Moses' injunction that lepers show themselves to the priest
for verification (Mk. 1:44), while he himself disobeys Mosaic prohibition against contact
with lepers (Lev. 13-14). Although grace reigns supreme in Jesus' witness, he
emphasizes that conscious neglect of society's broken people means that one has
consciously sided with the Devil and his angels (Matt. 25:41). While Jesus affirms the
marital union, he also reveals that divorce is a divine accommodation in situations of a
hardened human heart (Deut. 24:1ff; Mk. 10:5). Divorce does not reflect God's primary
intent in creation but reflects his accommodation to broken people in a broken world.
Impressions of his serenity. Jesus also breathes serenity to his followers and
opponents; he not only teaches the meaning of peace in the broadest sense of the term,
8 The verb "to do, practice" (poiei=n) is found 19 times in the Sermon on the Mount.
Christology and the Relational Jesus
01/28/09
 13

but he embodies and conveys wellbeing to others. For example, Jesus quells the rage and
violence of the demoniac(s). Here are those individuals that are unable to be stilled
through medical means or brute strength. Mark clearly expresses the contrast between
the Gerasene demoniac's pitiful existence (Mk. 5:2-8) before the exorcism and his new
existence, after the dramatic exorcism. The freed demoniac is now, "sitting, clothed and
in his right mind." (Mk. 5:14). He then proclaims what the Lord had done for him (Mk.
5:19ff; Lk. 8:39). In several instances of healing or forgiveness, Jesus conveys peace to
the various individuals, subsequent to his acts of grace. Jesus' confrontation with
religious leaders about the woman taken in adultery, issues in an authoritative word of
forgiveness, peace, and a silencing of her accusers (Jn. 8:2-11). Jesus empowers his
disciples with peace before his departure, "Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to
you; not as the world gives do I give to you" (Jn. 14:27; see also Jn. 20:20-21).
Jesus' accusers are likewise met with his peaceful responses. Frequently, they
come for the express purpose of challenge or dispute; Jesus refuses to be drawn into
disputes but clearly sets the general tone of the debate as he points to major issues. He
does not allow for the conversations to degenerate into mere scolding or "put-down." In
one instance, Jesus refuses to be drawn into a squabble over a family inheritance, "Man,
who made me a judge or divider over you?" (Lk. 12:14); instead, he concerns himself
with the more serious issue of covetousness.

2. Varied human responses to Jesus, expressed through verbs and nouns:

People respond to Jesus in various ways and also variously react in different
settings. The Evangelist draw on various verbs and related noun forms to express
differing human responses:
"Fear" (noun, fo/boj) and "to fear/to be afraid" (verb, fobei=sqai), "dare" (tolma=n).
The disciples' response to Jesus walking on water is one of "fear," since they think they
are seeing a ghost, causing them to cry out in terror" (Mk. 6:48-50). Similarly, the
disciples are afraid to ask Jesus about the meaning of the Passion Pronouncement (Lk.
9:45; Mk. 10:32). Onlookers express a "fearful response" to Jesus' authority to forgive
the sins and to heal the paralytic, but also express themselves in positive form, "they
glorified God who gave such authority to men" (Matt. 9:8). Jesus' imperative, "Do not
fear," is intended to encourage Peter, since it is linked with the promise, "from now on,
you will be a fisher of men" (Lk. 5:10). The high priests and scribes likewise "were
afraid" to act with clear resolve to put Jesus to death (Mk. 11:18). The verb, "to dare"
(tolma=n), is only used in negative contexts when disciples or opponents "do not dare" to
ask Jesus about something (Matt. 22:46; Lk. 20:40).
This fear of judgment befalls the demons/demoniacs in Jesus' presence, "What do
we have in common, Jesus of Nazareth? I know who you are, the Holy One of God"
(Mk. 1:24). The two demoniacs of Gadara/Gerasenes cry out, "What do we have in
common, Son of God? Have you come to torment us before the time?" (pro\ kairou= Matt.
8:29). Even though Jesus' presence evokes demonic-confession, he silences them, since
confessions of faith can only come through free persons—not coerced demons. The
demoniacs' reaction indicates that the presence of Jesus not only breaks up demonic
power in the present age, but that very presence portends the future destruction of evil
powers. Elsewhere Jesus proclaims the inevitable and inescapable nature of the coming
judgment, evoking a sense of fear and sober realism (Matt. 25:46; Jn. 5:29; Matt. 10:15;
Christology and the Relational Jesus
01/28/09
 14

Lk. 10:12; Matt. 11:24; Matt. 8:11; Lk. 13:28ff; Matt. 13:42; Matt. 24:30 par.); judgment
is the consequence of freely rejecting Jesus' person and the relationship he offers. Many
of Jesus' audiences do not fully realize that the fear they feel in Jesus' presence is evoked
by the supreme purpose that God assigns to him; ultimately their free response to the
crisis of his person results in salvation or judgment
"Awe/amazement" (noun, qa/mboj) and "to be filled with awe/amazement" (verb,
qambei=sqai). In Mk. 1:27, the verb express the onlookers' response to Jesus' teaching with
authority coupled with his ability to exorcise the demoniac (noun form in Lk. 4:36).9 His
authority is evident in his teaching in that it is immediate, expressed through the contrast
between Rabbinic or prophetic teaching: "You have heard it said . . . . But I say to you"
(Matt. 5:21-48). The verb also expresses the disciples' "amazement" at Jesus' word to the
rich young ruler and his assessment of the real danger facing the rich (Mk. 10:24). The
emotive response also characterizes the disciples as they go up with Jesus to Jerusalem,
leading up to Jesus' third passion pronouncement (Lk. 10:32). After the amazing catch of
fish, the noun also expresses Peter's sense of personal distance from Jesus, since he
regards himself as a sinful man (Lk. 5:8-9).
"To marvel" (verb, qauma/zein). In a number of instances, the verbal form captures
the idea of marvel or astonishment. Thus, the disciples respond with astonishment at this
one who is able to calm the storm (Matt. 8:27; Lk. 8:25); and they become aware of
Jesus' "otherness," i.e. his numinous authority to speak a word and calm a storm. The
verb expresses the crowd's marveling of Jesus' ability to exorcise and heal a deaf and
dumb mute (Matt. 9:33; Lk. 11:14) and also of the disciples' response to Jesus' dialogue
with a Samaritan woman (Jn. 4:27).
The verb "to be perplexed/in fear" or "to be surprised" (e0kplh/ssesqai). While, the
verb refers to those in the Capernaum synagogue (Mk. 1:22; Lk. 4:32), who are perplexed
at Jesus' authority to teach, it also covers their reaction to the exorcism, also related to his
authoritative teaching (Mk. 1:27). It expresses the perplexity of the crowd that has
listened to the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 7:28) or the crowd that is surprised/perplexed
at Jesus' wisdom, mighty works in His Nazareth hometown (Matt. 13:54; Mk. 6:2). The
crowd expresses surprise at Jesus' teaching of the resurrection (Matt. 22:33) and the
Cleansing of the Temple (Mk. 11:18).
"To be overwhelmed with excitement" (verb, e0ci/stasqai) or "overwhelming
excitement" (noun, e[kstasi"). The verb refers to people's profound excitement
with this Jesus who has forgiven the paralytic's sins, who then demonstrates his authority
to forgive sins through the healing of the paralytic. Both the verb and noun are used as
cognate forms with reference to the witnesses of Jairus' daughter, whom Jesus has raised
from the dead (Mk. 5:42). The verb narrates his family's response that he was "out of his
mind" (Mk. 3:21), the same reply of his opponents (though the verb is mai/nesqai Jn.
10:20). The verb communicates the disquieted response from the disciples when Jesus
walks on water (Mk. 6:51), negatively interpreted, "for they did not understand about the
loaves, but their hearts were hardened" (Mk. 6:52). It captures the disciples' anxiety
about entering the Kingdom of God, since Jesus has warned them about the great
difficulty of a rich man being able to enter the Kingdom (Matt. 19:25). Finally, the verb
9Lk. 4:36 And they were all amazed and said to one another, “What is this word? For with authority and
power (e0n e0cousi/a| kai\ duna/mei) he commands the unclean spirits, and they come out.”
Christology and the Relational Jesus
01/28/09
 15

communicates the effect of the women's witness to the Risen Lord, "some women of our
company utterly amazed us" (Lk. 24:22).
The verb "to worship/prostrate oneself" (prosxunei=n). There are occasions where
people fall to their knees and/or worship Jesus. The context generally dictates whether
the physical act of prostration is regarded as the relative act of humble supplication,
genuine worship, or even mockery. Mark narrates that the leper "fell to his knees"
(gonupetw=n Mk. 1:41), while Matthew says that "he knelt/worshipped before him"
(proseku/nei Matt. 8:2), prior to his specific request. The father who pleads for his
epileptic son (demon-possessed) "kneels" (gonupetw=n) before Jesus before he makes his
specific request on behalf of his son. The rich young ruler "falls upon his knees"
(gonupeth/saj), probably out of deference to Jesus who may provide the answer as to how he
may inherit eternal life (Mk. 10:17). The verbal expression with the noun narrates Peter's
physical and spiritual response to the miraculous catch of fish. He splashed his way
through the water to land, where "he fell to his knees" (prose/pesen toi=j go/nasin Lk. 5:8) before
Jesus. The form, "they worshipped" (proseku/noun) describes the soldiers' mockery of Jesus,
this time referring to their mocking physical actions, joined with their clothing Jesus with
a purple robe (a sign of kingship), striking him in the face with a reed, spitting on him,
and placing a crown of thorns upon his head—all shameful behavior of feigned mockery.
"To grumble" (verb, goggu/zein), "schism" (noun, sxi/sma), "to be moved with
indignation" (a0ganaktei=n), "to offend (verb skandali/zw), "to take offence at" (verb skandali/zesqai
e0n), "offense, stumbling block" (noun ska/ndalon). Murmuring or grumbling is the
frequent response of Jesus' critics. In Luke 5:30, the Pharisees and Scribes
"grumble/murmur" against Jesus for his table-fellowship with tax-collectors and known
sinners. Jesus aggressively heals a man with a withered hand, and is grieved at the
leaders' "hard hearts," even before the healing (Mk. 3:5; Matt. 12:14; a vicious plot is also
evident in Matt. 26:3-5; Mk. 14:1-2). The verb "murmur/grumble" is frequently used to
describe the reaction of many of Jesus' opponents or would be followers, e.g., after the
feeding of the five thousand (Jn. 6:41, 43, 61). The verb "to be moved with indignation"
(a0ganaktei=n) communicates the response of others, religious leaders, the crowd and even
his disciples to Jesus' actions or his words. In Matt. 21:15, the verb refers to the
indignant comeback of the High Priests and Scribes to Jesus' Triumphal Entry. The
synagogue president resents Jesus’ healing of a crippled woman on the Sabbath (Lk.
13:14). From his vantage point, Jesus should have chosen another day to heal her. The
disciples themselves are annoyed with the presumed waste of money in the anointing of
Jesus with such expensive oil (Mk. 13:3-4). And the disciples are argue with each other
about positions of requested prominence in the coming Kingdom of God (Matt. 21:24).
The noun "schism" (sxi/sma) in the Fourth Gospel refers to the divergent reactions
of people and their leaders towards Jesus (Jn. 7:43; 9:16; 10:19), since he often confronts
people with a "crisis" (kri/sij) of decision (Jn. 3:19-21). The skanal—word family expresses
both the active sense of "causing another to stumble" while the passive form (also
deponent) conveys the idea of "being led into sin" or "taking offence." The forms narrate
the fickle response to Jesus when commitment to Jesus collides with "suffering or
persecution (Matt. 13:21) or the limiting response of Nazareth's inhabitants at Jesus’
presence (Matt. 13:57). On occasion, the Pharisees are deeply offended by Jesus'
Christology and the Relational Jesus
01/28/09
 16

teaching about the origin of evil. Jesus claims that they are not only blind leaders of the
blind, but are a devilish plant, which must be rooted up (Matt. 15:12-15). Even the
disciples will be offended at Jesus, for he solemnly says, “this night you will all have
doubts about me, i.e., lose your faith in me" (Matt. 26:31). As the disciples lose their
focus and centre and then panic, they will experience their disruption of their fellowship
with Jesus. Peter cannot accept this sad pronouncement and thus, avows his loyalty, even
if the other disciples “fall away" (Matt. 26:33). Earlier, Peter's rejection of the first
passion pronouncement, constitutes a "stumbling-block" for Jesus, and thus, Peter is
called "Satan" (Matt. 16:23). In various charges to the disciples, Jesus teaches his own
that they must avoid creating "stumbling-blocks," and thereby, cause others to disbelieve
Jesus.
"To trust/entrust" (verb, pisteu/w), "faith/trust" (noun, pi/stij). Many stories link
"trust" with Jesus' saving help. Faith makes its appearance in unlikely places through
many unlikely people. Correspondingly, trust is strangely absent in other environments,
where people "know better" or should know better. Jesus offers no faith-formula, creedal
dogma, recipe, or program; yet he is constantly alert, seeking to stimulate and deepen the
trust of people in himself as they able to entrust themselves in committed relationship
with him. Numerous stories highlight expressions of trust to Jesus with various nuances.
On occasion, faith means a personal trust in Jesus that God is acting through
Jesus in a special way and that the hoped-for Kingdom of God ("dream of God") has
arrived in his person, words, and works. Since the gospel expresses that the turning point
of the ages has arrived and the Kingdom of God is present, people are summoned to
"repent" and "trust" in the good news with the radical newness that Jesus offers (Mk.
1:14-15). God takes the initiative and a readiness to trust means that people have
genuinely heard and have freely accepted him and the divine invitation.
Faith is linked with an abiding "faithfulness," or fidelity in the midst of life's
ambiguities and struggles, expressed in Jesus' refusal to assign blame for suffering and
tragedy (Lk. 13:1-5; Jn. 9:1-3). The twin story-parables of The Widow and Unjust Judge
(Lk. 18:1-8) and the Persistent Neighbor (Lk. 11:5-13) highlight the need for faithful and
persistent prayer. At the conclusion of the first parable, Jesus concludes with the
rhetorical question, "And when the Son of Man comes will he find the faith (persistent
faith)? (Lk. 18:8). Jesus honors the faith and wisdom of a humble yet persistent Syro-
Phoenician woman with a demon-possessed daughter (Matt. 15:28), "great is your faith."
When Jesus prophesies of Peter's forthcoming three-fold denial, he has already prayed for
Peter that his "faith (faithfulness or loyalty) will not fail" (Lk. 22:31).
Faith means trust in Jesus' miraculous power to meet human needs (a paralytic
Mk. 2:1-12; a hemorrhaging woman for twelve years or a daughter who has died (Mk.
5:24b-43), disciples fearing drowning at sea (Mk. 4:35-41). By way of contrast, a
practical failure to entrust oneself to Jesus is a sign of an unbelieving generation (Matt.
17:17).
Faith also includes trust in Jesus' involved and holistic concern for people. For
Jesus, God is no remote deity who has wound up the clock of the universe allowing it to
tick as it will. Instead he is especially near to those who need love and mercy, concrete
help in all areas of human life, and grace—qualities that only a responsive person can
express. Jesus makes war on all fronts of human distortion, such as sin, paralysis, disease,
marginalization, demon-possession, and death, and thereby reveals God's holistic and

Christology and the Relational Jesus

01/28/09
 17

saving activity for broken people in a broken world. His offer of the Kingdom of God
announces God's dream for his people or his proclamation of the way that life is to be
lived.
Trust is also humble and understands Jesus' authority (the wayward son—"I am
no longer worthy . . ." [Lk. 15:18f.]; the Centurion—"I am not worthy . . ." [Matt. 8:8,
10]; hemorrhaging woman—falling down before Jesus and "telling him the whole truth"
[Mk. 5:3]; the Syro-Phoenician woman's dogged determination [Mk. 7:28]). Jesus
affirms the Centurion's faith as a buoyant confidence in Jesus' authority, "not even in
Israel have I found such faith" (Mk. 8:10; Lk. 7:9). He then uses this occasion to indict
the "religious" persons, who may confess articles of faith, but who are excluded from the
Messianic banquet (Matt. 8:12). The father of a demon-possessed (epileptic) son
confesses his faith, but is also aware of faith's opposite—unbelief, and thereby asks Jesus
to help him with his unbelief (Mk. 9:24).
Faith also means gratitude. Of ten healed lepers, there is only one, an outcast
Samaritan, who feels a deep-seated gratitude to God (Lk. 17:15) and to Jesus (16). For
him, healing is incomplete without a verbal thanksgiving to his benefactors. His
thanksgiving prompts Jesus' haunting and sad question, "Where are the other nine?" (17-
18). To the healed leper, he affirms, "Your faith has saved you" (19). The perfect tense,
"has saved" intimates far more than deliverance from the scourge of leprosy, since the
other nine were still in a healed condition. His wholeness is a deeper experience due to
his grateful response. The sinful woman, who expresses such vulnerable and lavish
gratitude for Jesus' forgiveness, is honored for such appreciation, "Your faith has saved
you" (Lk. 7:50).
Jesus also says that faith can effect the miraculous, even do the impossible in a
number of mountain-moving sayings (Mk. 11:22-23; 17:19-20; Mk. 9:28-29; Matt.
21:21; mulberry tree in Lk. 17:5-6). Because of the inconceivable power of faith, "all
things for which you pray and ask, believe that you have received them, and they shall be
granted to you" (Mk. 11:24).
In the Fourth Gospel, the verb "to trust" is found nearly a hundred times and is
expressed so clearly in John's purpose statement, " these [signs] are written, that you may
continue to believe . . . (Jn. 20:30-31). At times, the signs lead to a trusting response
(2:11; 9:35-36; 11:45), while on other occasions, signs are met with unbelief and hostility
(12:37). The verb is twice used with a double-entendre in Jn. 2:23-24; while people
"believed in his name, when they saw the signs, which he did, Jesus "would not believe in
them" (would not entrust himself to them). For them, signs produced a superficial
response of sensationalism, which regarded the signs as "wonders" (te/rata). In the Fourth
Gospel, the verb signifies both an initial entrustment followed by a corresponding growth
in discipleship (Nathaniel in 1:49-51; Nicodemus in chapters 3:1-15, 7:50-51, 19:38-42).
The Evangelist appears to portray stages of faith, expressed so well in cha. 9 when the
blind man moves from literal blindness to spiritual sight and worship at the end of the
story (9:35-38). "One gains the impression that Jesus is constantly asking, 'What may I
do to strengthen the faith of those who believe and bring about the inception of faith of
those who do not believe.'"10 Such concern for genuine trust clearly surfaces in the
Lazarus-story, with its focus on the disciples, Martha, the believing onlookers, the
unbelieving crowds, and the religious authorities (11:4, 15, 25-27, 40-45; 12:11). Growth
10 Story, 244.
Christology and the Relational Jesus
01/28/09
 18

in trust is a chief concern in Jesus' High Priestly prayer (17:8, 20, 21). Step by step, Jesus
leads people into deeper relationship with him as he entrusts himself to them and they to
him, to the extent that they live in a position of "friendship" (15:13-15) and "trust." The
verb, "abide" (me/nw) is used so pointedly (40 times in the Fourth Gospel). By way of
contrast, unbelief is serious business and the consequences are disastrous (3:18, 36).
"To hear" (verb a0kou/ein), "report" (noun a0koh/). The gospels strongly emphasize
the believing response inherent in "genuine hearing." Various parables of "hearing" and
"listening" in Mk. 4 affirm the all-importance of proper listening (13 times). To "the one
who has," i.e., "who listens and appropriates what is heard"—more will be given, all out
of proportion to what was initially heard (Mk. 4:24). Physical hearing and true hearing of
the message of grace are distinguished by the presence or absence of "trust" (Matt. 8:10;
9:2; 17:20). Proper hearing likewise results in "doing the words of Jesus" (Matt. 7:16,
24, 26) in a relationship of mutual knowledge with the Father. Charismatic activity apart
from relationship with Jesus or the Father leads to the indictment, "Away from me, for I
never knew you" (Matt. 7:23).
"To receive" (verb lamba/nein, compound paralamba/nein), "to welcome/receive" (verb
de/xesqai). The three verbs express the free-will decisions that people make, whether they
receive or reject Jesus. The verb "take" or "receive" and its compound occur for a total of
171 times in the gospels. The verb "welcome, receive" occurs for a total of 71 times and
is used to express the same positive response to Jesus, "to take on oneself" (Matt. 10:38),
"to take up," or "to attach oneself to Jesus" (Jn. 3:11, 32f; 12:48; 17:8). Receiving or
welcoming Jesus signifies personal attachment to him, and thereby, to God, an equivalent
of "entrusting oneself to them." When the disciples are sent out in short-term mission-
trips, they will know that he is present in them as they seek to bring others into
attachment with them, and with Jesus and God (Matt. 10:40ff.). These "welcome"-
sayings express the Semitic law of the messenger, "The emissary of a man is as the man
himself." The same principle holds true for children (Matt. 18:5 par.); attachment to a
child means attachment to Jesus and to God. The verbs express Jesus' invitation, which
positions people for their libertarian and free-will-decision to welcome or reject.
"To repent" (verb, metanoei=n), "repentance" (noun, metavnoia), "to repent"
(verb metame/lesqai), "to grieve" (verb lupei=n), "grief" (noun lu/ph). The various terms express
a feeling-response of remorse, a stirring of the whole person, a radical change and
transformation of the way people relate to Jesus, to God, and to others, expression of
conversion itself.11 People turn from evil and turn to God with resolution (Mk. 1:15;
4:17; 8:23). Such transformation affects the centre of one's personal life, thoughts,
words, and actions, in all times and situations (Matt. 12:33ff. par; 23:26; Mk. 7:15 par.).
When people approach Jesus with repentance, they not only turn from evil, but embrace
the new and holistic lifestyle and relationship that Jesus offers. When people enter into
relationship with Jesus in his invitation (Matt. 11:28), they are promised a personal
transformation, expressed well in Jesus' thanksgiving prayer (Matt. 11:25-30).
Repentance no longer means "law" that burdens people, but good news. Bonhoeffer
plays down the traditional idea of repentance as a religious act or method, laying stress on
the positive side of "allowing oneself to be caught up into the way of Jesus Christ."12
11Behm, G., "metanoe/w" and cognates. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. IV. (Grand
Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans' Publishing Co., 1969), 1000.
12 Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison, ed. Eberhard Bethge, trans. Reginald Fuller and

Christology and the Relational Jesus

01/28/09
 19

While these verbs and nouns do not provide a comprehensive picture of the
totality of human responses to Jesus, they do express the diverse and profound effect of
Jesus' presence among people and his desire for a relationship with them. These verbs
and noun forms are not captured in the various Christological titles used for Jesus.
Instead, the forms express the complexity of the human response. They describe the
various impressions that Jesus makes upon his disciples, adversaries, and crowds. The
crucial concern is the impression he makes upon various individuals that he encounters as
he seeks relationship with them. This issue should serve as the beginning point for
coming to grips with the mystery of Jesus' person. While the Evangelists use
Christological titles to express Jesus' identity, the titles are nonetheless subservient to the
experiential impression that Jesus makes upon the varied encounters he has, whether with
a learned Jew (Jn. 3) or a simple Samaritan woman (Jn. 4). Jesus is the one who makes a
profound impact upon others, who, in turn, are to reckon with his remarkable presence;
he cannot be casually ignored or dismissed. Through his relatedness with others, their
lives cannot remain the same. People are forced to deal with this person in an altogether
new way. People reflect a strange mixture of majesty and frightfulness, attractiveness
and repulsion, acceptance and rejection. In essence, the Evangelists "tell the story" of
how Jesus is perceived by people and how they respond to the mystery of Jesus when he
seeks relationship with them.

Titles by which people address Jesus:

It is striking that in the gospels, people rarely address Jesus by his first name;
most of these occasions are voiced by various demons (Mk. 1: 24 par.; 5:7). Other
isolated occurrences are voiced by Bartimaeus (10:47 par.) and ten lepers (Lk. 17:13).
Instead, the Evangelists narrate the various encounters using honorable titles:
"Teacher" (dida/skaloj). It is the title that the disciples frequently use of Jesus in
times of great need, "Teacher, do you not care that we are perishing?" (Mk. 4:39).
Elsewhere, it is used when they seek an answer to a question or problem, e.g., "Teacher,
we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we forbade him because he was
not following us" (Mk. 9:38). Clearly they are seeking approval for what they have just
done, but instead, they are rebuked. On other occasions, opponents in an atmosphere of
conflict, also address Jesus, "Teacher, we desire to see a sign from you" (Matt. 12:38),
"Teacher, we know that you are true and teach the way of God truthfully" (Matt. 22:16).
"Rabbi" (r9abbi/ or r9abbouni/v). The disciples call Jesus "Rabbi" in human terms,
"Rabbi, the fig-tree you cursed is withered" (Mk. 11:21); "Rabbi, who sinned, this man or
his parents that he was born blind?" (Jn. 9:2), or the title is used as part of an exalted
confession, "Rabbi, you are the Son of God, you are the King of Israel" (Jn. 1:49-50). On
other occasions, those who are outside of the group of disciples address Jesus as "Rabbi,"
which is coupled with the term "Teacher," "Rabbi, we know that you have come from
God as a teacher . . . ," by Nicodemus in his initial conversation with Jesus (Jn. 3:2).
Mary Magdalene makes a similar response to the Risen Jesus, "she says to him,
'Rabbouni,' (which is being translated, "Teacher") in Jn. 20:16.
"Lord" (ku/rioj). Sometimes, the term "Lord" is used in a weakened sense of "Sir":
"Sir, you have nothing to draw with" (Jn. 4:11), "Sir, give me this water" (Jn. 4:15), "Sir,
I perceive that you are a prophet" (Jn. 4:19)—all of these by the Samaritan woman; "Sir,
come down before my child dies" (Jn. 4:49)—by a Gentile official; "Sir, I have no one to
Christology and the Relational Jesus
01/28/09
 20

put me in the water" (Jn. 5:7)—by the paralytic at the pool. On other occasions, the term
"Lord" is used with an exalted sense, and is frequently paired up with other forms of
address: "Lord, I am not worthy that you should come to my house" (Matt. 8:8), "Lord,
save us, we are perishing" (Matt. 8:25); "Oh Lord, thou Son of David" (Matt. 15:22);
"Lord, I believe, help my unbelief" (Mk. 9:24); "My Lord and my God" (Jn. 20:28).
"Master" (e0pista/thj). The address to Jesus as "Master" is unique to Luke: "Master,
we have toiled all night and have caught nothing" (Lk. 5:5); "Master, Master, we perish"
(Lk. 8:24); "Master, it is good for us to be here" (Lk. 9:33); "Jesus, Master, have mercy
on us" (Lk. 17:13). There are a number of places in the gospels where addresses are
interchangeable, e.g.,
Matt. 8:25 Mk. 4:38 Lk. 8:24
"Save, Lord (ku/rie); we are "Teacher (dida/skale), do you "Master, Master (e0pista/ta,
perishing." not care if we perish?" e0pista/ta), we are
perishing."

Other titles or impressions. Other persons go far beyond these titles of honor and
respect—both positive and negative. In early Christian preaching, Peter recounts the fact
that Jesus was able to do the things he did and said since "God was with him" (Acts.
10:38). Nathaniel addresses Jesus, "Rabbi, you are the Son of God, the King of Israel"
(Jn. 1:49). At Caesarea Philippi, Peter witnesses," You are the Christ, the Son of the
Living God" (Matt. 16:18 par.). Thomas responds to the Risen Jesus, "my Lord and my
God" (Jn. 20:28); others affirmed Jesus as the Christ (Mk. 8:29; Matt. 16:18; Lk. 9:20.
Others, including Herod said that Jesus was John the Baptist, John the Baptist Redivivus,
Elijah, or another prophet (Mk. 6:14ff; Lk. 9:7-9; Matt. 14:1). Some of the hostile
onlookers accuse Jesus of being possessed by Beelzebul and in collusion with him (Mk.
3:22; Matt. 12:24; Lk. 11:15; Jn. 8:48; 10:21). Various voices from Jesus' environment
reveal the powerful impression that Jesus makes upon individuals and groups.

Some Implications:
The condition of the human heart is the frequent reason why human reactions are
so diverse. Jesus says that the human heart serves as the origin for the ways that different
people view Jesus, and they, of course, are responsible for their free choices. For
instance, in the Parable of the Soils, the seed is the same that is falls upon four different
types of soil. The varied conditions of the soil determine whether the seed will or will
not be productive. Various soils are responsible for their condition, whether they are
impervious, shallow, beset with distraction, or single-minded. When Jesus speaks to his
disciples about the issue of defilement, he specifies that the heart is the inner source or
origin of "evil thoughts, fornication, theft, murder, adultery . . . All these things come
from within, and they defile a man" (Mk. 7:21-23).
Notably in John's Gospel, the coming of Jesus effects a "crisis" (kri/sij). People
either do not come to the light out of hatred and fear of self-exposure or they come to the
light with openness and vulnerability (Jn. 3:19-20). The condition of the human heart
and free choices that people make, predispose them to respond in various and even
contradictory ways. Some respond superficially because their heart is not right. Others
respond with fear and hatred since they are aware of the greatness of Jesus but cannot
bring themselves to make a free decision for him. Others reveal attraction and love
Christology and the Relational Jesus
01/28/09
 21

because they possess an inner disposition to receive and be transformed.

In human experience, power often separates people, whether the power is
political, military, cultural, socio-economic, religious, or charismatic. Expressions of
power heighten a contrast between the "haves" and the "have-nots." A key reason for
such separation is that the powerful person will use power as the "patron" of power, who
possesses the right to coerce others. Those who are attracted to the powerful person will
then align themselves with this person to receive the benefits of this person to better their
condition. Jesus' use of power is markedly different. He does not begin his ministry with
displays of power so as to stun people with his superiority. He immediately summons
disciples to himself with whom he could share his life. He lives in the context of human
relationships when he personally engages people. They come to Jesus out of great need.
And when they find that Jesus meets their need, their contact with him fosters a greater
relationship, attachment, and allegiance. Thus, even his use of power pales in
comparison with the personal interest in them and in the new relationships he offers.
People gradually learn that Jesus conveys a qualitative newness of life for those who have
made a personal commitment to him; they are promised "a hundredfold now in this
time—houses, brothers, sisters and mothers, children and lands." Thereby, he points to
the excellence of the new life, which is infinitely superior what they have previously
known: "A man's life does not consist in the abundance of things which he possesses"
(Lk. 12:15, 21).
Jesus amazes people through his person, words, and works. His words affect his
hearers and reveal a qualitative difference from the words of the learned. While religious
persons discuss what one ought to be and do, Jesus talks about human life and how to
find meaning in the relational give-and-take of life. He heals people without ostentation,
personal propaganda, or profit. His miracles signify the original condition that God
intended for humanity. His very person is an enigma to his contemporaries. Even those
who are attracted to him are not immediately able to understand him (Lk. 2:50; Jn. 2:27;
7:20, 35; 8:22). There is no end to the various expressions of misunderstanding and
doubt, even among his disciples. There is always a certain mixture of genuine belief and
unbelief (Mk. 9:24; Lk. 24:37; Matt. 28:17), even with the post-resurrection appearances
of the Risen Lord.
The complexity of the human response to Jesus is directly related to the
complexity of Jesus. He belongs, yet he does not belong to human categories. The
mystery of Jesus originates in his own ambiguity. Even those who attach themselves to
Jesus and commit themselves to him, are unable to fully understand him (Lk. 2:50; Jn.
2:27; 7:20, 35; 8:22). There is an initial commitment of trust and also an ongoing growth
that occurs in them as they grapple with the mystery of this person. Some move beyond
an initial understanding of Jesus as a miracle worker (Jn. 2:11) to a fuller declaration of
Jesus' Messiahship and divine Sonship (Matt. 16:18 par.) Our western thinking often
equates "faith" with mental assent to the various Christological titles. However, the
Evangelists interpret the Jesus-story in fully relational encounters: how he was perceived
by others and how they responded to him. The story reveals that Jesus was "the man for
others,"13—in the language of relationality.
It is hoped that these reflections on the gospels enable others to understand and
experience Jesus in his full relationality, who also directs his audience, then and now, to
13 Bonhoeffer, 240.

Christology and the Relational Jesus

01/28/09
 22

“feel” the full sociality of God. God is passionate about relationship with his audience.
Instead of “evangelism outlines,” which are reductionistic and propositional in nature, the
Jesus-story offers another approach, a style that speaks to people, in need of relationship
with God, with others in the Christian community and citizens of the world. God takes
the full initiative in His gift of His son, who personally approaches others and seeks to
elicit responses of love, trust, and faithful obedience. He honors the freedom of others to
make the decisions and experience the consequences of their decisions. The beginning
point for human framing of Christology surely needs to be understood within the context
of relationality.

Christology and the Relational Jesus

01/28/09
 Story, p.1

The Crucifixion Accounts

Introduction
The crucifixion of Jesus makes the reader painfully aware of the utter inadequacy
of human words to capture the drama and the significance of the drama that unfolds
before our eyes. We confront the center of all of human history. The various witnesses
of the Old Testament (prophets, leaders, priests, elders, poets) all looked ahead to the
future when God would act in a redemptive way for His people. Since Calvary, every
generation and race looks backwards to this event and its significance for the whole of
human history, human significance, as well as future hope. Further, the cross also serves
to unite two different spheres—the world above and the world below. While the event
will always remain a mystery, nonetheless we need to understand the human words that
both narrate and explain this moment in history, which is a moment of supra-historical
significance, a "once-for-all" event.
The four evangelists offer different perspectives and details concerning the
crucifixion and its meaning, which must be respected. However, despite the differences,
the evangelists express the divine mystery of the person of Jesus in His mission, passion,
and death. Accordingly, the various phenomena that occur during the crucifixion,
likewise attest to the mystery of the event.

Via Dolorosa
The Latin term, Via Dolorosa designates the "Sorrowful Road," along which the
procession passed to the crucifixion site. There is a modern street called by this name but
it is doubtful whether this is the actual street since ancient Jerusalem is buried under the
rubble of centuries. Like public executions of past years, e.g., hanging, the event is
witnessed by thousands, especially present in Jerusalem at the time of the Passover
pilgrimage.
The condemned Jesus is forced to carry the crossbeam of the cross to Golgotha;
His shame is compounded in that He must carry on His back the very instrument of His
torture and death. He who had warned about the cost of discipleship and the necessity of
carrying one's cross (Lk. 14:27) now bears His own. The wording, "in order that he
might take up is cross" (i{na a[rh/ toVn stauroVn aujtou') of Mk.
15:21, reminds the reader of Jesus' earlier summons to discipleship, "let him take up his
cross" (ajravtw toVn stauroVn aujtou') of Mk. 8:34. And yet, He is
unable to carry the cross very far. Jesus has been up all night in various trial scenes,
extending into the morning. He has also been scourged, worn a crown of thorns and been
beaten (Jn. 19:3). As a result, He is exhausted and no doubt dehydrated.
A certain man named Simon of Cyrene (a city in North Africa) is forced into
service, compelled to carry the cross to the place of execution. Perhaps Simon is in
Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, one of the three annual pilgrimages that Jews made
to Jerusalem. Mark's Gospel states that "he is the father of Alexander and Rufus" (Mk.
15:21). Mark's use of the names here without explanation might well suggest that these
two men were known by the Roman community to whom Mark writes his Gospel. In the
letter to the Romans, Paul mentions a Rufus along with his mother (Rom. 16:13). In Acts
13:1, Simeon (same name as Simon) is mentioned, along with Lucius of Cyrene. Since
the name Alexander was a common name and is mentioned elsewhere in the NT, it is

cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.2

difficult to establish any link elsewhere in the NT. On the Day of Pentecost when the
Holy Spirit descended, strangers from Cyrene are present (Acts 2:10).
Luke contains an interchange between Jesus and a multitude of wailing women as
He walks towards Golgotha. In contrast to their wailing for Him, Jesus says that they, the
"Daughters of Jerusalem" should weep for themselves and their children (Lk. 23:28), and
then explains why their weeping should be redirected. Jesus says that childless women
will actually be blessed over against women with nursing children:
29 "For the time will come when you will say,
'Blessed are the barren women,
the wombs that never bore
and
the breasts that never nursed!'" (Lk. 23:29)
In the OT, childlessness was a curse; Jesus says that in the coming days, childlessness
will actually be a blessing. Formerly, in the Apocalyptic Discourse (Lk. 21), Jesus
pronounced a curse upon pregnant and nursing mothers that they would experience in the
approaching siege of Jerusalem (Lk. 21:20-24). Personal pain will be far eclipsed by the
pain that will wound Jerusalem's daughters through the suffering of their children.
Josephus' account of the siege and related famine narrates the grotesque way in which
both women and their children were starved to death.1
The suffering will be so intense that people will cry out for a quick and merciful
death which would end starvation, suffering and horror:
30 "Then they will begin to say to the mountains, 'Fall on us';
and to the hills,
'Cover us.'2
While long life was one of the blessings accorded to the righteous, now blessing is
imagined as a sudden premature death that would end the horrible pain and torment of
Jerusalem's daughters.
His closing word to Jerusalem's daughters uses the minor major form of
argument, using a contrast between green wood and dry wood:

Minor Major
31 For if they do this when the wood is what will happen when it is dry?”
green,
The metaphor points to the unlikely and unnatural burning of green wood which is
currently in process in the crucifixion (minor); this underscores the more likely and
natural burning of wood that is dry and fit for burning (major). In the metaphor, Jesus
reveals His own horrid treatment by the civil and religious authorities (the green sappy
wood) and the more certain misery and judgment that would befall the people of God in
the Holy City (the dry wood). Invasion and fire soon fell on the dry tree and it was
burned in the fearful events of A.D. 66-70, noted by Josephus as the great conflagration.
1See Josephus, Wars of the Jews, esp. Book V-VI.
2Hosea 10:8
8 The high places of Aven, the sin of Israel,
shall be destroyed.
Thorn and thistle shall grow up
on their altars;
and they shall say to the mountains, Cover us,
and to the hills, Fall upon us.
cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.3

Luke's account alone narrates that two other "criminals" (kakou'rgoi) were
also part of the procession to the execution site (Lk. 23:32). Matthew and Luke state that
they were "robbers" or "revolutionaries/insurrectionists" lh/stai (Matt. 27:38; Mk.
15:27), a term which also describes Barabbas (Jn. 18:40).

The Crucifixion
The site. Jesus and the two insurrectionists are led to the place called "Golgotha",
an Aramaic/Hebrew term (aT*l=G|l=G|, tl\G)G|) meaning "the skull" (Lk. 33:33) or
"the place of the skull" (Matt. 27:33; Mk. 15:22; Jn. 19:17). The Latin term lies behind
the name "Calvary". It is unclear as to whether Golgotha was called "the place of the
skull" because the hill was shaped like a man's head or whether the place was littered by
the skulls of executed criminals.
The time. The evangelist variously report the time of the crucifixion: Mark
(15:25) states that it occurred at the third hour (9 a.m.); John says that it came at the sixth
hour (12:00 p.m. Jn. 19:14). Moreover, the Synoptic Gospels note that the darkness
covered the land from the sixth until the ninth hour. From a logical standpoint, the noon
hour is more likely in that time should be allowed in the morning for the trial before
Pilate, Jesus' trip to Herod. A three-hour crucifixion might also express Pilate's
wonderment that Jesus was dead after three hours (Mk. 15:44).
The narcotic. Matthew and Luke mention that Jesus was offered a narcotic:
"wine mingled with gall" (Matt. 27:34); "wine mingled with myrrh" (Mk. 15:23). Gall is
a bitter and poisonous herb, sometimes translated as "hemlock", implying bitterness and
tragedy.3 In Acts 8:23, the term "gall" has a symbolic meaning, "For I see that you are in
the gall [poison] of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity.” Myrrh is a fragrant substance,
a resin from various shrubs and trees and was one of the gifts offered to the infant Jesus
(Matt. 2:11) and was brought by Nicodemus for Jesus' burial (Jn. 19:39). It appears that
such a drink was a merciful gesture to dull the senses and deaden the pain of the
crucifixion and was offered to all criminals.4 Both Matthew and Mark narrate that Jesus
did not drink the draught, although Matthew states that Jesus "tasted" it before His refusal
(Matt. 27:34). Earlier, Jesus affirmed His commitment to not drink the fruit of the vine
until He would drink it new in the Kingdom of God. Although many have argued that
Jesus did not take the narcotic because He wanted to experience the full force of death
with an unclouded and clear mind, the text does not indicate why Jesus refused the drink.
The cross. Christian art generally portrays the cross as a very lofty structure but it
need not be much taller than the height of a man and could be in the shape of a small "t"
or capital "T". Since the inscription is said to be "above his head" (Matt. 27:37), some
type of projection is needed above the crossbeam upon which the inscription is nailed.
The practice of crucifixion. Although the practice of crucifixion did not damage
the vital organs of the body, death came slowly and painfully and was hastened by the
3 Deut. 29:18 [Heb. 29:17]; Jer. 9:15; Lam. 3:19; Amos 6:12. Often the passage from Psalms 69:21 [69:22]
is cited:
Psalm 69:21 They gave me poison for food,
and for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.
4 A Jewish custom based on Prov. 31:6:

6 Give strong drink to him who is perishing,

and wine to those in bitter distress;
Mk.'s verb, ejdivdoun may be a conative imperfect, i.e., "they tried to give," but then gave up when
unsuccessful, that is more explicit in Matthew's Gospel (24:34).
cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.4

use of nails in the hands and feet, which were sometimes used in addition to the rope
which held the victim's arms to the crossbeam. As a result of fatigue, cramped muscles,
inability to breathe, and thirst, the body could no longer cope with the trauma. When
victims were simply bound to the cross immobile, they might survive for three days but
would then die of severe dehydration. Rome adopted the practice from the Phoenicians
and Persians, reserving this form of execution for slaves and foreigners, and in Jesus' case
(with the other two revolutionaries), this was the punishment for sedition. From the
Jewish perspective, crucifixion was the greatest possible insult paid to Jesus, since this
death will obviously mean that He is accursed by God (Deut. 21:23). Since the Roman
practice of scourging was so merciless and severe (many died under it), Jesus' body was
already in a desperately weakened condition. It is remarkable that the actual crucifixion
of Jesus is told with such restraint with a minimal number of verbs and nouns.5
The inscription. All the Evangelists note the inscription over the cross of Jesus, a
common custom, indicating the reason for His execution.6 John's use of the transliterated
Latin titulus makes it especially clear that Jesus was condemned as a messianic pretender,
an insurrectionist. The title is differently expressed in the four Gospels:
"This is Jesus, the King of the Jews" (Matt. 27:37)
"The King of the Jews" (Mk. 15:26)
"This is the King of the Jews" (Lk. 23:38)
"Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews" (Jn. 19:19)
John's Gospel contains the detail that the inscription was written in Hebrew, Latin and
Greek, the languages of religion, Roman empire and culture, a universal perspective that
may be intimated by Jesus' statement, "And if I be lifted up, I will draw all people to
myself" (Jn. 12:32). The inscription that Pilate ordered was no personal confession but
an evasion of responsibility, shifting the blame to Jewish concerns.
John's Gospel also contains the interchange between Pilate and the Jewish
authorities concerning the actual wording of the inscription. Instead of the title, "Jesus of
Nazareth, the King of the Jews," they demand a new inscription that reads, "Jesus the
Nazarene, the one who said, 'I am King of the Jews'" (Jn. 19:21). Pilate has already
stated to the Jews that Jesus is their king (18:39) and the Jewish leaders have already
apostasized by saying, "We have no king but Caesar" (18:15). Pilate uses the occasion to
take a "parting shot" at the Jews, humiliating them in his annoyance. Stalker interprets
Pilate's intent in the inscription, "This is what becomes of a Jewish king; this is what the
Romans do with him; the king of this nation is a slave, a crucified criminal; and if such
be the king, what must the nation be whose king is he?"7 What he has written will stand
written.8 Just as Caiaphas made an unwitting prophecy about the death of Jesus (Jn.
11:50-51), so Pilate makes an unwitting confession of Jesus' identity through the title.
Through the trial scene, scourging scene, and crucifixion, John the Evangelist highlights
Jesus' Kingship, the sovereignty of truth9:
5 Taylor notes, "No attempt is made to describe the harrowing details familiar enough in the ancient world."
Vincent Taylor, The Gospel According to St. Mark, (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1974), p. 589.
6 Matt. 27:37 "the charge against him"; Mk. 15:26 "the inscription (ejpigrafhv) of the charge

against him; Lk. 23:38 "an inscription (ejpigrafhv) over him"; Jn. 19:19 "a title" (tivtlo").
7 James Stalker, The Trial and Death of Jesus Christ, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1965

repr.), p. 103.
8 The perfect tense of the repeated verb "I have written" gevgrafa underscores the permanence of his

decision.
9 For discussion see C. H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, (Cambridge: At the University

cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.5

Pilate-----------"Are you are the King of the Jews" (18:33).

Jesus-----------"My Kingdom is not of this world. If my Kingdom were of this
world, my servants would be fighting that I might not be handed
over to the Jews. But my Kingdom is not from here" (18:36).
Pilate-----------"So you are a king?" (18:37)
Jesus-----------"You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I have
come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Every one who is
of the truth hears my voice.”
Pilate-----------"What is truth?" (18:38)
Soldiers--------Mockery with the purple robe of Kingship and crown of thorns,
"Hail, King of the Jews" (19:3).
The Jews-------"every one who makes himself a king sets himself against Caesar”
(19:12)
Pilate-----------"Shall I crucify your king?" (19:15)
The Jews------"We have no king but Caesar" (19:15)
Pilate-----------The inscription, "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews" (19:19).
The Jews-------“Do not write, ‘The King of the Jews,’ but, ‘This man said, I am
King of the Jews’” (19:21).

The Groups around the Cross

While Jesus hangs on the cross during the three or six torturous hours there are
differing responses of different groups or individuals to Jesus, revealing different
relationships with Jesus.
Mockers. The largest and loudest group is the passers by, mocking Jesus, hurling
their abusive speech at him, shaking their heads in derision, saying,
"You who would destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself!
If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross" (Matt. 27:40).
The words are similar to the word of the devil in the temptation narrative, "If you are the
Son of God, then . . ." (Matt. 4:3, 6). Jesus was tempted to use his divine Sonship to
transform stones into bread and throw Himself from the pinnacle of the Temple. At
Golgotha, the force of the abusive speech is the challenge that Jesus should prove His
divine Sonship by a miraculous act, saving Himself by coming down from the cross. "To
the mockers the logic of the challenge is irrefutable. Crucifixion is the crowning proof of
self-deception."10 In both the temptation and crucifixion, Jesus does not succumb to the
demanded proof of His divine Sonship.
Joining the clamor of the passers by are the voices of the religious leaders (chief
priests, scribes and elders of the people) expressing the same mocking11 challenge:
"He saved others; he cannot save himself.
He is the King of Israel; let him come down now from the cross,
and we will believe in him.
43 He trusts in God; let God deliver him now,
if he desires him'; for he said, 'I am the Son of God'" (Matt. 27:42-43).
Their ringing challenge is that Jesus saved others but could not now save Himself. They
even affirm that they will believe if they see such a miracle. Their statement accords
10Taylor, p. 591.
11With the use of the verb ejkmukthrivzw "to mock," the rulers remind Jesus of His "supposed"
authority and power, which appears to them as impotent.
cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.6

with Jesus' earlier assessment, "while seeing, they might see but not understand" (Mk.
4:11). Ironically, they do not seem to notice that the challenge they voice is from the
Psalter which Jesus later refers to from the cross:
6 But I am a worm, and no man;
scorned by men, and despised by the people.
7 All who see me mock at me,
they make mouths at me, they wag their heads;12
8 “He committed his cause to the Lord; let him deliver him,
let him rescue him, for he delights in him!” (Psalm 22:6-8).13
Had Jesus given in to the temptation to prove His divine Sonship, He would not have
been the Savior. His enemies had no idea of the divine design in His death on the cross
but were judging Him as one accursed by God (Deut. 21:23), challenging Him to prove
His Sonship by a miraculous feat. Their thoughts about the Kingdom are concentrated on
a political savior, not a Savior who will deliver them from sin.
Joining the mocking chorus are the voices of one (Lk. 23:39) or two
insurrectionists (Matt. 27:44):
"And the robbers who were crucified with him also reviled him in the same way"
(Matt. 27:44).
"One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him, saying,
'Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!'" (Luke 23:39).
The Roman soldiers. Luke's account narrates a similar response from the Roman
soldiers:
36 "The soldiers also mocked him, coming up and offering him vinegar, 37 and
saying, 'If you are the King of the Jews, save yourself!'" (Lk. 23:36-37).
These mockings from different groups all stress the claims of Jesus as Messiah or Son of
God.
The four Roman soldiers dividing Jesus' garments. There were four Roman
soldiers responsible for the crucifixion, who were allowed the personal effects of the
criminal. Jesus was stripped before the crucifixion, exposing his nakedness in public, and
thereby furthering His shame. Their action of doling out Jesus' garments among
themselves14 expresses nothing more than sheer callousness and mindless selfishness.
12 Lam. 2:15 All who pass along the way
clap their hands at you;
they hiss and wag their heads
at the daughter of Jerusalem;
“Is this the city which was called
the perfection of beauty,
the joy of all the earth?”
13 "Let us see if his words be true,

And let us try what shall befall in the ending of his life.
For if the righteous man is God's son, he will uphold him,
And he will deliver him out of the hand of his adversaries.
With outrage and torture let us put him to the test,
That we may learn of his gentleness,
And may prove his patience under wrong.
Let us condemn him to a shameful death;
For according to his words he will be visited."
Wisdom of Solomon 2:17-20, R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament,
(Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1973), p. 538.
14 Mk. uses the middle voice diamerivzontai, "divide among themselves."

cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.7

Only the fourth evangelist distinguishes between Jesus' outer garment and His tunic. His
large loose upper garment, perhaps a headdress and sandals were all divided between the
company of four. The tunic or undergarment was woven all of one piece; thus, even the
Roman soldiers were unwilling to tear it. Instead they throw dice, settling their difficulty
with a game. The fourth Evangelist interprets the actions of the Roman soldiers a
fulfillment of Psalm 22:
18 "they divide my garments among them,
and for my raiment they cast lots" (Psa. 22:18).
The dramatic contrast is incredible—the Son of God atoning for the sins of the world
while the soldiers beneath the cross gamble for pieces of fabric within a few feet of Jesus.
Jesus' sympathetic friends. In a position "from afar" (ajpoV
mavkrovqen— Synoptics15) or "by the cross" (paraV tw'/
staurw'/--Jn. 19:24-27) is another group of sympathetic women [also the beloved
disciple]: Mary Magdalene, the mother of Jesus,16 her sister, Mary the wife of Clopas,
Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, Salome, the mother of the sons of
Zebedee. Luke also notes the presence of many other women from Galilee who followed
Him and ministered to Him (Mk. 15:40-41). These women stand in sharp contrast with
the other groups: passers by, the religious authorities, the insurrectionist[s] and the
Roman soldiers—women, whose very presence speaks of care, grief and compassion.
Although these women loved Him, they see their friend, the one who was known as
Savior, Redeemer, King, Messiah, Son of God and Son of Man, perishing before their
eyes. Although the evangelists do not record their words, their attendance speaks louder
than any words they might have spoken.

The Seven Words

Drawing from the different witnesses of the four evangelists there are seven
"words" spoken by Jesus from the cross. The seven words are listed below but it is
important to note that the order below cannot be regarded as absolutely true with respect
to the order of their utterance. They are but fragments that the evangelists record, which,
nonetheless are filled with eternal significance:
1) The First Word:
34 "And Jesus said, 'Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.'" (Lk.
23:34)
Luke is the only evangelist to record the prayer of Jesus for His enemies. This
brief prayer contains three elements: a) personal address, b) petition, c) grounds for the
petition. The personal address, "Father" breathes the language of Jesus' unique
relationship of the Son with His Father. His relationship with the Father is unmediated,
direct and personal, in a way that is not true of others. All others experience a mediated
relationship with God as Father (Matt. 11:25-27). Jesus never calls God "our Father"
except when he teaches His disciples the Lord's Prayer—even then, it is their prayer. He
is the only one who knows the Father in an absolute sense. Here, on the cross, in His
physical agony and forsakenness, He still affirms His utterly unique relationship with
God as His Father.
Jesus' petition is for the forgiveness of His enemies. The pronoun "them" surely
includes all those who subjected Jesus to maltreatment—verbally, physically and
15 Matt. 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41; Luke 23:49.
16 John always refers to her not by name but by "His mother" or "the mother of Jesus" (cf. Jn. 2:3).
cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.8

emotionally: the religious authorities, the civil authorities, Pilate, the jeering crowd, the
Roman soldiers, Judas. His prayer for the forgiveness of enemies exemplifies His earlier
teaching on the Sermon on the Mount, "But I say to you, 'Love your enemies and pray for
the ones who persecute you.'" (Matt. 5:44)—words, which countered the current thought
in Judaism, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy" (Matt. 5:43). While
revenge is a bitter-sweet delight in human experience, Jesus proves that prayer for the
forgiveness of our enemies can be realized here on earth. Stephen, who was dying from
stoning, similarly prayed, "Lord, do not hold this sin against them" (Acts 7:60). Jesus'
petition expresses the truth that these people were guilty and in need of forgiveness.
Through His prayer for their spiritual wellbeing, Jesus drives away the natural human
response of anger and bitter revenge.
The basis for this petition is expressed in the clause, "for they know not what they
do." Normally, those who are injured are only sensitive to their side of the injury and
cannot or will not see the other side of the injury. "But at the moment when the pain
inflicted by His enemies was at its worst Jesus was seeking excuses for their conduct."17
To be sure, through the various passion episodes, there are varying degrees of guilt of
different individuals and groups: the disciples, Peter, Judas, chief priests, scribes, elders,
Caiaphas, Pilate, Herod, the multitude in Jerusalem, the passers by, the Roman soldiers.
However, Jesus' prayer includes all, irrespective of their own personal or corporate guilt.
This realization of ignorance is expressed by Peter in Solomon's portico, "And now,
brethren, I know that you acted in ignorance, as did also your rulers" (Acts. 3:17). The
truth is expressed here that ignorance characterizes the sinner. In many ways, the people
involved in the trial and crucifixion know what they are doing. Pilate washes his hands
(Matt. 27:24), attempting to absolve Himself of the guilt for Jesus' death. Judas' remorse
for his betrayal leads to his suicide (Matt. 27:3-10). Peter is likewise guilty for his denial
of Jesus in the face of Jesus' prophecy (Matt. 26:31-35, 69-75). However, in a deeper
sense, all of the parties involved in the passion narrative do not know the extent of their
sin and guilt.
2) The Second Word.
43 "And He said to him, 'Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in
Paradise'" (Lk. 23:43).
In Luke's Gospel, one of the two insurrectionists joins in the mocking challenge to
Jesus to save Himself and them as well. However, he is rebuked by his compatriot in
crime, "Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation?
And we indeed are justly receiving the penalty for our deeds; but this man has done
nothing wrong" (Lk. 23:40-41). The torture of the impenitent outlaw reduces him to an
enraged animal, which will bite anything or anyone who comes too close. However, the
other outlaw draws back from the verbal abuse of his fellow criminal. He affirms their
own need for the fear of God, Jesus' innocence and undeserved punishment, as well as
their own guilt and deserved punishment. Surely he was witness to Jesus' attitudes and
actions from Pilate's judgment seat, his movement along the via dolorosa, and his
response to shame, verbal abuse and torture. Many conjectures have been made about
previous encounters of this penitent outlaw with Jesus, leading to his own statements.
However, Luke's text does not give a clue. The only thing that can be found in the text is
his awareness that Jesus will soon enter His Kingdom; thus, he expresses the humble plea
that Jesus would remember him at the point when Jesus enters His Kingdom. His plea is
17 Stauffer, p. 116.
cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.9

humble and simple without presuming anything. Something grand occurred in his life
before Jesus speaks a word directly to him.
Jesus' response is immediate and direct, beginning with the solemn words, "Truly,
I say to you," an introduction that underscores the significance of the promise. Instead of
a union at some future time when Jesus would enter His Kingdom, Jesus points the
outlaw to "Today" as the day of fellowship with Jesus in Paradise. The other-worldly
descriptions of heaven/paradise strain the limitations of every human language, but the
most important affirmation is that this experience means, "to be with Christ" (I Thess.
4:17; 5:10)—a sure promise to be realized on the very day of the outlaw's death.
The term "Paradise" (paravdeiso") recalls the blissful Garden of Eden
(Gen. 2), which is used in the OT, inter-testamental period, and NT period to portray the
intermediate state between death and final resurrection as well as the last Paradise. Other
figures are used, which express Paradise: "to be in the bosom of Abraham" (Lk. 16:23),
"to be with the Lord" (II Cor. 5:8), "to be with Christ" (Phil. 1:23), "in the Father's house"
(Jn. 14:2), the Father and the Son will make a room with the believer (Jn. 14:23), "in the
heavenly Kingdom" (II Tim. 4:18) or "the heavenly Jerusalem" (Heb. 12:22).18
Jesus' answer goes far beyond the plea for a future remembrance, promising that
today he will enjoy fellowship with Jesus. The dawn of the "one day" of salvation from
sins, has already eclipsed the horizon. Jeremias states, "Paradise is opened even to the
irredeemably lost man hanging on the cross. He is promised fellowship with the
Messiah."19 Earlier in Luke's Gospel, Jesus expresses the wonder of "today"
(shvmeron) as the day of salvation as He celebrates table-fellowship with the
repentant Zacchaeus, “Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son of
Abraham" (Lk. 19:9).20 In the receptive encounter with Jesus, whether it be in a tax-
collector's home or on a cross, salvation is present.

3) The Third Word.

26 "When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple, whom he loved, standing near,
he said to his mother, 'Woman, behold, your son!' 27 Then he said to the disciple,
'Behold, your mother!' And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home"
(Jn. 19:26-27).
While the first word is a prayer for His enemies, the second is a promise of
relationship to a revolutionary. The third word is addressed to Jesus' mother. The fourth
Evangelist alone narrates the bittersweet expression of Jesus' concern for his mother
standing near the cross. The old and honorable Simeon had prophesied to Mary about her
infant child, "And a sword will pierce through your own soul also" (Lk. 1:35)—a sober
prophecy that is now fulfilled in the death of her son as a political criminal and "cursed
by God" (Deut. 21:23), from the Jewish perspective. Readers of the narrative can
scarcely fathom the depth of pain that Mary experienced. Those who have lost a child
through illness or accident may only begin to approximate Mary's agony.
Mary had been privy to the divine mystery of the Incarnation and angelic
visitation and prophecies from angels and humans, which she treasured in her heart (Lk.
2:18). She had heard the words that her male offspring "will be great, and will be called
18 See J. Jeremias, "paravdeiso"", TDNT, vol. V, p. 769.
19 Ibid, p. 771.
20 Luke uses the term "today" more than the other evangelists put together (2:11; 4:21; 5:26; 12:28; 13:32,

33; 19:5, 9; 22:34; 23:43; 24:21).

cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.10

the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father
David. . .therefore the child to be will be called holy, the Son of God" (Lk. 1:32-35). She
had participated in the communication by angels, astrologers, shepherds, Simeon, Anna,
Elizabeth—who had all voiced the wonderful news that her son was the Son of God.
And yet, her human son is dying an agonizing death as a political criminal, hanging on a
tree, and ostensibly "Cursed by God." We can hardly imagine what this all meant for
Mary and can only surmise at the plethora of emotions that gripped her as a mother from
deep within her heart. For the fourth Evangelist, writing years later, he is able to mark
the movement of Jesus to the cross as the climactic "hour" of glorification, when Jesus
ascends His throne. But for Mary, His mother, at this point in time, the cross looks like
anything other than a throne.
From the cross Jesus expresses concern for Mary's wellbeing and provision and
He fulfills the fifth commandment that enjoins the honor of one's parents. He still
remains Mary's Son. In a way, these words serve as His last will concerning Mary and
John's responsibility for his new "mother." Nothing is said about Joseph; presumably he
has died before Jesus' public ministry since no mention is made of him subsequent to the
birth and infancy narratives. Concerning his own brother's responsibility for Mary, they
are as yet unbelievers (Jn. 7:5). The dying Jesus affirms the relationship between Mary
and John and confirms John's responsibility for her care. In so doing, Jesus informs us of
His concern for the temporal and emotional as well as spiritual needs of others. Jesus'
concern for her is not simply comfort about His or her reunion with them in the after-life,
but in the here and now, He knows her need for food, a place to live and a relationship.
John's text also says that John promptly obeyed, by taking her to his own home "from
that hour," thereby fulfilling Jesus' loving charge for his mother
4) The Fourth Word.
34 "And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, 'Elo-i, Elo-i, lama
sabach-thani?' which means, 'My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?' (Mk.
15:34; Matt. 27:46).
The fourth word from the cross is difficult. The words appear to be a mixture of
Hebrew and Aramaic given by Mark and Matthew:

Matthew 27:46 Mark 15:34

hjliV hjliV lemaV ejlwi< ejlwi<
sabacqavni lamaV sabacqavni
tou't j e[stin o} ejstin
qeeV qeeV mou, meqermhneuovmenon
iJnantiv me oJ qeoV" mou oJ
ejgkatevlipe" qeoV" mou
Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani, eij" tiv
that is ejgkatevlipev" me.
"My God, My God Eloi, Eloi lama sabachthani
why hast thou forsaken me?" which translated means,
"My God, My God
why hast thou forsaken me?"
The spelling of lema represents the transliterated Aramaic interrogative, "why"
(am*l+) while the verbal form, sabacqavni is a transliterated form of the
Aramaic,yn!T^q+b^v "you have forsaken" (Hebrew = yn!T^b+z^u&).
cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.11

Luke does not contain the saying per se, but contains the eclipse of the sun or the
sun's desertion in exactly the same position in his Gospel (Lk. 23:45). Since the words
Elo-i ("my God") and heliou ("the sun") are so similar in sound, this may be one reason
why Luke's account does not contain reference to the actual saying. Moreover, the
personal address Elo-i is very similar to the proper name Elijah (Elijah). Clearly, the
bystanders understand that Jesus is calling Elijah.21
The evangelists interpret the Hebrew and Aramaic mixture as "My God, my God,
why has thou forsaken22 me?" Jesus feels Himself to be abandoned by God and cries out
for explanation, "Why?" During His ministry, He was abandoned by others, His
brothers, His hometown acquaintances and friends, the people of God, the religious
leaders, His own disciples, more pointedly by Judas and then Peter. In the Upper Room
Discourse, Jesus prophesied the desertion of the twelve and yet affirmed the divine
presence with Him even in the abandonment by others:
'The hour is coming, indeed it has come, when you will be scattered, every man to
his home, and will leave me alone; yet I am not alone, for the Father is with me"
(Jn. 16:32).
The disciples were scattered as He had predicted, but His new experience is that of
abandonment by God. Jesus experiences the forsakenness by God and people. And yet,
God feels nothing but a Divine hurt for His beloved Son. Jesus speaks from the Psalter,
from a complaint song (Psa. 22), which describes the suffering of one of God's people, a
lone poet in Israel. The Hebrew poet lodged his complaint with God (Psa. 22:1-18),
made supplication to God (vss. 19-21), and then experienced the joy of deliverance (vss.
22-31). Within the psalm, the poet received the answer to his prayer, which leads to the
second portion, the psalm of thanksgiving (vss. 22-31). What grieves the poet more than
anything in the opening lines of the psalm is the apparent absence of God, also expressed
in the second line of 22:1, "Why are you so far from helping me?" The sense of
abandonment by God does not express a lapse of faith or broken relationship with God,
but complains that God's protective presence is withdrawn as the enemies close in on the
poet (vss. 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18). The poet searches for God and finds God in and
through his suffering. The questions, "Why?" and "How long?" are clearly the major
questions that Israel's poets expressed. The first question, "Why?" reveals the human
need for meaning in suffering. If suffering can be adequately explained, by offering
meaning and purpose, then the poets can be encouraged. Conversely, when there seems
to be no explanation or rationale, the poets are driven to the death of despair (Psa. 73).
Psalm 22, which begins as a personal complaint concludes with the victory of God in
Israel (vss. 22-26), the ingathering of Gentile nations (vss. 27-28), past, present and
future generations (vss. 29-31).
In Jesus' hour when He feels abandoned by God, Jesus remains faithful, by
uttering the words of Israel's poet. He expresses the human heart that seeks to know God
in God's apparent absence. He makes supplication for others and looks beyond to His
redemptive effect on all future nations and generations.
On the one hand, Jesus is the object of divine pleasure (Matt. 3:17) who has no
need to confess sin. He lived a life of sinless obedience to the Father's will, which led
21 Jeremias notes the presence of a popular Jewish belief that Elijah was a helper in time of need. Joachim
Jeremias, " Jhl[e]ia"", TDNT, vol II, p. 935.
22 The verb "forsake" (ejgkataleivpw) conveys the meaning "abandon" or "desert." BAGD, p.

214.
cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.12

Him to the cross, the very purpose for which He was born and lived. Readers are
reminded of Jesus' resolve in the Garden of Gethsemane, "Abba, Father, all things are
possible for you. Take this cup away from me. But not what I will but what you will"
(Mk. 14:36). And yet, there at the cross, the insidious nature human heart is exposed.
There is no greater contrast than between the quintessence of the love of God with the
quintessence of the world's sin.
Paul interprets this event in the language of becoming a "curse" or "sin" for us:
13 "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us—
for it is written, 'Cursed be every one who hangs on a tree'— Gal. 3:13
21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might
become the righteousness of God" (II Cor. 5:21).
Early Christians interpreted Psa. 22 as a Messianic fulfillment by Jesus on the
cross; this was thought to be proof of His Messiahship. Indeed, the verbal abuse and
wagging of the heads by Jesus' mockers is expressed in Psa. 22:6-8. While Psa. 22 is an
individual psalm of complaint of one of Israel's poets, the psalm also looks ahead. Peter,
in reference to another psalm, refers to the poet as a "prophet" and foresaw more than
through his natural comprehension (Acts 2:30 = Psa. 132:11; II Sam. 7:12-13).
Jesus, through the language of the Psalter expresses His complete identification
with humanity, sharing our nature (flesh and blood) and experiences a sense of
abandonment by God. Some, such as Luther and Calvin, pressed the text further, by
saying that in the hours which preceded this cry our Lord endured the torments of the
damned; however, this is surely outside of the bounds of legitimate exegesis. At best, the
abandonment is as mysterious as is the nature of the incarnation and remains as an
unutterable enigma for us.
5) The Fifth Word.
28 "After this Jesus, knowing that all was now finished to fulfill the scripture, said
'I thirst'" (Jn. 19:28).
The RSV connects the fulfilling of Scripture with the statement, "I thirst," which
has led many to pore over the OT passages to find the specific passage which is now
fulfilled. Perhaps there is another allusion to Psa. 22 which has already been used in the
Passion narrative:
15 "my strength is dried up like a potsherd,
and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
thou dost lay me in the dust of death" (Psa. 22:15).
Although the term, "thirst" is not used in Psa. 22, it is captured by the image of a mouth
so dry that the tongue cannot move, since it sticks to the roof of the poet's mouth.
Further, the last clause, "thou dost lay me in the dust of death," links the motif of extreme
thirst with death.
It may more fruitful to connect the fulfillment with the preceding account, "Jesus,
knowing that all was now finished that would fulfill the Scripture." Knowing that His
divinely appointed work was completed, he expresses his physical agony, "I thirst." This
is the only cry of physical pain that the evangelists record. Thirst was one of the horrible
agonies of crucifixion, a raging and devouring thirst that gripped the entire body in its
severely dehydrated condition.
In the FG, this is the same Jesus who had promised a lone Samaritan woman, "a
well of water springing up into eternal life" (Jn. 4:14) and had offered Himself as drink to

cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.13

the multitudes in Jerusalem, "If any one thirst, let him come to me and drink.
38 He who believes in me, as the scripture has said, 'Out of his heart shall flow rivers of
living water'"(Jn. 7:37-38). The one who had claimed to satisfy the spiritual thirst of all
is the one who now thirsts with a raging physical thirst that racks his body.
At this point some of the bystanders [soldiers?] took a sponge, dipped it in a bowl
of vinegar, offered it to Him, and He drank the vinegar.
6) The Sixth Word.
30"When Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, 'It is finished,' and he bowed his
head and gave up his spirit" (Jn. 19:30).
The sixth word of Jesus is just one Greek verb tetevlestai, the Greek
perfect tense, translated "it is finished." The Greek perfect tense communicates the
enduring state of completion, i.e., past action with extended results. The verb "finish"
televw is related to the verb "fulfill" teleiovw, the related noun "end"
(tevlo") and the adjective "complete/perfect" (tevleio"). While it is possible to
interpret Jesus' statement as a cry of relief that the agony and pain is over, it is more
natural to relate the verb to the fourth Evangelist's statement in 19:28 that "all things were
now finished (tetevlestai) in order that the Scripture might be fulfilled"
(teleiwqh'/ ). That is to say that the entire saving work entrusted to Jesus has
been accomplished with finality.23 Jesus claims that the text of Scripture bore witness to
Him (5:39) and, as His life moves to the "hour" of glorification in the Passion narrative,
there is direct reference to the OT (Psa. 22:1,15; 69:21) according to Jn. 19:28. The word
is triumphant, expressive of Jesus' certainty of achieving the divine goal for his life. Paul
uses perfect tense of the same verb with other perfect tenses in a similar setting,
expressing his confidence in realizing his life's work, "I have fought the good fight, I
have finished (tetevlhka) the race, I have kept the faith" (II Tim. 4:7). And Paul
looks forward to the crown of righteousness that he will receive.
The exclamation "It is finished" sharply contrasts with the complaint "My God,
My God. Why have you abandoned me?" It is appropriate that for the FG that this
exclamation comes as the climax, which builds with intensity throughout the ministry,
particularly expressed through the motif of the "hour" (w{ra).24 The hour is an
irresistible force ("not yet"), which points to the final goal when Jesus ascends to the
throne. The same Divine force prohibits any premature seizing of Jesus (7:30; 8:20).
From chapter 12:23 onwards, the "hour" is said to have come ("already"), referring to the
chain of Passion events, climaxed by the cross. Specifically the "hour" provides Jesus
with the divine purpose that drives Him to accomplish God's will:
"Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? 'Father, save me from this hour?'
No, for this purpose I have come to this hour" (Jn. 12:27).
The cross is the means by which Jesus will draw all people to Himself (12:32) and
thereby reveals God's purpose of full inclusion, similar to the message of Psa. 22, when
the poet concludes the complaint psalm with a celebration of God's inclusion of all—past,
present and future. The cry, "It is finished," is a victorious declaration of God's saving
activity that He has obediently fulfilled.
23 In Jn. 4:34, Jesus says that His food is "to accomplish His work"; 5:36--"for the works which My Father

has given to me that I might accomplish them"; 17:4--"I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the
work which you have given me to do."
24 Jn. 1:39 (40); 2:4; 4:6, 21, 23, 52 (twice), 53; 5:25, 28, 35; 7:30; 8:20; 11:9; 12:23, 27, 28, 35; 7:30; 8:20;

11:9; 12:23, 27 (twice); 13:1; 16:2, 4, 21, 25, 32; 17:1; 19:14, 27.
cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.14

7) The Seventh Word.

46 "Then Jesus, crying with a loud voice, said, 'Father, into thy hands I
commit my spirit!' And having said this he breathed his last" (Lk. 23:46).
In Luke's Gospel, the last word of Jesus on the cross is a loud prayer of self-
committal to the Father and is also taken from the Psalter. Jesus adds the personal
address, "Father":
5 "Into thy hand I commit my spirit;
thou hast redeemed me, O Lord, faithful God" (Psa. 31:5).
It is striking that even in the context of unbearable pain, bitter shame and cruel mockery,
Jesus uses the words from the Old Testament. For Jesus, the Old Testament is the Word
of God, which He had constantly used in His ministry, and now, in His passion.
The term, "spirit (pneu'ma) is sometimes used in the NT with respect to the
inner spiritual life of a person, the "belongingness to the spiritual realm, the dimension of
the beyond in the midst . . . At death, man ceases to exist both in the realm of the physical
and in the realm of the spiritual, and continues existing only in the spiritual: and the
physical body, ceasing to be the embodiment of the whole man in the observable world,
becomes merely a corpse (James 2:26)."25 The same prayer of a final personal committal
of one's spirit to God was expressed by Stephen the first martyr of the Church (Acts
7:59—to the Lord Jesus), Polycarp, Jerome of Prague, Luther, Melanchthon, and many
others in church history.

Two Other Fulfillment Passages

1) "For these things took place that the scripture might be fulfilled, 'Not a bone of
him shall be broken'" (Jn. 19:36).
The narrative, concerned with the breaking of bones, is regarded as a fulfillment
of Scripture (Psa. 34:19-20a), serving as a vital element of Jn. 19:31-37. While the text
makes it clear that Jesus died (19:30), it was not apparent to the Jewish authorities. Their
request of Pilate is to break the legs so that death would quickly come when the human
body would no longer be able to stand up "on the nails" to breathe. The physical trauma
of breaking the legs would compound the suffocation of the victim. The reason for their
request is that the "great" Sabbath was near, called a "great" or "high day" because it fell
within the Passover celebration. The Deuteronomic law (Deut. 21:21-23) legislated that
the body of an executed victim should not remain on the tree into the next day but should
be buried on the same day as the execution; to fail in this responsibility would issue in
defilement of the land. Ironically, the very same concern for ritual purity that prohibited
the Jewish authorities from entering Pilate's Praetorium (18:28) now motivates them to
speed up the death process so that the body might be quickly removed and buried on the
same day to avoid defilement of the land. Clear irony is at work in John's account of the
trial. On the one hand, the Jewish authorities will demand the death of Jesus the Lamb of
God from a pagan Pilate (Jn. 1:29, 36) and apostasize by saying, "We have no king but
Caesar." On the other hand, they will not enter the official courtyard of the unclean
Pilate so as to maintain their own personal purity. In the crucifixion narrative, the same
authorities place another demand from Pilate, to speed up the death process of the three
victims so that they would not incur defilement for the land. From the evangelist's
25Colin Brown, "Spirit", Dictionary of New Testament Theology, vol. 3, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Publishing House, 1971), p. 694.
cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.15

perspective, they have already defiled the Passover and the land, by their hideous murder
of the Son of God.
Again Pilate accedes to their demand as he had already done in the Praetorium
("Pilate went out to them"—18:29). The bones of the two insurrectionists were broken
since they had not yet died. But when the soldiers come to Jesus, they observe that Jesus
was already dead, and thus, do not break his legs. To the fourth Evangelist, the human
purpose is eclipsed by the divine purpose in the fulfillment of Scripture (Psa. 34:19-20).
"The particular Scripture either concerns the Passover lamb (Exod. 12:46, "You shall not
break a bone of it," cf. Numb. 9:12) or the protection vouchsafed to the righteous, Ps.
34:20b = Septuagint, 33:21b, "He keeps all his bones;) not one of them shall be
crushed."26 In light of the "Lamb of God" imagery in Jn. 1:29, 36, an allusion to the
Passover lamb is most likely.27 Thus, the law concerning the Passover lamb is kept with
regard to Jesus, even though the Jews requested that His legs be broken.
2) "And again another scripture says, 'They shall look on him whom they have
pierced'" (Jn. 19:27).
Closely related to the fulfillment passage about not breaking bones is the piercing
of Jesus' side. After the soldiers discover that Jesus is already dead, they are no longer
compelled to break His legs; one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear, and
immediately there came out blood and water (19:33-34). Perhaps to make Jesus' death
certain, one of the four soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a long spear. The gruesome
narrative is witnessed and authenticated by the writer of the Fourth Gospel (v. 36) and is
then followed by the witness of the Scripture from Zechariah 12:10:
10 "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a
spirit of compassion and supplication, so that, when they look on him whom they have
pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly
over him, as one weeps over a first-born" (Zech. 12:10).
The full text of Zech. 12 speaks of a wonderful outpouring of the Spirit of compassion
and supplication that is accompanied by genuine repentance of "the house of David"
(Zech. 12:10-14.28 These attitudes of compassion and repentance are far away from
hardened soldiers, accustomed to such grisly tasks. While the soldier, casually and
without thinking, thrusts his spear into Jesus' side, he is unaware that he is fulfilling an
ancient prophecy. Just as an unbelieving Caiaphas prophesied unwittingly by word
(11:51), so a Roman soldier fulfills prophecy by action (19:34).
Zechariah's prophecy of mourning, compassion and repentance was fulfilled in a
greater way on the Day of Pentecost, when people began to acknowledge their personal
and corporate guilt in killing God's Son. The prophecy is fulfilled in successive
generations as people come to the same sense of personal responsibility and corporate
acknowledgment. The death of Jesus on the cross is not simply the result of human
manipulation, jealousy of religious leaders, the cowardice of the Roman Pilate, or an
execution by four Roman soldiers. From the fourth Evangelist's perspective, it was the
sin of the world and divine purpose that led Jesus to his throne on the cross, wherein He
becomes the Paschal Lamb, with unbroken bones and a pierced side, from which flowed
blood and water. Some medical specialists have spoken of a literal "breaking of the
26 Cullen I K Story, The Fourth Gospel: Its Purpose, Pattern, and Power, (Shippensburg, PA: The Ragged

Edge Press, 1997), p. 407.

27 Paul refers to Christ as our Passover lamb was sacrificed (I Cor. 5:7).
28 Story, p. 407.

cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.16

heart" in which the blood from within the heart is poured into a sac, separating into two
fluids— a clotting blood substance and a colorless substance which appears to be water.
Thus, when the sac is pierced, the two fluids flow out in large quantity, especially since
the body is in an upright position.
While this suggestion is plausible, the evangelist's interest more probably lies in
the meaning of the event. Perhaps a more promising clue is to be found in John's Epistle:
6 "This is he who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ, not with the water only
but with the water and the blood.7 And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit
is the truth.8 There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these
three agree" (I Jn. 5:6-8).
There is a link established between "water," "blood," "Spirit," and "witness," which is
apparent in the crucifixion account. The term "water" is used by the fourth Evangelist to
designate the Spirit (3:5), who would not come until Jesus was glorified (7:39), and is
conditional upon Jesus' death and departure (16:7). Blood signifies the real death of
Jesus as well as atoning and cleansing power, "The blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us
from all sins" (I Jn. 1:7). It is the Spirit who witnesses to this wonder. "In the poetic
phrasing of the First Epistle the water had to mingle with Jesus' blood before the Spirit
could give testimony: "not in water only, but in water and blood. . .Thus, it would seem
that in the Gospel picture of a flow of blood and water from the side of Jesus, John is
saying that now the Spirit can be given because Jesus is obviously dead and through
death has regained the glory that was before the world existed (17:5)."29
There is, nevertheless, a hidden silent mourning latent in the context of 19:37, the
mourning of the four women and of the disciple whom Jesus loved. Their silence has
already been noted as Jesus entrusted his mother to the beloved disciple and the
disciple to her. Then (19:25-27) as now (19:37), however, the mourning of Jesus'
faithful followers for their Lord, although not referred to expressly, would have been
deep beyond words.30

Attendant Circumstances
Various signs witness to the crucifixion and its import: the physical world, the
underworld [world of the dead], the religious world and the human witness of a Roman
Centurion.
The thick darkness. The Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 27:45; Mk. 15:33; Luke 23:44-
45a) describe a period of darkness31 over all the land from the sixth hour until the ninth
hour (12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.). An eclipse of the sun is impossible during the Passover,
since the moon is full at this time during the year. At this point, distanced by twenty-one
hundred years, it is impossible to be confident about the nature or explanation of the
darkness.
Rending of the veil of the Temple. Matthew (27:51), Mark (15:38) and Luke
(23:45) record the rending of the veil of the Temple. The "veil of the holy place" (toV
katapevtasma tou' naou') refers to the thick curtain covering the
entrance to the holy of holies.32 This veil was torn from top to bottom. For Paul, the
29 Raymond Brown, The Gospel According to John, (Garden City: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1970), p.
950.
30 Ibid, p. 408.
31 Luke's Gospel contains the verb ejkleivpw can be used of the sun going dark or eclipsed. BAGD,

p. 242.
cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.17

rending of the veil means that the wall separating Jew and Gentile is abolished (Eph.
2:13-14). For the writer of Hebrews, the rending of the veil signifies that the system of
purification, ritual ceremonies and intermediaries, is swept away; thus the new people of
God can directly enter into the presence of God with confidence since their hearts have
been cleansed (Hebrews 9-10, esp. 10:19-22). The sacrifice of Jesus offers to all people a
new and living access to God (6:19; 9:3; 10:20).
An earthquake. Matthew alone narrates a violent earthquake, which shook the
land and split the rocks and opened the tombs, which housed the deceased (Matt. 27:51).
Raising of dead saints. Matthew also notes that subsequent to the earthquake's
opening of the rock tombs that the bodies of saints were raised after Jesus' resurrection
(27:52-53). On Friday, the tombs were opened by the earthquake and the deceased were
given life; on Easter, the saints emerged from their tombs after Jesus was resurrected.
This narrative may lead to Paul's affirmation, "But now Christ has been raised from the
dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep" (I Cor. 15:20). By Jesus' death and
resurrection, God raises the saints. Moreover, these saints appeared as public witnesses
in Jerusalem.
The centurion's witness. A Roman Centurion, charged with overseeing the
execution, makes his own confession. Matthew notes that his confession is in direct
response to the earthquake (Matt. 27:54); Mark states that his confession occurs at the
precise moment of Jesus' death (Mk. 15:39); Matthew and Mark note that his confession
is a declaration of Jesus as the Son of God (Matt. 27:54; Mk. 15:39); Luke notes that the
Centurion glorified God and affirmed Jesus' innocence (Lk. 23:47).33 Whether the
Centurion meant "demi-god" or "hero" from His Gentile background or the personal
confession, "This man was the Son of God" is immaterial. For Mark, this confession is
the climactic and triumphant witness.

The Burial
Jesus died on Friday, the day of preparation for the Sabbath, which began at
sunset. As noted, Jewish law forbade that the bodies of impaled victims should remain
unburied after sunset (Deut. 21:22-23), especially in preparation for the "high day" of the
Passover. The Romans were content to let the bodies hang on crosses until they rotted
away. Thus, the removal of Jesus' body (also the other criminals) represents Pilate's
concession to the Jews.
All four Evangelists identify a certain Joseph of Arimathea who took
responsibility for the burial of Jesus. Matthew (27:58) and John (19:38) state that Joseph
was a disciple of Jesus; John adds that he was a disciple, but secretly, for fear of the Jews.
Mark (15:43) and Luke (23:51) note that he was a member of the council, i.e., the
Sanhedrin, and that he was looking for the Kingdom of God. Matthew alone notes that
he was rich, which may be intended as a fulfillment of the OT Servant Song:
9 "And they made his grave with the wicked
and with a rich man in his death. . . " (Isa. 53:9).
The fourth Evangelist adds another person, Nicodemus (19:39), the one who came
to him by night (Jn. 3:2). This is the same man, who calls for justice and the need for
witness from the individual (8:50) before condemnation. Through the use of the phrase,
"who came to him by night," the evangelist forges a link between the three chapters and
33 Isa. 53:11 he shall see the fruit of the travail of his soul and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the
righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous; and he shall bear their iniquities.
cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.18

notes the progressive commitment of this man who initially came to Jesus in a confused
state in Jn. 3. "The contrast lies between the concern of the Jews who were present that
the Sabbath be kept (19:31) and the concern of the two Jews that the body of their Master
be given proper burial."34
The body of Jesus was wrapped in a linen shroud (Matt. 27:59; Mk. 15:46; Lk.
23:53). John narrates that Nicodemus brought about a hundred pounds of a mixture of
myrrh and aloes (19:39), which they bound up in the shroud wrapping the corpse--to
protect the corpse from rapid decomposition. The tomb was a rock-hewn tomb that was
new, in which no one had been buried. A great stone was rolled over the mouth of the
tomb, perhaps rolled in a rock groove in front of the tomb's entrance. Matthew alone
records the Jewish request for a seal over the tomb and the posting of a Roman guard to
prohibit Jesus' disciples from stealing the body and thus, creating a "last fraud" (Matt.
27:64). Matthew's paragraph is clearly apologetic by refuting Jewish discrediting of the
resurrection, as was proclaimed by the early Church.

The Evangelists' Perspectives on the Cross

Matthew. Matthew's Gospel highlights the Jewish rejection of God's Messiah
climaxed in the Jewish acceptance of full responsibility ironically, their culpability, "His
blood be upon us and our children!" (27:25), which is spoken by "all the people." Jewish
culpability for the death of Jesus for the death of Jesus is already foreshadowed in the
birth narratives (Matt. 2), especially in the massacre of Bethlehem's infants (2:16-18), the
foreboding death of John the Baptist that will parallel the death of Jesus,35 the plot to kill
Jesus (12:14), the Passion Pronouncements (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:17-19), the polemic of
the trilogy of parables (21:28-22:14), and the major role of the chief priests and elders in
the Passion narrative (26:1-4, 14-16, 47ff.). The growing hostility of Jewish leaders
throughout the Gospel culminates in Israel's rejection of her Messiah.
In a transparent way, Matthew highlights the role of Jesus as Messiah and Son of
God, terms, which are closely linked, not only in the Gospel, but especially in the Passion
narrative:
"Are you the Messiah, the Son of God?" (26:63)
"Are you the King of the Jews?" (27:11)
"Whom do you want me to release for you, Barabbas or Jesus who is called
Messiah" (27:17)
"Then what shall I do with Jesus who is called Messiah?" (27:22)
"Hail, King of the Jews!" (27:29)
"This is Jesus the King of the Jews" (27:37)
"If you are the Son of God..." (27:40)
"He is the King of Israel..." (27:42)
"He said, 'I am the Son of God'" (27:43)
"Truly this man was the Son of God" (27:54)
The term "Son of God" is closely linked with Jesus' sense of intimate and unmediated
Sonship (11:26-27), and is also reflected in His "Abba" prayer (26:39, 42) and His
reference to "my Father" (26:53).
Jesus' unique Sonship leads Him to fulfill the role of the Servant of the Lord,
34Story, p. 358.
3511:1-19; 14:1-12; 21:28-32; 27-57-60. See J. B. Green, "Death of Jesus," Jesus and the Gospels,
(Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1992), p. 155.
cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.19

demonstrated by His innocence,36 silence 37 and commitment to fulfill the divine will of
the Suffering Servant--especially transparent in the Passion narrative:
7 "He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a
lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is dumb,
so he opened not his mouth."
11 "he shall see the fruit of the travail of his soul and be satisfied; by his
knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted
righteous; and he shall bear their iniquities" (Isa. 53:7, 11).
The first Servant Song (Isa. 42:1-4) is echoed in the Baptism of Jesus (Matt. 3:17), the
Transfiguration narrative (Matt. 17:5), the healing ministry of Jesus, and His silence
charge and unobtrusive nature of His ministry (Matt. 12:18-21). Jesus' words at the Last
Supper interpret His impending death with vicarious terminology, "poured out for many"
(Matt. 26:28), thereby underscoring the connection with the fourth Servant Song (Isa.
52:13-53:12). Although Matthew's Passion narrative offers a transparent picture of Jesus
as the Messiah and Son of God; the narrative points to the way in which Jesus fulfills the
Divine will as the Suffering Servant.
Further, the death of Jesus is the means by which "forgiveness of sins" (26:28)38
is conferred, i.e., the fulfillment of Jeremiah's promise of a new covenant (Jer. 31:31-34)
and the necessary prelude to Jesus' gathering the scattered flock as Shepherd (26:32), and
the Great Commission (28:18-20).
Mark. The confession of Jesus as the Son of God by the Roman Centurion comes
in a climactic way, particularly in Mark's Gospel. The opening title of Mark's work, "The
beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, Son of God" (1:1), gives us his central thesis
concerning the identity of Jesus. We find the language of Sonship both in the Baptism
and Transfiguration (1:11; 9:7). Twice we read that evil spirits (supernatural) confess
Him to be the Son of God (3:11; 5:7; see also 1:24, 34). Indirectly, His divine Sonship is
alluded to in the Parable of the Wicked Vinedressers in which the beloved son was sent
on a dangerous mission (12:6). Finally, the narrative of the crucifixion concludes with
the Centurion's witness, "Truly this Man was the Son of God" (15:39). Jesus prefers the
ambiguous term "Son of Man" for Himself and expresses His serving and saving role
through the title:
45 "For the Son of Man also came not to be served but to serve, and to give
his life as a ransom for many" (Mk. 10:45; see also 14:24).
Mark leads his readers to a true understanding of Jesus as the Son of God. People
thought of Jesus as a madman or fanatic (3:21), prophet (8:28), even as the Messiah
(8:29). It is in the very depth of his humiliation on the cross, that one man—a Roman
36Matt. 27:4 saying, “I have sinned in betraying innocent blood.” They said, “What is that to us? See to it
yourself.”

Matthew 27:18-19
18 For he knew that it was out of envy that they had delivered him up.19 Besides, while he was sitting on
the judgment seat, his wife sent word to him, “Have nothing to do with that righteous man, for I have
suffered much over him today in a dream.”
The Revised Standard Version
37 Matt. 26:63 But Jesus was silent. And the high priest said to him, “I adjure you by the living God, tell us

if you are the Christ, the Son of God.”

Matt. 27:14 But he gave him no answer, not even to a single charge; so that the governor wondered greatly.
38 See 1:21, "He will save His people from their sins."

cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.20

centurion—ventures to call him, "The Son of God" (15:39). That confession comes
through in a very unexpected and startling manner. Mark arranges his material so as to
lead up to this confession. The great confession that Jesus is the Son of God comes at the
moment of His greatest weakness and apparent defeat. Throughout the Gospel, Jesus is
often defined by who He is not. His divine Sonship can only be understood in His
humiliation, completed in the crucifixion, and vindicated by His resurrection from the
dead.
The disciples are to look to the cross of Jesus as their paradigm for service.
Discipleship, according to Mark, means following Jesus along the same path of
misunderstanding and rejection. To be engaged in the mission of Jesus implies the
payment of a price. The sober account of John the Baptist's fate (6:14-29) set within the
disciples' preaching mission (6:7-13) is a stern reminder–then and now–of just how great
a price is involved in following Jesus. For the disciple of Jesus, the warning and promise
is sure, "Whoever desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross,
and follow Me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life
for My sake and the gospel's will save it" (8:34,35). Simon of Cyrene "takes up the
cross" (115:21) and women faithfully stand by Jesus at His death (15:40-41).
Luke. Not only does Luke affirm Jesus' Messianic identity but he is careful to
define and redefine the nature of Jesus' Messiahship. Jesus is preeminently the Servant,
who steadfastly sets His face to go to Jerusalem "to be received up" (9:31,51). Jesus is
the One who was reckoned with transgressors (Isa. 53:12; Lk. 22:37), Lord (20:41-44)
and as the Servant of the Lord (4:17-19). The impersonal verb "it is necessary" (dei')
signals the divine necessity of the cross in salvation history (41 of 102 occurrences of
the term are found in Luke-Acts).
Jesus is the exalted Lord. Luke uses the term "Lord" eighteen times in his gospel
(50 times in Acts). The term finds its theological basis in the resurrection of Jesus,
wherein God has made Him both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36), but is also used of Jesus
prior to the resurrection. Most of the uses of the term are found in passages distinctly
Lukan (7:13,19; 10:1,39,41; 11:39; 12:42, etc.). Thus, the purpose of God, fulfilled in
Jesus' history is continued in the Church's life and witness. Through the rejection and
humiliation of Jesus by His own people, Jesus becomes the Savior of the world. In Acts,
Jesus' death is likewise regarded as an expression of the divine purpose of reaching out
to the whole of humanity (2:23). Jesus is the Suffering Servant of the Lord, Messiah,
and Lord, but above all, He is a "light to the Gentiles." Even Luke's genealogy reveals
that God's saving deed is for all people, seeing that Jesus' pedigree is traced back to
Adam. Luke's purpose is realized through a salvation history, "a narrative of those
things which are most surely believed among us" (1:1).
A secondary purpose of Luke's crucifixion narrative is apologetic in that he
wishes to affirm the position of Christianity vis-a-vis Judaism and the Roman State. The
Christian Good News is not seditious, and thus, Pilate, representing Rome, declares
repeatedly that Jesus is innocent (23:4, 14, 22). And yet, "Herod and Pontius Pilate, with
the Gentiles, and the peoples of Israel" (Acts. 4:27) are together responsible for Jesus'
death (see Acts 3:13, 26; 4:27, 30 and Isa. 52:13-53:12). More than the other Gospels,
Luke emphasizes that Pilate is unwilling to sentence Jesus to death, "Why, What evil has
he done? I have found in him no crime deserving of death; I will therefore chastise him
and release him (23:22; 23:13-16). God has made the Church to be the true heir of

cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.21

Judaism. The death of Jesus is the fulfillment of Jewish hope (23:34, 48), now opened up
to the whole world (2:25-38).
John. The Fourth Gospel presents the cross as Jesus' "hour" of glorification when
Jesus "is lifted up," thereby ascending His royal throne. The cross is the wonderful sign
that interprets itself. In the language of the Fourth Gospel, this is the climactic "sign"
(shmei'on) that signifies (shmaivnw) the meaning of the Jesus story. This event
is prefigured by the various "signs" and by the statements about Jesus' being "lifted up":

Son of Man lifted up [cross] believe in Him eternal

life
Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness [physical sight] [physical
life]
(Jn. 3:14-15)

"When you have lifted up the Son of man, then you will know that I am he, and
that I do nothing on my own authority but speak thus as the Father taught me."
(Jn. 8:28).
"'And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.'
He said this signifying what death he was to die.
34 'How can you say that
the Son of Man must be lifted up?'" (Jn. 12:32-34)
32 "This was to fulfill the word which Jesus had spoken signifying by what death
he was to die" (Jn. 18:32).
In its stress on Jesus' exaltation and glorification ("being lifted up"), the Fourth
Gospel portrays Jesus as the King,39 who is in charge of the Passion. In the mashal of the
Good Shepherd, Jesus makes it clear that His death will be volitional, "No one takes it
from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have
power to take it again; this charge I have received from my Father." He is aware that life
and an abundant harvest will not ensue unless He, as the grain of wheat, dies (12:24).
Jesus has come for this "hour" (12:27), and indeed, sets in motion the actual betrayal (Jn.
13:27; see 6:70). From the Fourth Evangelist's perspective, Jesus' trial before Pilate and
the Jews, is actually a trial of Pilate and the Jews by Jesus (also the trial of the Jews by
Jesus the Light of the World in Jn. 9).
The cross is also transparently the death of Jesus for the world. He is "the Lamb
of God who takes away the sin of the world" (1:29, 36), the Passover Lamb (19:14;
18:28) and the supreme expression of the love of God wherein Jesus offers life to the
world (3:16). The cross is the means by which Jesus returns to the glorious world above
from the world below (3:13, 31; 6:38; 8:23; 13:1-3).

Summary
The evangelists do not concentrate on the actual horrid details of the crucifixion,
but interpret that awful and wonderful moment. They combine narrative with
interpretation with dependence on the thought and imagery of the OT and the images that
Jesus used to interpret His death. Those images include fulfillment passages from the
OT, Servant Songs, Passion Predictions (Mk. 8:31; 9:31; 10:32-34) and metaphors that
culminate in the climax of the Gospel tradition. The Gospels are also guided by other
39 See references above to "King", "Kingdom" in the Fourth Gospel.
cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Story, p.22

explicit and implicit clues that Jesus used to indicate the reality and significance of His
impending death.
In the course of the Fourth Gospel, metaphors are used, signifying Jesus one
greater than Moses' serpent, living water as over against physical water, the bread of life
over against manna, light of the world, good shepherd over against the thieves and
hirelings, resurrection and life, the grain of wheat, the true vine. In the Fourth Gospel,
the Passion of Jesus is the final and all-inclusive sign, which points to itself.
The Gentile official's son was raised from his death condition but would die.
The paralytic was healed but would die.
The multitude ate bread but would go hungry again.
The blind man could see but would die.
Lazarus was raised from the dead but would die again.
But, with the cross, something happened within time of eternal consequences in history,
human life and the world structure. Life will never be the same, going about "business as
usual." The temporal and eternal are irrevocably concentrated and united in the wonder
of the cross. It is an event, which belongs to two ages, this age and the age to come, and
an event, which includes two worlds, the world above and the world below.
As the new community of faith, the Church draws its ongoing life from the
crucified Son of God and also finds the pattern for her life in His love (Jn. 13:34-35),
service (13:14-17), evangelism (Jn. 11:42), willingness to undergo suffering (Mk. 8:34-
35) with the certainty of reunion with Jesus (Jn. 14:1-18).

cross.doc
2/4/2015
J. Lyle Story
 Female and Male in Four Anointing-Stories

Introduction.

Women in general have the sense of the person

much more than men have. This means that they
have a special mission, which is to reintroduce love,
to give back to its humanity to a world which
remains so glacial when men alone have built it.(Paul Tournier)1

Tournier, the Swiss psychiatrist suggests some generalized points of tension with respect
to women and men. These generalizations can be applied to the anointing stories in Matthew 26,
Mark 14, Luke 7 and John 12. Each story revolves around a woman who anoints Jesus, male
objection, Jesus' rebuttal of male objectors and his explanation for why the woman and her
action are to be accepted, valued and appreciated—not rejected. For the sake of this article, we
will assume that there were two original versions of the stories: 1) Matthew, Mark and John, 2)
Luke, in their oral transmission. E.P. Sanders states that "These stories probably rest on
memories though details have been exchanged and possibly confused."2 At the oral and written
stages, details from one story may have been transferred and vice versa, with overlapping strands
or conflations.3 In one strand, the anointing is symbolic for the preparation of Jesus' body for
burial, while another strand understands the anointing as an expression of vulnerable gratitude
for the forgiveness of sin. In the stories, the authors juxtapose male authorities and disciples and
the women who anoint Jesus.
In this article, we will argue for a literary approach that treats the four pericopes as
whole stories with attention to broad structure, significant literary relationships (comparison,
contrast and purpose) and the implied author's point of view, to be embraced by the implied
readers. The tension between women and men stands out as a vital component of the anointing
stories, which is to be taken seriously by the readers.
This article presupposes that the four stories are genuine stories and need to be READ AS
STORIES. The relatively new field of literary or narrative criticism suggests a careful reading of
the narratives, including setting, plot, characters, dialogue, events, point of view, time, implied
authors4 and implied readers.5 To be sure, these pericopes have been studied from perspectives of
historical, source, form and redaction criticism, as well as structuralism.6 However, such
1 Paul Tournier, The Naming of Persons, (New York: Harper & Row, 1975), 86.
2 E. P. Sanders, The Historical Figure of Jesus (New York: Allen Lane, Penguin Books, 1993), 127. Ben
Witherington shares a similar viewpoint. Ben Witherington III, Women in the Ministry of Jesus (Cambridge:
University Press, 1984), 110-116.
3 C.H. Dodd, Historical Tradition in the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1965), 171.
4 The implied author is the author who has chosen to reveal himself along with his perspectives, concerns

and values.
5 The implied reader is the person who can detect the original message of the story, with the potential of

re-living the story and embrace the author's point of view.

6 Conjectures about the stories abound and are reflected in the various commentaries and journals. Some authors

approach the stories from: 1) Source and Form criticism (J. F. Coakley, "The Anointing at Bethany and the Priority
of John," Journal of Biblical Literature, (107/2; 1988), 241-256; Robert Holst, "The One Anointing of Jesus:
Another Application of the Form-Critical Model," JBL 95/3 (1976), 435-446; J.N. Sanders, "Those Whom Jesus
Loved," New Testament Studies," No. 1 (1954), 29-41; André Legault, "An Application of the Form-Critique
Method to the Anointings in Galilee and Bethany, CBQ 16 (1954). 131-141. 2) Redaction Criticism (e.g., Elisabeth
Schüssler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, (New York: Crossroad, 1984), 128; Joel Green, The Death of Jesus
disciplines often atomize and control the text with a specific agenda in mind. Steven Barton
notes that such disciplines often deal with the archaeology of the text but do not pay sufficient
attention to the text as it stands.7 The paper offers a holistic approach in understanding the
individual stories.
Krieger suggests the language of historical "windows" and literary "mirrors," which
function interdependently.8 "The historical nature of the Bible leads one to treat the story as a
window to the event behind the text,"9 and to relive the Jesus-events as part of a community of
faith. In the four narratives, the authors invite readers into the text-world of the anointing stories,
to experience and feel the various points of tension and to be changed when the readers return to
their separate worlds. We are indebted to Seymour Chatman for his helpful approach of "story"
and "discourse,"10 which has been further developed by David Rhoads and Donald Michie,11
Norman Petersen,12 and Jack Kingsbury,13 et al. The anointing paragraphs tell the event (story),
while the discourse reflects upon how the stories are told.14 In support, Meir Sternberg labels
narrative as "a functional structure, a means to a communicative end, a transaction between the
narrator and the audience on whom he wishes to produce a certain effect by way of certain
strategies."15 The authors help the readers to relive the event and thereby adopt the author's point
of view in changing thoughts, attitudes and behavior, which reflect upon both genders.
Broad Structure of the Stories
Matt. 26 Mk. 14 Lk. 7 Jn. 12
Literary and Religious leaders' Religious leaders' Reception of Unwitting
Historical Context plot to kill Jesus plot to kill Jesus Jesus by the prophecy of
(1-5) (1-2) people (29) and Caiaphas (Jn.
rejection by the 11:49-50) and plot
Pharisees and to kill Jesus (45-
lawyers (30) and 57)
indictment for
fickleness of this
generation (31-35)
Setting of the
Anointing
a. Place House in Bethany House in Bethany House of Simon Bethany where
(6) (3) the Pharisee (36) Lazarus was (1)
b. Time After two days, the Two days before During Jesus' Six days before
Passover is Passover (1) Galilean ministry Passover (1)
coming (2)
c. Host Simon the leper Simon the leper Simon a Pharisee, Lazarus, Martha
(6) (3) others who were who served Jesus
with Jesus (36, 39, , Mary (2)
7 Stephen Barton, "Mark as Narrative: The Story of the Anointing Woman (Mk. 14:3-9), The Expository

Times 102 8 1 (1991), 231.

8 Murray Krieger, A Window to Criticism: Shakespeare's Sonnets and Modern Poetics (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton

University Press, 1964), 3-70.

9 Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1991). 154.
10 Seymour Chatman, Story and Discourse, (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1980).
11 David Rhoads, Donald Michie, Mark as Story: an Introduction to the Narrative of a Gospel (Philadelphia:

Fortress Press, 1982).

12 Norman R. Petersen, Literary Criticism for New Testament Critics (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1978.
13 Jack D. Kingsbury, Matthew as Story (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986).
14 Kingsbury, 2.
15 Meir Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading

(Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1985), 1. See also R. Alan Culpepper, The Anatomy of the Fourth
Gospel: A Study in Literary Design, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983), 6.
 40)
d. Activity Sat at table (7) Sat at table (3) Sat at table (36) Supper—at table
(1)
Anointing Event
a. Anointing Unnamed woman Unnamed woman Unnamed sinful Mary (3)
Woman (7) (3) woman (37)
b. Container An alabaster jar of An alabaster jar of An alabaster flask A pound of costly
and value of very precious ointment of pure of ointment (37) ointment of pure
oil ointment (7) nard, very costly nard (3)
(3)
c. Verb She poured (7) Broke the flask Anointed (37) Anointed (3)
and she poured (3)
d. Body part Head (7) Head (3) Feet (38) Feet (3)
anointed
e. Mention of Weeping, she Wiped his feet with
weeping, began to wet his her hair; and the
wiping, hair, feet with her tears house was filled
kissing feet and wiped them with the fragrance
with the hair of her of this ointment (3)
head, and kissed
his feet (38)
Male Objector (s) Disciples are Some are silently Simon the Judas Iscariot, one
to Anointing indignant (8) indignant, followed Pharisee of his disciples; he
with their verbal and other who was to betray
censure of the Pharisees at the him (4)
woman (4) table (39, 49)
Reason for Male Why the waste? Why the waste? Accusation of Why was this
Objection Could have been For this ointment Jesus' prophetic ointment not sold
sold for a large might have been status. for 300 denarii and
sum and given to sold for more than Implication: he given to the poor?
the poor (9) 300 denarii and should have (5-6)
given to the poor known the lifestyle
(4-5) of the sinful
woman and
rejected her
anointing. Also
noted is the
objection for
Jesus' direct
forgiveness (39,
49)
Jesus' Rebuttal of
Male Objectors
a. Initial Rebuttal Why do you Leave her alone; Simon, I have Let her alone (7)
trouble the why do you trouble something to say
woman? (10) her? (6) to you (40)
Jesus' indirectly
affirms his
prophetic status by
revealing his
knowledge of what
Simon was saying
to himself
b. Explanation for She has done a She has done a An expression of Let her keep it for
Woman's beautiful thing to beautiful thing to gratitude: Contrast the day of my
Anointing-- me…to prepare me…she has between the burial (7)
 Purpose me for burial (10) anointed my body woman and
beforehand for Simon; Simon has
burying (6, 8) neglected the
customary tasks
while the woman
has gone far
beyond the norm
(36-46). Her
extravagant
anointing is an
expression of
gratitude.
c. Further For you always For you always Parable of the Two The poor you
Explanation have the poor but have the poor with debtors—which always have with
you will not always you, and whenever supports the you, but you do
have me (11) you will, you can woman's actions not always have
Implication? do good to them. as gratitude (41- me (8)
But you will not 42) Implication? Implication?
always have me.
She has done
what she could (7)
Implication?
d. Climactic Truly I say to you, And truly I say to The forgiveness of The house was
Statement for wherever this you, wherever the the woman's many filled with the
the Woman's gospel is preached gospel is preached sins issues in such fragrance of the
Anointing in the whole world, in the whole world, gratitude (loves ointment (3)
what she has done what she has done much) (47)
will be told in will be told in
memory of her memory of her (9)
(13)
Following Context Judas' agreement Judas' agreement Paragraph filled Jewish plot to kill
with high priests to with high priests to with the names of Lazarus along with
betray Jesus (14- betray Jesus Jesus' female Jesus (12:9-11)
16) (14:10-11) disciples (8:1-3)
COMPARISON, CONTRAST AND PURPOSE
The four accounts use three major literary relationships (comparison, contrast and
purpose) to narrate their particular story.
Literary and Historical Context. Matthew, Mark and John tell the anointing-story in the
context of Passion Week—just before Jesus' crucifixion and burial (comparison). Hostile (male)
Jewish leaders are plotting to kill Jesus, in collusion with Judas. In particular, John's account is
the fullest as he narrates Caiaphas' unwitting prophecy that it is expedient for one man to die than
the nation (Jn. 11:49-50). As a result of Caiaphas' argument/prophecy, the leaders took counsel
to put Jesus to death (v. 53). Supreme irony is expressed by the narrator in the use of the verb,
"gathered together" (suna/gw) in 11:47, 52: the religious leaders gather together the Sanhedrin
(v. 47), which is the very means by which Jesus might gather together both the nation and the
scattered children of God (v. 52).16
Luke's version, by contrast, takes place earlier during Jesus' Galilean ministry; Jesus
tampers with the religious, racial and social taboos of Jewish particularism: healing of a Gentile
Centurion's servant (Lk. 7:1-10), interrupting a funeral and touching a coffin, raising a widow's
only son (vss. 11-17), critique of John the Baptist and Jesus and Jesus' indictment of the present

For further discussion see Cullen I K Story, The Fourth Gospel: Its Purpose, Pattern and Power (Shippensburg,
16

PA: Ragged Edge Press, 1997), 249-250.

fickle generation (vss. 18-35).
Setting for the Anointing—
a. Place. Comparison is evident between Matthew, Mark and John who locate the
setting as a house in Bethany (near Jerusalem), which is contrasted by Luke's story, locating the
meal in the general Galilean area.
b. Time. Matthew, Mark and John can be compared in that the anointing pericope occurs
in the Passover week, although the specific details vary (before or after the Triumphal Entry).
This contrasts with Luke's narrative, which includes no temporal indicator—and is fitted within
Jesus' extensive Galilean ministry.
c. Host. Matthew and Mark are compared with the identification of Simon the Leper,
who hosts the dinner. John specifically names Mary, Martha and Lazarus,17 in connection with
"Bethany, where Lazarus was." The host is not specifically named, but due to the activity of
both Martha and Mary, it can be argued that the dinner was hosted in their home, thereby making
them hosts. Luke's host is Simon the Pharisee, who is not named in the earlier part of the story,
but is clarified by Jesus' address to Simon. (7:40).
d. Activity. All four gospels can be compared in terms of the physical posture of guests'
reclining (in Oriental fashion). The anointing event happens in the context of a dinner. John
alone records Martha's serving (diakonei=n) activity, which can also be compared with her
serving role in Luke's account of Jesus' visit to Martha and Mary's home (Lk. 10:38-42).18
Anointing Event.
a. Identity of an Anointing Woman. The anointing woman is nameless in Matthew, Mark
and Luke— to be contrasted with John's account, which identifies Mary. John's literary style
throughout the gospel is to forge inner links between separate events19; in Jn. 11:3, the evangelist
links the Lazarus-story (cha.11) with Mary's anointing story (cha. 12), "This Mary, whose
brother Lazarus now lay sick, was the same one who poured out perfume on the Lord, and wiped
his feet with her hair."20 The woman in Lk. 7 is spoken of as a "sinful woman" (7:37—perhaps
prostitute) also noted by Jesus, "this woman" (7:44) with many forgiven sins (7:47).21
The fact that a woman anointed Jesus is noteworthy. In a similar way, it is women who
were the first to receive and are entrusted with the wonderful witness of the resurrection to the
male disciples. None of the eleven disciples were first to the tomb. These women met the
criteria of apostleship, even though a woman's witness was not accepted in the legal courts and
Rabbinic Judaism reflected prejudicial devaluing of women.22
The stories do not reflect that the anointing-woman fully understood the Messianic
significance of the anointing, although the evangelists doubtlessly understood that the implied
readers should feel the significance of the woman's prophetic sign-action in contrast to the
twelve male disciples. Amy-Jill Levene depicts the women as "aware, sympathetic and loyal,"23
17 J.N. Sanders believes that the Johannine expression "beloved disciple" refers to Lazarus. "Those

Whom Jesus Loved (Jn. 11:5)," New Testament Studies 1 no. 1 (1954), 29-41.
18 In Lk. 10:38-42, Martha's activity in the kitchen appears to be trivialized.
19 See also the link between Cana in Jn. 2:1-11 with Cana (4:46), Nicodemus (3:1-15; 7:50; 19:39), Judas (6:71;

12:4; 13:2, 26, 29; 18:2, 3, 5).

20 Raymond Brown argues that Martha and Mary serve as disciples in John. "Roles of Women in the

Fourth Gospel," Theological Studies, 694.

21 Unconvincingly, Bernard Robinson argues that the sinful woman and Mary of Jn. 12 are identified with

her attempt to make amends for a sinful life. "The Anointing by Mary of Bethany," The Downside Review
Vol. 115, Issue 399 (1997), 99=111.
22 See C.E.B. Cranfield, The Gospel According to Saint Mark (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1972), 464 for

Rabbinic sources.
23 Amy-Jill Levine, "John, Women's Bible Commentary, ed. Carol A. Newsom, Sharon H. Ringe
contrasted with the male disciples, often characterized by "little faith" (o0ligo/pistoi).
Further, "the twelve function primarily to disrupt rather than enhance Jesus' mission." 24 During
Jesus' passion, the women serve as disciples in that they "follow" Jesus and recognize that Jesus'
mission includes crucifixion, burial and resurrection on the third day. They also "embark on a
journey that may lead to the loss of their own lives for his sake."25
All four narratives can be compared in the fact that the woman is voiceless; it is men who
speak, become indignant, and verbally censure either the woman or Jesus. Further, Luke's story
is unique in that it mentions her emotion, her tears (7:38).
c. Container and value of oil. The four accounts all refer to anointing—the pouring of
expensive perfumed oil on Jesus. The container in Matthew, Mark, and Luke is an alabaster flask
(a)la/bastrov), a "vessel with a rather long neck which was broken off”26 when the contents
were used. John's story contains no mention of the container, but it can be assumed to be a
container large enough for a pound of ointment. The jar or flask could not be re-closed; the
contents would be completely poured out. Mark says that the woman “broke the jar,” an act that
shocked the male guests as well as their host in its lavishness and finality.
d. Verb. Matthew and Mark are compared with respect to the use of the verb "she
poured" (kate/xeen), while Mark alone uses the verb, "to break," with the flask, which occurs
prior to the pouring. By way of contrast, Luke and John use the verb, "anoint" (a0leifei=n).
e. Body part anointed. The anointing in Matthew and Mark bears striking contrast to the
account in Luke and John. In Matthew and Mark, the woman pours oil onto Jesus' head, and in
Luke and John it is Jesus' feet that are anointed. Normally, people were anointed on the head
rather than the feet. In ancient Israel, a king was anointed by pouring oil on the head. Such
anointing on the head often conveyed the image of Israel's ancient monarchy.27 Perhaps this is
the connotation intended by Matthew and Mark.
By contrast, in Luke and John, pouring the expensive nard on Jesus’ feet is not a royal or
priestly anointing. In John's story, the idea of royalty does not fit, for in the following narrative,
Jesus does not accept the royal acclamation of the crowd. Raymond Brown states, "If John
meant to signify the anointing of Jesus as king, then one would have expected the anointing of
the head, not of the feet."28
Luke and John both recount the woman’s wiping of Jesus' feet with her hair
(comparison). Luke also mentions that she wet his feet with tears and kissed them. Scholars
point to the woman's violation of Jewish custom that dictated the covering of women's hair;
letting down of a woman's hair could well indicate loose morals.29 This woman could have been
regarded by the men at the dinner as a repugnant social outcast. Even though Mary is no such
person, it is stunning that she lets down her hair and the climactic statement that “the whole
24 Ronald F. Thiemann, "The Unnamed Woman at Bethany," Theology Today, (October 1986), 180. See Matt. 6:30;
8:26; 14:31; 16:8.
25 Thiemann, 182-182.; See Jack Dean Kingsbury, "The Verb AKOLOUTHEIN ("to follow") as an Index of

Matthew's View of His Community," JBL, 97/1 (1978), 56-73.

26 Walter Bauer, William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, Frederick W. Danker. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New

Testament (hereinafter BDAG). (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1979) 34.
27 See 1 Sam. 10:1; 16:13; 1 Kgs. 1:39; 2 Kgs. 9:6.
28 Raymond Brown, The Gospel according to John, vol. 1 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1966),

545
29 See Witherington, 55; Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm.B. Eerdmans

Publishing Co., 1974), 567-77. In Numb. 5:18, a priest is to let down the hair of a woman suspected of
adultery. See also Sot. 1.5, 8a. See Craig S. Keener, Paul, Women & Wives, (Peabody, MA:
Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 2004), 38-39.
house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.” Keener notes, "The meal setting is probably
a banquet celebrating Lazarus' resuscitation but may also foreshadow the implied meal setting of
Jesus' pre-passion washing of his disciples' feet in ch. 13."30
The positive life-giving action by the women in these stories stands in stark contrast with
the hideous, life-taking, and aggressive posture of the male religious authorities, who plot Jesus'
death in the preceding narratives, before and after the actual anointing (Matthew, Mark and
John). Hoskyns calls this contrast "a supreme act of ignorant unbelief and a supreme act of
intelligent faith."31 While the religious authorities sentence Jesus to retain their authority, the
woman finds the unique opportunity of pouring out her best for Jesus. In Luke's story, the
context depicts the rejection by the male Pharisees and lawyers (7:30), coupled with the
indictment of this fickle generation (7:31-35).
Mention of weeping, wiping, hair, kissing feet. Luke and John can also be compared in
that both evangelists mention the wiping of Jesus' feet with her hair, while Luke also mentions
the wetting of his feet with tears and kissing Jesus' feet. By way of contrast, Matthew and Mark
do not mention this activity since Jesus is anointed on his head with the costly ointment.
Male Objector(s) to the Anointing Event.
Mark’s version says, “Some of those [males] present were saying indignantly to one
another, 'Why this waste . . . ?' And they rebuked her harshly.” Matthew states that the indignant
ones were the twelve disciples. In Luke's story, Simon the Pharisee is identified as the initial
critic, who rejects Jesus’ prophet status as he says to himself, “If this man were a prophet, he
would know who is touching him and what kind of woman she is—that she is a sinner.” The
reasoning in Simon's silent objection is based on a conditional proposition in which both halves
are untrue: "If this man were a prophet (which he is obviously not), then he should also know of
who and what this sinful woman is (which he obviously doesn't know)."32 The implication of
this sentence is that if Jesus were a prophet he would obviously not let the woman anoint his feet.
Later on in the narrative, male objectors raise the accusation of blasphemy for Jesus'
announcement of the forgiveness of sins.
John notes that the male objector is Judas Iscariot, and he identifies Judas as the one who
would later betray Jesus. Judas says the ointment should have been sold and the money given to
the poor. 33 John notes Judas' hypocrisy in his objection. John makes it clear for the implied
reader that Judas was not concerned for the poor,34 but was a thief who often pilfered the
community's money bank. The woman's priceless gift of love is contrasted with Judas’s selling
Jesus' life for thirty pieces of silver.35
Ostensible Reason for Male Objection.
Matthew, Mark, and John can be compared in that the explanation of their objection is
due to the costly extravagance of oil used, not the anointing itself; the male objectors initially
frame the rhetorical question as "Why the waste?" Ostensibly, Matthew, Mark and John provide
the reason for the objection that the costly anointment should have been sold and given to the
30 Craig Keener, The Gospel of John: a Commentary (Peabody, MA: Hendricksen Publishers, 2003), 862.
31 Edwyn C. Hoskyns, Francis N. Davey ed. The Fourth Gospel (London: Faber and Faber Limited, 1947)
32 Reference to the prophet-motif also occurs in Lk. 7:16.
33 The term "poor" is used here without detail. Cf. Bruce J. Malina, The New Testament World, (Atlanta:

John Knox Press, 1981), 84.

34 The term "poor" is used here without detail. Cf. Bruce J. Malina, The New Testament World, (Atlanta:

John Knox Press, 1981) 84.

35 Price of a slave, accidentally killed (Ex. 21:32). See Rosemary M. Dowsett, "Matthew," The IVP

Women's Bible Commentary, ed. Catherine Clark Kroeger & Mary J. Evans (Downers Grove: InterVarsity
Press, 2002), 539.
poor (Matthew = a large sum; Mark = ointment could have been sold for more than 300 denarii;
John = ointment sold for 300 denarii). Luke's story contains a hidden accusation that Jesus is not
a prophet.36
Jesus' Rebuttal of Male Objectors.
In each story, Jesus snaps back at the male objectors telling them to “leave her alone.”
Jesus' retort in Luke 7 is expressed by Jesus' direct address, "Simon, I have something to say to
you" (7:40). Satoko Yamaguchi says of Jesus' rebuttal, "'Let her be' is the strongest liberating
support a woman could wish to receive in such a milieu,"37 Jesus’ rebuke virtually strikes in the
face of male aggression. John’s climactic scene is heightened by the imagery—the sensual
fragrance that permeates the whole house. Luke’s climax comes in the form of a parable and a
rebuke that effectively shut down the male objector, Simon.
Purpose of the Anointing.
The intended message of the anointing stories, as explained in Matthew, Mark and John,
is quite different from that in Luke’s gospel. Matthew, Mark, and John provide the purpose for
the anointing: "to prepare Jesus for burial."38 In these three accounts, the religious leaders make
preparation for Jesus' death, while a woman prepares for Jesus' burial. Jesus' statement makes it
clear that her act is prophetic and proleptic, anticipating his burial.39 John implies that Mary has
genuine insight into the nature of Jesus' mission, which includes death by crucifixion, burial, and
resurrection40 (John 19:38-40). It is appropriate, therefore, for this woman to give this gift to
Jesus. Jesus' time with them will soon draw to a close. The woman has seized the moment
(kai/rov). In contrast to the woman's insight, the male objectors have not perceived the once-
in-a-lifetime nature of this moment in time.
Thiemann notes that Matthew opens up "the category of 'disciple' to those who were not
originally among the twelve."41 As Fiorenza notes, "In the passion account of Mark's Gospel
three disciples figure prominently: on the one hand, two of the twelve—Judas who betrays Jesus
and Peter who denies him—and on the other, the unnamed woman who anoints Jesus."42
Jesus says that the woman’s action is to be remembered hand in hand with the
proclamation of the gospel: "Truly I say to you, wherever this gospel is preached in the whole
world, what she has done will be told in memory of her" (comparison in Matthew 26:13; Mark
14:9). There is no such accolade for any other person, male or female, in any of the gospel
narratives.
Luke's story presents a parable coupled with an explanation, teaching that those who are
forgiven much will appreciate the release to a far greater degree than the one who is forgiven the
smaller debt. The use of the parable at this point presupposes that the woman had been forgiven
and experienced faith at some previous time, perhaps through Jesus' preaching the day before.
Due to her animated expressions of gratitude, it is hard to imagine that much time elapsed
between her faith-experience and her lavish display at Simon's home; over time, emotional
36 Reference to the prophet-motif also occurs in Lk. 7:16.
37 Satoko Yamaguchi. Mary and Martha: Women in the World of Jesus. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books,
2002), 124.
38 Kathleen E. Corley believes that the mention of Jesus' burial is clearly secondary. "The Anointing of

Jesus in the Synoptic Tradition: An Argument for Authenticity." J.S.H.J 1.1 (2003), 67
39 The difficult expression in Jn. 12:7, "let her keep it for the day of my burial," is best explained by Brown, as "she

was keeping it until now to embalm Jesus." Brown, 449

40 It is also significant that her open and transparent anointing for burial is contrasted with the secretive

action of Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea.

41 Thiemann, 185
42 Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, xiv
expressions tend to wane in intensity. "Jesus now is simply making that fact public and assuring
the woman of the forgiveness which faith brings. It is better, therefore, to interpret v. 47a as
implying, "One can see that her many sins are forgiven, because she loved much,"43 i.e. was so
grateful.
In a united manner, the stories reach out to the readers (primary and implied) to learn the
lesson that the woman's voiceless action teaches the community about devotion, gratitude,
vulnerability and prophetic insight. All four implied authors wish that their readership adopt
Jesus' attitude of sympathy for the vulnerable expression of a woman (comparison). The male-
female conflict stories cannot be understood apart from interest in the role played by women in
the narratives.
As Fiorenza notes, "In the passion account of Mark's Gospel three disciples figure
prominently: on the one hand, two of the twelve—Judas who betrays Jesus and Peter who denies
him—and on the other, the unnamed woman who anoints Jesus. But while the stories of Judas
and Peter are engraved in the memory of Christians, the story of the woman is virtually
forgotten."44 From Matthew and Luke, the woman loses her name, and in the four stories, the
woman's voice is not heard. However, Jesus notes that this woman is the quintessential faithful
disciple.
THE AUTHORS’ POINTS OF VIEW
The anointing stories infuse a dramatic tension in the interplay of female and male
characters and Jesus' response to both genders. Moreover, the interchanges between the female
and male characters provide guidelines for the readers as to the meaning of this conflict. The
actions recorded reflect differing points of view of each of the four authors, as well as differing
messages they intend to communicate to their readers. Meir Sternberg labels narrative as "a
functional structure, a means to a communicative end, a transaction between the narrator and the
audience on whom he wishes to produce a certain effect by way of certain strategies."45
In the four narratives, the authors invite readers into the text-world of the anointing
stories, to experience and feel the various points of tension, and therefore to be changed when the
readers return to their separate worlds. Krieger suggests that "the historical nature of the Bible
leads one to treat the story as a window to the event behind the text."46
The gospel writers draw readers into the narrative world of the anointing stories to relive
the event and thereby adopt the author's point of view in changing the reader’s thoughts, attitudes
and behavior. One result may be a change in the reader’s thoughts, attitudes, and behavior
toward women and their unique contribution.
Matthew's Point of View.
Matthew tells the story from the point of view of changing a reader’s thinking.
Throughout the gospel of Matthew, the religious leaders are relentlessly evil, hypocritical, in
error, blind, malicious, slanderous, and manipulative. Obviously, he intends that his readers
accept, appreciate, value and feel the unique contribution that this unnamed woman makes, in
terms of 1) her recognition of Jesus' kingship (anointing of his head), 2) her prophetic insight and
purposeful prophetic symbolism of Jesus' death and burial, 3) the cost of her gift, and 4) the
climactic declaration by Jesus that the woman's act will be remembered wherever the gospel is
43 Craig L. Blomberg, Interpreting the Parables (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 185.
44 Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, xiv.
45 Meir Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading

(Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1985), 1. See also R. Alan Culpepper, The Anatomy of the Fourth
Gospel: A Study in Literary Design, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983), 6.
46 Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1991). 154.
proclaimed. Further, in the ensuing narrative, her prophetic action is fulfilled in the reality of
Jesus' burial. Clearly, the narrator adopts the stance of Jesus' defense of the woman and wishes
to draw others into Jesus' sympathy for this woman.
Matthew highlights the wonder of the woman’s anointing through the contrast between
her activity and that of the religious authorities, who are bent upon Jesus' destruction. They wish
to take life, while the woman gives life—even though her act points to Jesus' burial. Elizabeth
Ford states, "The disciples see the ointment, not for what it is, but for what purpose it can
serve."47 Jesus' prophetic awareness brings their criticism out into the open ("knowing this," i.e.,
their sub-verbal criticism in 26:10). In Matthew’s story, implied readers are to distance
themselves not only from the religious authorities but from the disciples and Judas, who have all
failed to honor the woman and her activity; at the same time, readers are to feel "close" to the
woman. The calculated plot of the authorities stands in sharpest contrast with the woman’s
unstinting and spontaneous giving to Jesus. Further, in the course of the Passion narrative, male
disciples recede into the background48 while women are conspicuously present at the crucifixion
and at the open tomb.
Kingsbury argues that the "evaluative point of view" is equivalent to "thinking the things
of God" and not "thinking the things of humans."49 Through comparison, contrast and purpose,
Matthew guides the implied readers to "think the things of God."
Mark's Point of View.
Mark's anointing story is sandwiched between the premeditated decision of male
religious authorities to put Jesus to death (14:1-2) and the plot with Judas (14:10-11) that
immediately follows the anointing. The "sandwich" is a frequently used literary design in Mark's
Gospel.50 Such arrangement leads the reader to draw comparisons, note contrasts and discover
important purpose statements.51 As the anointing story unfolds, the implied readers are
encouraged to side with Jesus (and God) and the unnamed woman (comparison) and to distance
themselves from the male objectors. The negative portrayal of the male opponents is used as a
foil to highlight the "beautiful thing" that this woman has done for the purpose of a proleptic
anointing for burial. Her self-denial is parallel to the poor widow who gives all (Mark 12:41-44),
who is likewise contrasted with the male scribes who can only take all (12:38-40).52
Barton draws links between this dinner-setting and the Last Supper; in each there is a
ritual action, symbolizing Jesus' death, reference to Jesus' body (14:9, 25) and an Amen-saying.53
Through her anointing she recognizes something of Jesus' royal person and serves as a prophet of
the upcoming burial. She understands the opportunity as "sacred time" (kai/rov)54 while the
male figures either misunderstand or are ruthlessly hostile. "Her openness and willingness to
risk conflict for Jesus' sake contrasts with the priests' and scribes' secrecy and fear and conflict."55
Male aggression is especially evident in Mark's progression from the silent indignation of
47 Elizabeth B. Ford, "Matthew 26:6-13," Interpretation (October, 2005), 402
48 For the male disciples' failure in the Passion Story, see also 26:14-16, 25, 26:30-35; 36-46; 47-49; 51-
53, 56; 27:3-10
49 Jack Dean Kingsbury, Matthew as Story (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986), 33.
50 See Mk. 5:21-24a-Jairus; 5:24b-34--woman; 5:35-43; 6:6b -12-mission; 14-29-Herod; mission-30.
51 Barton notes, "What for Traditionsgeschichte is a dislocation, for narrative criticism becomes a literary

technique, the observation of which adds new meaning to the story." 231.
52 Elizabeth Struthers Malbon, "Fallible Followers: Women and Men in the Gospel of Mark," Semeia, 28

(1983), 38.
53 Barton, 233.
54 Barton, 233.
55 Barton, 232.
"some" of the male guests to an open censure of the woman (v. 5). The verb, "to censure"
(e0mbrima=sqai) is a strong verb, meaning "to severely warn"56; the inceptive imperfect form
reflects the beginning of their severe warning: "They began to severely warn her." The narrator
suggests the point of view that readers would distance themselves from the progressive criticism
of the woman by male opponents and sympathize with the woman in her vulnerable condition.
Through her anointing (not through words), an unnamed woman acts as a confessor and
prophet of Jesus' death, while the males can only misunderstand and criticize; silent indignation
leads to verbal censure. In the broader picture of discipleship within Mark, both the poor widow
of Mark 12 and the unnamed woman in Mark 14 also "embody the self-denial of followership,"57
Further, the beautiful work that this woman does stands in the sharpest contrast with the hideous
deed that Judas does against Jesus. Readers become feeling persons who respond with
appreciation for the woman's deed or disgust for the male opponents. The narrator also draws an
implicit contrast between the near distant pronoun, "this" (au(/th) in "this waste" (v.4) and
Jesus' use, "this" (au(/th) in "this woman," a contrast between a thing and a person.58 Through
such comparisons and contrasts, the readers are led to be on the "inside-track" as they adopt
Mark's point of view.
Luke's Point of View.
Luke's point of view emphasizes Jesus' acceptance of Gentiles, women, the poor, and the
outcast—in which religious and societal divisions are annulled. Luke's anointing-story is encased
in his familiar social context of table-fellowship of a meal or banquet, which are often contexts
of joy, celebration, forgiveness and acceptance.59 On three separate occasions, Jesus' host is a
Pharisee.60 This woman is not "put-off" by the imposing presence of all of the males at the
banquet. As a social outcast, her person and action also contrast with the socially prominent
Pharisees and lawyers, who function only within their framework of religious taboos. The
woman fits in with other unworthy individuals, in the same chapter, who recognize their need for
Jesus' help—Gentile Roman Centurion, the widow of Nain, and tax-collectors. Readers are
made aware of the contrasting responses to Jesus in the whole of this chapter. Readers are guided
to feel sympathy for this unnamed sinful woman in her emotional and vulnerably display of
gratitude for what Jesus has done for her—he has forgiven her much (7:47).61
For Luke's readership, the three figures in the Parable of the Two Debtors clearly
correspond with the chief persons at table in Simon's home. The parable is intended to affirm the
woman's vulnerable expressions of gratitude (greater debt) and to expose the unfeeling attitude
of Jesus' male critic (lesser debt). The parable presupposes that Jesus has previously forgiven the
woman, identified as a "sinner."62 Through the parable and his explanation, he honors her lavish
display of gratitude for forgiven sin and unmasks the thankless response of his host who offers
no customary etiquette (water, kiss of friendship, oil).
Readers are led to feel Luke's point of view: they sympathize with the woman’s gratitude
56 See Mk. 1:43.
57 Malbon, 40
58 See Cullen I K Story, The Fourth Gospel: Its Purpose, Pattern and Power (Shippensburg, PA: Ragged Edge

Press, 1997), 240-41.

59 Jesus as dinner guest Lk. 5:29—Levi; 10:38-42—Mary and Martha; 19:5—Zacchaeus; also Lk. 15:1-

32; 14:7-24
60 7:36-50; 11:37; 14:1.
61 In contrast with Van Til's argument that the anointing refers to her plea for forgiveness, Kent A. Van Til,

"Three Anointings and One Offering: The Sinful Woman in Luke” 7:36-50, Journal of Pentecostal
Theology, vol 15 (2006), 73-82.
62 See Joachim Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus (New York: Charles Scribner's sons, 1963), 127.
and vulnerability and they distance themselves from the man’s "cold shoulder." Luke succeeds in
putting the man’s judgmental thoughts about the woman in a bad light, along with his doubt that
Jesus could really forgive sins. Simon's initial and unspoken criticism revealed that the "real
question therefore, is whether Jesus had the authority of a prophet to proclaim God's forgiveness,
for in Luke's understanding, this is indeed what Jesus is—the prophet who proclaims release to
the captives and sets at liberty those who are oppressed (4:18)."63
Further, the readers are led to adopt Jesus' inclusive concern for a woman who is
marginalized in society and who represents other marginalized people (both women and men).
Acceptance of the marginalized is central for Luke. The reader is won over to that point of view,
in this story, through an irony that is understood by the reader but not by Simon. Dramatic irony
occurs, according to Rhoads, “when there is a discrepancy between what a character blindly
thinks to be the case and what the real situation is or between what a character expects to happen,
and what actually happens."64 In Luke’s account, the author and implied reader share
understanding of the woman's insight and activity, while Simon and his male guests are in the
dark about the significance of the woman's act and Jesus' divine prerogative of forgiving sins.
John's Point of View.
The implied author of John's Gospel seeks to elicit several responses from the readership.
First, the story occurs immediately after the death of Mary’s brother, Lazarus, and amidst the
ongoing plot to kill Jesus. Readers are thus to feel the seriousness of the anointing story in terms
of life and death. Within the story itself, readers are invited to fully hear Jesus' statement, "You
will not always have me."65 As Michaels points out, Readers participate in the shared awareness
that Jesus is “returning as the divine Son of God to the Father who sent him, but from the
standpoint of Jesus' disciples death is still death, with all the dread and pain of separation that the
word implies."66 The implied readers can sense the pain, and they draw close to Mary in her
symbolic role of preparing Jesus' body for burial.
In addition, readers are guided to sympathize with the extent of Mary's love for Jesus
even in the midst of male aggression and accusation. Mary is grateful for Lazarus' new life; the
context of the dinner is a celebratory supper (12:2). In her humble act of devotion at Jesus' feet,67
she pours out her love for him. She senses that the brief window of time with Jesus will soon
close. She seizes the moment to express her self-giving love for Jesus. Michaels says that "her
reckless act of pouring out a pint of expensive perfume on Jesus' feet and wiping them with her
hair dramatizes for the readers—and for us—the truth that love is stronger than death."68
Readers are also drawn to Mary with respect to the "sign-nature" of her expensive gift. In the
broader context of John's "Book of Signs" (Jn. 2-12), Mary's expensive gift is also SIGNificant. John
makes it clear to the readers that her devotional act is actually a loving preparation for Jesus' burial.69 It is
a foreshadowing of Jesus’ significant washing of his disciples’ feet that follows in John’s next chapter
63 D. A. S. Ravens, "The Setting of Luke's Account of the Anointing," New Testament Studies 34 2 1
(1988), 284.
64 David M. Rhoads, Joanna Dewey, Donald Michie, Mark as Story (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999),

60.
65 Similar motif in Jn. 7:33-34 and 8:21.
66 J. Ramsay Michaels, "John 12:1-11," Interpretation, 288
67 Michaels draws attention to the fact that Mary is always at Jesus' feet (John 11:32; 12:3; Lk. 10:39)

Michaels, 287
68 Michaels, 288
69 Giblin notes that both the copious anointing and the wiping of Jesus' feet with her hair is a prophetic

action declaring his burial and his rising incorrupt." Charles Homer Giblin, "Mary's Anointing for Jesus'
Burial-Resurrection (John 12, 1-8)," Biblica 73 4 1 (1992), 564.
(13:1-20). While implied readers draw near to Mary, they also distance themselves from the hideous plot
of male authorities and from Judas, the male objector. The carefully crafted plot of John 11:45-57 reflects
the insecure and hideous nature of the religious authorities who face the powerful unmistakable sign of
Lazarus’ resurrection. They are even forced to admit that “this man continues to do many signs” (11:47)
and yet they are afraid of losing their national status.70
Alan Culpepper71 links the story with events in the following chapter: Mary's gift anticipates Jesus'
washing of the disciples' feet and both of the scenes take place in the context of a meal, enveloped within
the somber shadow of Jesus' death. Further, the statements of "serving" and "following" (12:26) are
positioned in the context of the mini-parable about the necessity of the grain of wheat that must fall into
the ground and die if it is to be fruitful (12:24-25). Careful readers take note of the reigning death motif in
the two chapters.
In the broader context, Mary's anointing serves to identify the life of a disciple/servant (female or
male). In this story, two women serve Jesus: Mary serves by anointing Jesus' feet, and Martha is serving
the meal. Jesus links "serving" and "following," with the promise that God will honor the one who serves.
According to Michaels, "Jesus' anointing by Mary is needed in John's Gospel to put the glorious promises
of the farewell discourses in a genuinely human context."72
SUMMARY IMPLICATIONS
In all four narratives, the woman is voiceless. It is men who speak, become indignant,
and verbally censure the woman and Jesus. One might ask, “Are readers to conclude that the
woman expressed no emotion or said nothing in the four stories?" Yet, in all four stories, the
woman’s actions speak volumes and have a more profound effect on the reader than words ever
could.
In the four anointing-stories, there are conversations between the implied author's world,
the text's role, and the reader's world. The overall structure of the stories provides a background
for the contrasts, comparisons, and purpose statements; these literary relationships are used by
the authors to generate narrative wholes, with their intended purposes for the readers. The
Gospel writers are not strictly concerned with the factual accounts; in each story, the authors
condition the readers to sympathize, appreciate and value the woman and her behavior while
distancing themselves from the aggressive, hostile and unfeeling males. While the gender issue
is not the primary intent of these stories, nonetheless the stories do portray woman in the all-
important and live-giving role, against the roles of men who act with murderous purpose or
negative criticism.
The hideous, life-taking, and aggressive posture of the male religious authorities stands in
stark contrast with positive, life-giving action by the woman in these stories. While the religious
authorities, all of them male, condemn Jesus in order to retain their authority, the woman finds
the unique opportunity to pour out her best for Jesus. In all four of these stories, Jesus affirms
her act in the face of her male opponents. Jesus’ response to the anointing woman speaks
volumes about his liberating love. The four authors send the clear message to their readers that
this woman has “a special mission, which is to reintroduce love” in a situation that could have
remained “so glacial” without her unabashedly feminine act.

70 Story, 252.
71 Alan Culpepper, The Gospel and Letters of John (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998), 859
72 Michaels, 291
 Lessons for the Powerful Rich and Vulnerable Poor
(The Book of James)

Introduction
Social justice drives the argument of the Book of James. James is perhaps the
most consistently ethical social writing in the New Testament that compares well with the
OT Book of Amos. The author says that faith alone, without works, is dead. Social
justice is something that the people of God (both poor and rich) are to "do."
The idyllic picture of the Early Church, wherein Christian believers "had all
things in common" (Acts 2:42-47; 4:32-35) is subsequently fractured by Ananias and
Sapphira's dishonesty (Acts 5:1-11) and the complaint about partiality against the Grecian
widows (6:1). A rupture between the "haves" and the "have-nots" continues to raise its
ugly head in various NT letters. James is one such letter that voices issues surrounding
the hiatus between the powerful rich and the vulnerable poor1 and their corresponding
treatment. Joe is one such person of the vulnerable poor.
Joe was a thirty-year old crack addict, with a long history of entering
treatment, dropping out, or relapsing within weeks after completing programs.
His attendance at AA or NA meetings was spotty at best. The social worker that
worked with me helped Joe get a job as a stock person in a neighborhood grocery.
He completed an outpatient program and remained clean for many months.
Joe had two children who lived with their maternal grandparents, since
their mother, also an addict, was of no help. In his recovery, the grandparents
agreed to share and eventually relinquish custody of their grandchildren to Joe.
The court specified that he needed a solid residence for them. The social worker
helped him to get SSI assistance. Along with his salary, Joe obtained approval for
a publically subsidized apartment. As part of the final approval for his apartment,
a physical exam was required. I did his physical and the required lab-testing,
which was then analyzed by the lab. He passed in all areas except that he tested
positive for HIV. He was devastated. Then, it was believed that HIV positive
people would develop AIDS and die within 2-4 years. He was denied approval
for his apartment and in a few days committed suicide. A week later, the public
hospital, which analyzed the lab-test for free, wrote me a letter and informed me
that a lab-mistake resulted in a false positive for Joe and that he was not indeed
HIV positive.2
Joe represents many marginalized persons, who make bad choices, fall into disastrous
cycles of poverty, and who make fresh starts but are then distressed by people and
institutions to the extent that they give up trying or give up on life itself.
Armed with his social-justice agenda, James uses a homiletic style and addresses
the community as "brethren" or "beloved brethren" (1:2, 16, 19; 2:1, 5, 14; 3:1, 10; 4:11;
1 We need to bear in mind that the vast percentage of people in the Mediterranean region lived close to the
line of abject poverty, something akin to a hand-to-mouth existence.
2 This story and other stories in this article are taken from an interview with Dr. Wayne Lewis, who worked

extensively with the poor in DC, who now resides in Norfolk, VA where he pastors a Nazarene Church.
The interview during this last summer covered at least ten years of medical service in the DC area (1990-
2000).
5:7, 9, 10, 12, 19; "sister" in the 3rd person in 2:15). James' greeting addresses his
readership as "twelve tribes of the Diaspora" (1:1), and the material of the book is replete
with OT examples, laws, and wisdom traditions. The setting appears to be
Jewish-Christian and is noted as a "synagogue" or "assembly" (2:2) when the community
is actually gathered. However, because James uses some universal traditions, he looks
beyond the assembly to the larger world. The deprived audience, you is coerced by the
rich (in 3rd person), "suppose that a wealthy person comes into your assembly" (2:2) or
"Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you
into court . . . and slander you?" (2:6-7). The questions assume a positive response: Of
course, the rich are the ones who dishonor the good name of Christians—certainly not the
poor. James highlights the poor's absurd and selective partiality toward their oppressors,
who display wealth and exert power.
At the same time, chapter 5 reveals a direct address to the rich when James
highlights the transitory character of riches, "you have hoarded wealth in the last days"
(5:3). The community has "caved in" to worldly attitudes of partiality that accompany
the welcome of the rich to the extent that the rich are directly addressed (5:1ff.). From
the polemical nature of James's instruction (paraenesis), we can only surmise that there
were real situations in the Early Church (outside of James' community) that reflected
serious problems. By their adoption of the world's standards, the unity of the community
is compromised.
James indicts the rich for their lives of luxury at the expense of the poor. He
allies himself with the poor and offers hope to the hopeless. James relates social justice to
effective prayer and makes an appeal to unity, integrity, and consistency—for the
Christian and the Christian community.
The need for social justice reflects itself in the high proportion of people living in
poverty in the U.S. and the broader global community that is rich and prosperous.
Although the poor in America live better than the global poor, manifestations of abject
poverty call Christian commitment into question of the need to help the poor in our midst
(local and global). The existence of widespread abject poverty in the world's poorest
nations must also be met with practical help to relieve suffering and to empower the poor
to help themselves.3

Faith and Works

What about the relationship between "faith" and "works?” James says that faith is
not evidenced by one’s belief in God or mere intellectual orthodoxy. The contrast is not
between "faith" and "works" but a living faith and practical atheism. Theoretical "faith"
does not distinguish human beings from the belief of shuddering demons (2:19). Faith
alone without works is useless—it is dead faith:
Do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? Was not our ancestor
Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on
the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together (2:20-22
NIV)
Abraham believed God, but his faith was proved by his actions (Gen. 22:1-14). A person
is justified through practical Christianity, expressed in helpful behavior towards others,
3The writer has discussed at length some of the socio-economic issues in the global community with his
colleague, Dr. Douglas Walker, Professor of Economics, in the Robertson School of Government of Regent
University (Virginia Beach, VA). Discussions occurred during the Spring, '08.
such as Rahab the prostitute who demonstrated faith by welcoming Israel's spies with
"sacred hospitality" (Joshua 2:1-21). James asks the rhetorical question, "Was not Rahab
the prostitute justified by works?" (2:25).
Abraham and Rahab provide examples of the way in which one
behaves—actively and practically. James denigrates a cold religious confession that can
say the right things, but be devoid of relationship with God or needy people. He exposes
a false Christianity of appearances only. A do-nothing policy means that one has sided
with the devil. Indictment of quietism is clearly expressed in James 4:17: “Anyone, then,
who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it—sins.” "The Christianity that
James preaches is not a comfortable religion. But his practical, virile teaching will
remain salutary and necessary as long as Christians continue to miss the path from
knowledge to action, from faith to charity, from piety to moral proof."4
The author had the privilege of working with Sean and Linda, two elderly people
of minimal means, who experienced a radical transformation of life, leading to
their grateful response. Initially, they targeted various blocks in Norfolk,
Virginia, where they lived, by passing out free loaves of bread to countless
households. Their influence widened as they worked in partnership with local
food banks and numerous grocery stores. With their limited funds, they
purchased several vans and daily collected and distributed food to numerous low-
income facilities. In addition, they opened the church's fellowship center three
times a week for food-distribution (not cash) after a short service for people who
were homeless, poor, and addicted. While the poor had every opportunity for a
decision to begin the Christian life, their Christian experience never became the
basis for their privilege of receiving food. Over twenty years, thousands of
people made life-changing decisions through gifts of bountiful compassion. Their
reward consisted in helping others in the vicious cycles of poverty.5

The Question of the "Brother or "Neighbor"

James summons the rich and poor to an active love for the "brother," "sister," or
"neighbor"; they are to be the recipients of charitable assistance (2:8). James repeats the
OT directive in Lev. 19:17-18, "love your neighbor as yourself," 6 taken up by Jesus in
dialogue with a rich young man (Matt. 19:16-22) or a lawyer (Lk. 10:25-37). The
Parable of the Good Samaritan in Lk. 10:30-36 is framed to undermine the lawyer's
question, "Who is my neighbor" (10:29). The lawyer wants Jesus to define neighbor.
According to the Halakah, the term, neighbor (rēa, plēsion), applied to every Jewish
fellow-countryman but did not extend to a non-Israelite.7 The question implies two
standards of treatment: love for Jewish neighbors\brothers and absence of love for non-
Israelite persons. Jesus refuses to give the lawyer a comprehensive list or a means of
correctly identifying a neighbor. In his counter-question, Jesus stands the lawyer's
4 Rudolph Schnackenburg, The Moral Teaching of the New Testament, (Waco: Word Publishing Co.,
1988), 358.
5 Observations were made during 1998-2000 in Norfolk when I helped Sean and Linda with food collection

and distribution to the poor.

6 In several places, James uses Leviticus to substantiate his exhortations, most pointedly with the law of

love, enunciated in Torah, but ratified by Jesus' behavior and teaching.

7"Samaritans, foreigners, and resident aliens who do not join the community of Israel within 12 months are

excluded." J. Fichtner, "plēsion " TDNT, VI, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p.
315.
question on its head, "Who proved to be the neighbor" (10:36). The lawyer's undefined
object of love is inverted to become the active subject of compassion.
In the 21st Century, the lawyer's question about the neighbor's identity is the same
question raised by Christians: "Who is my brother?" The question is unanswerable in
that love does not begin by defining groups, but discovers them in actual need.8 There is
no religious "stained-glass" expression from the hated half-breed Samaritan; he does not
look God-ward or evidence that his life-giving behavior is "religious." He sees a
desperate crisis, is moved with compassion, and then proceeds to provide continued life-
giving support. James' ethical teachings broaden out to include a dependence upon the
Jesus-traditions, expressed elsewhere in the letter. In the 21st Century, the truth of
Evangelical Christianity is to be expressed in efforts to relieve the suffering poor and to
provide an example to those who are not believers.
James argues for the comprehensive aspect of the Law, including the Decalogue
in Exod. 20:1-17, the love commandment, and the "weightier things of the Law" affirmed
by Jesus (Matt. 21:21). His readers must not "pick and choose" which law they obey or
neglect. The dual love-commandment highlights the absurdity of believing and obeying
the Decalogue and yet refusing to honor or love the "neighbor" (James 2:8-13). In
context, the mention of the "neighbor" means the disadvantaged poor, not to be
exclusively understood. Thus, we would submit that James reviews Jesus' teachings and
approach, which are inclusive in nature—not exclusive. In the 21st Century, Jesus and
James orient the Christian community to be responsive to those in need (within and
without the Church).
In 2:22-25, James uses the metaphor of a person who looks at a mirror to portray
an active faith—certainly not passive. The person who is a hearer of the word alone is
likened to the one who has short-term memory loss because of not intently looking into
the Law.

The Powerful Rich

James indicts the powerful rich for their selfish exploitation of the poor. The
terms rich one (plousios) and poor one (ptōchos) speak to the issue of wealth or its
absence. Mention of the rich in 1:9-10 prepares for later directives to the rich (2:2-4, 5-
12, 15-16; 4:13-17; 5:1-6).
Those who are wealthy are in great danger of self-trust (bragging 1:9). For the
rich, pompous bragging will give way to humiliation since the rich have "had their day"
at the expense of the poor. Their transitory character will “pass away like a wild flower”
(1:10). He tells the rich to "wail" (klauō) and "cry out in pain" (ololuzō) because their
riches have rotted, clothing is moth-eaten, and gold and silver are tarnished (5:2-3). He
accuses rich members of amassing such flawed items instead of helping the poor. Their
conduct is clearly irreligious, inhumane, and anti-social. Apparently, some of these
powerful rich persons became part of James' "assembly."
The writer caricatures those who profess faith (intellectual or creedal) but choose
not to help the poor:
Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says
to him, 'Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,' but does nothing about his
physical needs, what good is it? (1:16)
In the 21st Century context, those who are responsible for job-applications, often reflect
8 See also Jesus' Parable of the Sheep and the Goats (Matt. 25:31-46).
similar attitudes to those in James' community, which amount to practical atheism. When
people vocalize the unconscionable words like go in peace, be warmed, be filled, "go get
a job" to those who are distraught, scantily clothed, hungry, and jobless—when it is
clearly within their power to meet their physical needs—their words do nothing mock the
impoverished and reinforce the community's social stratification?
It is very difficult for people to reflect upon and accept the Christian message
when their primary concern is physical survival; both James and Jesus express the
"gospel" in a holistic manner. In our culture, such needs are well reflected in issues
related to the needs of the poor for housing, food, clothing, and a job—which are so often
denied.
Nineteen-year old Sheila worked in a fast-food restaurant and was laid off. She
obtained a bed in a shelter for women and as part of her intake, a physical exam
was required. When I performed the physical she was fine. During our
conversation she was a fount of optimism. She was going to get work and move
out of the shelter in just a few weeks. Her job-loss was simply a "bump" in her
plans for the future. In the fall, I saw her again for a cold and sore throat. She
was much duller and far less optimistic. She had been in the shelter for three
months and still was jobless. People were interested but when she gave them a
shelter address or phone number they gave her the line, “Don’t call us. We’ll call
you." Rapidly, she deteriorated into the "black hole" of depression and was
brutally victimized through physical and sexual abuse, and thereby incurring
several STDs.9
What would have occurred for Sheila, along with countless thousands, if she had received
a job-offer, which offered hope and a means of independent living?
The rich often prosper by virtue of their oppression of the poor day-laborers.
James argues that wages are not patronizing help to the poor but their actual due. Their
day-laborers have mowed and harvested the landowners' fields but wages are denied to
those who are dependent on them for physical survival. Their prayers will be
unanswered for they ask with the wrong purpose—to spend freely for their own pleasures
(4:2-4), which is linked to enmity with God (4:5).
In the 21st Century, violent and greedy aggressors can be identified with those
involved in subprime mortgages and foreclosures, wherein powerful rich lenders
victimize people through corrupt loans, balloon-payments, rising interest rates, and
qualifying people, whom they know cannot repay them. If they are inside or outside the
Christian community, James states that God will not answer prayer, since violent
aggressors are God's enemies, including the powerful, who display riches, exact
dishonest payments, and foreclose on poor homeowners with a callous disregard for the
vulnerable weak. Greed and aggression are portrayed through numerous faces in the
global economic world.
Ungodly partiality (lit. to lift the face) by the poor, is often shown to the rich, who
are bedecked with gold rings and fine clothing. They are shown preferential treatment in
the assembly's seating arrangement. By one look at a visitor, the poor guide the rich to
the more prestigious and comfortable seats, while the shabbily clothed are left standing or
are told, “Sit on the floor by my feet” (2:2-3). God chooses to be partial to the poor for
they are chosen, rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom. Preferential treatment of the rich
insults the poor (2:6) and reveals "double-mindedness" and "doubting" (1:6-8). "It
9 Dr. Wayne Lewis, 2008.
should be unthinkable to hold the faith and exercise discrimination between people."10
If people really keep the royal love-commandment, they are doing right. But if they
show favoritism, they sin and are lawbreakers to the extent that they had committed
murder (2:8-11).
There is a distinction between those who are poor through no fault of their own
and those who have direct responsibility for their bleak existence. The Church is not
called to "enable" irresponsible or addictive lifestyles; James speaks of "fine conduct"
and "deeds done in humility," which are to be expressed by the poor (3:13). The people
of God are to thoughtfully discern different needs with the goal of helping people become
independent and responsible persons of church and society. Discernment needs to be
coupled with indiscriminate compassion. The Church cannot condemn either the
responsible or irresponsible poor, but encourage both groups to be responsible and more
productive. Perhaps "empowerment" might be the goal rather than enablement.
Over the past half-century, marked progress has been made in reducing U.S.
poverty in that the poverty-rate has been halved from 20% to 10%.11 Doug Walker
suggests that while government can provide some minimal support; the Church or
charities can provide further assistance by tailoring assistance to individual and familial
circumstances, using discernment and discretion, coupled with in initial and long-term
accountability and needed encouragement. He suggests two imperatives: 1) We cannot
let people and their vulnerable children starve, 2) We cannot create situations (locally,
nationally, and internationally) which foster unhealthy dependence. For example, the
Church can assist individuals who have lost jobs, but tailor assistance based upon the
efforts of individual to find jobs with a time-table of lessening assistance. Also, the
Church needs to be courageous in speaking out to the rich and wealthy about the needs of
others and the temptation of hoarding of riches.12 This is precisely James' line of
approach with the rich.
Christians, churches, and charities are better equipped than government to
empower the poor because they can apply discernment, discretion, and accountability to
needy persons. On the other hand, government is practically mandated through formulas
to treat everyone the same, irrespective of their practical need or level of responsibility,
and cannot deal with moral questions. James inveighs against a discrimination expressed
through partiality. The following narrative expresses a charity's genuine care as well as a
hidden partiality.
Rose started Columbia Road Health Services (CRHS), a free clinic for the
homeless, unemployed, and working poor in Washington, DC, and later the
Washington ministry for Health Care for the Homeless (HCH). After years of
working with the homeless, the entire staff felt the need for a place where
homeless men could recover. As Rose walked to the CRHS, she passed an
abandoned home that had become a crack-house and haven for the addicted.
Every day for three years, she and her fellow-nuns stopped in front of the house to
pray, convinced that the respite care center would replace a crack-house.
A few thousand dollars came in and was earmarked for the purchase and
10 Sophie Laws, The Epistle of James, (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980), 93.
11 Table 4 of the Historical Poverty Tables of the U.S. Census Bureau. While 9.3% of Caucasian families
with children live in dire poverty, 21% of African-American families live in dire poverty. This figure does
not take into account the 1.4 billion people in the global community who live in abject poverty
12 Dr. Doug Walker, 2008.
 restoration of the house. One day Rose's pastor, Gordon Cosby, called concerning
a lady wanting to donate in person. Rose asked Gordon to thank the lady, accept
the donation, and inform her that she was too busy to come. Gordon insisted and
Rose came to his office to meet her. They chatted for a bit and Rose wondered
how long this discussion would continue. Then the woman said she wanted to
offer a donation and hoped it would help fund the project. The two-million dollar
check was enough for the purchase-price, extensive renovation, and operating
expenses for six months.
It became Christ House, a respite care center for homeless men, offering a warm,
clean, and safe place while they recover from serious illness and prepare for
employment.13
Commitment, compassion, and prayer by Rose and the nuns were effective.
However, we note a "silent" partiality concerning the woman's begrudging welcome;
surely the reception would have been markedly different if Rose knew of the "dollar
amount" of the gift.
The only remedy is the “wisdom that comes from heaven,” which is full of mercy
and impartial (3:17). Love means a genuine welcome of the poor, holistic concern for
them, and compassion for the many faces of the "needy poor." Showing mercy is
required for receiving mercy and being blessed (2:12; cf. Matt. 5:7). Mercy will always
win the case in God's tribunal (2:13).

The Vulnerable Poor

James also provides encouragement to the poor. In 2:3, the poor person (ho
ptōchos), identified by filthy clothing, is akin to a beggar. In 1:9 we find the term "the
humble one" (ho tapeinos), who is also called a "brother" or "sister" (2:15). James also
brings "widows" and "orphans" into view as stereotypes of those who are most vulnerable
to oppression. Looking after orphans and widows is part of what constitutes true religion
(1:27). "To visit orphans and widows . . . may be literally to go and spend time with
them; but certainly is also to do so in order to make provision for their needs."14 These
poor (anawim) can only wait for their vindication by God; they are deprived by no fault
of their own and are "drastic examples"15 of victims of greed, aggression, and illegal
practices, exacerbated by aggressors who are legally well-represented. The destitute have
no legal recourse for social justice since they have no funds for hiring lawyers or bribing
judges—baksheesh (2:6-7), a corrupt practice in countless countries, experienced by the
author and his missionary parents in Beirut, Lebanon regarding customs officials and the
release of a Willis Jeep. James takes his stand with the poor, weak, and
vulnerable—those who have been cheated out of their just wages. The only cry that God
will hear is the cry of the oppressed day-laborers (James 5:4); He will act in retribution.
James does not advocate poverty for its own sake, nor does he celebrate poverty
due to people's irresponsibility; however assures the responsible poor that they are special
signs of God's choice or bias. He clarifies that God has chosen them with a special status
of divine favor (2:5-6). His choice of the poor is counter-cultural with respect to the
world's assessment of poverty as a curse. While they are poor with respect to the world's
standards (2-5-6), they are also "rich with respect to faith" (2:5-6). He points to the
13 Lewis, '08.
14 Laws, 89.
15 Ralph P. Martin, James: Word Biblical Commentary, (Waco: Word Publishing Co., 1988), lxxv-lxxvi.
glorious crown that affirms victory (1:12—stephanos—the victor's crown/wreath), which
is a reward for those who love God. James encourages the poor to change their
perspective from sadness to paradoxical joy, grounded in their exaltation (1:9); a
profound reversal lies ahead from the current stratified situation (1:9).16 James does not
say that God loves the vulnerable more than the powerful. However, James says that
God takes the side of the oppressed poor. It is not a question of equal treatment for all,
which would be a reiteration of social stratification between the "haves" and the "have-
nots," reflected in a growing hiatus between the rich and poor in the 21st Century.
Whereas the rich are called to compassion, the suffering poor are encouraged to
reflect endurance and patience during their "testing" (peirasmos) as an occasion for joy
(1:2). The grounds for such paradoxical joy will lead to proving the worth (dokimos) of
their faith. The adjective, dokimos (worthy or approved), derives from the field of
metallurgy wherein precious metals are put to the refiner's fire through smelting. The
smelted metal is stamped dokimos, meaning "proven," "refined" or "worthy." The result
of such communal testing leads to the quality of "endurance" (hupomonē—staying
power), initially noted in 1:3-4.
The second exhortation to endure follows the portion relating to the financial
contrast between the rich and the poor (1:9-11) and the pending great reversal. James
uses two calls to endurance (inclusio in 1:2-4; 1:12) on either side of the theme of the
great reversal (1:9-11). The rich cannot view the poor's divine approval as an excuse for
thoughtless words, judgment over others, and unconscionable behavior.
James encourages the poor that they are not governed by an inexorable fate. He
reassures them that their trials, which include poverty, are not signs of divine disfavor or
rejection. This is no call to inactivity but to a responsible and fiscal approach to one's
resources, noted in his metaphor of the farmer who works his field, who "waits for the
land to yield its valuable crop, and how patient he is for the autumn and spring rains"
(5:7-8). The Parousia ("return and presence"), or its idea, is expressed in three ways: "be
patient until the Lord's Coming" (5:7), "the Lord's coming is near" (5:8), "the Judge is
standing at the door" (5:9). Patience counters the bitter complaint of the poor against the
rich. The patient person finds security in relationship to God—without judgment (5:9)
and a shared experience with "good company," the OT prophets (5:10). The second
example is that of Job, "You have heard of Job's perseverance and have seen what the
Lord finally brought about. The Lord is full of compassion and mercy" (5:11). Job's
commitment to God in the midst of tragic adversity is emphasized so that the readers may
draw encouragement—it is possible to withstand such adversity.
To the oppressed, James states that they must back up their verbal profession by
their "fine conduct" through their meekness or gentleness (praŭtās) in 3:13. Again,
James' plea for fine conduct includes responsible behavior from the poor. Envy has no
place whatsoever in the Christian community, "these things should not be" (3:10). Such
false wisdom is earthly, unspiritual, and demonic in origin (3:15). Fine conduct includes:
endurance, the promise of the crown of eternal life, answered prayer, responsibility, a
profound reversal of conditions, divine approval, expectant faith, and serenity in peace-
making.

Unity, Integrity, and Consistency

16 Prov. 1:9; 4:9; 12:4; I Thess. 2:19; I Cor. 9:25; II Tim. 4:8; Rev. 2:9.
 James appeals to unity, integrity, and consistency for the individual and the
Christian community. His appeal for faith-filled prayer promises a response from a
generous and gracious God (1:15), who gives without regard to personal status and
without equivocation. Such petition needs to be expressed through faith without
doubting. Where there is unbelief, a person is double-minded and unstable; he resembles
the wind-tossed surf (1:7-8). Unbelief is often expressed through unfeeling words
towards the marginalized.
A former U.S. President stood up and flipped through the Washington Post
Classifieds and stated, “Golly Geez. I dunno why there are so many homeless
people. Look at all of these jobs in the paper. I guess with all these jobs available
those homeless people just don’t want to work and would rather be on the street
with no responsibilities.” Of course, the President failed to actually take the time
to understand that the jobs were for engineers, lawyers, and other white collar
positions.17
James traces disunity to people who are torn apart by conflicting desires. The
wealthy are fueled by the ungodly motive of greed that ignites wars, fighting, and strife
(4:1-2). James says that "desire does not attain its end but sends the greedy back with
empty hands." Greed reflects the world's basic corruption (4:1, 4) in that friendship with
the world is compared to an adulterous existence (4:4). James' frequent pejorative,
"double-mindedness" (1:8; 4:8) characterizes the unbeliever since "double-mindedness"
is equated with sin. The one who separates hearing from doing is a deceiver (1:22-24)
with an empty faith (2:14-17). On the poor's side, their faith should be met by a
responsible work-ethic as well. Their faith without fine conduct or a responsible work-
ethic is also double-minded and empty.
Disunity and double-dealing are also obvious in the socio-economic separation
between the rich and powerful and the poor and vulnerable. Disunity rears its ugly head
in community life with sins such as partiality, omission, inhumane treatment, and
compromise with the devil (4:7) and the world (4:4). No doubt, some of these issues
surfaced in James' community, which provided a platform for James to address wider
communities in his letter. He argues for coherence between hearing and doing for social
justice in the Christian person and Christian community.
One night I saw a patient with a terrible headache. I went to see him and his story
was that he had been to the public hospital and they had sent him away. I asked
him if he had any idea why his head was hurting, and he said that he had been
shot. He had gotten his SSI check early in the day, was robbed by two fellows,
and when he resisted, one of them pulled out a .25 caliber pistol and shot him. In
my office, he uncovered his head and when his hair was parted, I could see the
entry wound and when cleaned, I could see through the first layer of skull to
where the bullet lodged in the second layer. I called an ambulance crew. When
they arrived, I introduced myself and informed them of the nature of the problem.
All they seemed to hear was the complaint of a headache. “Oh, so you want to go
to the hospital with your headache and get drugs? That’s what this is all about,”
was their response.18
Obviously, there was no willingness to "see," "hear," or "do" anything to help the
wounded victim—even from an ambulance crew.
17 Lewis, '08.
18 Lewis, '08.
 As the "flip-side" of double-minded persons, James contends for integrity that
leads to perfection of the "perfect one" (teleios anēr). The adjective "perfect" is used five
times in James out of the nineteen times in the whole NT (1:4a, b, 17, 25; 3:2); there are
also occurrences of the word-family in 2:8, 22. Perfect does not mean a complete moral
perfection; rather, it signifies a basic integrity between hearing, willing, and doing,
without discrepancy. The perfect word-family includes other adjectives: whole (holos) in
2:10; 3:2, 3:6, entire, complete (holokleros) in 1:4. It is the expected mature Christian
response to the gospel's message. The adjective perfect/complete (teleios) is also used to
modify important nouns: work (ergon in 1:4; 2:22), faith (pistis in 2:22), law (nomos in
1:25; 2:8, 10), and wisdom (sophia in 1:5, 17). Works by the rich and poor are the
necessary complements to faith; where such integrity exists, it reflects "wholeness" or
"maturity" (teleiōsis) for both poor and rich.
The plea for integrity and unity is grounded in the very nature of God. He is
constant and unchanging in his care and compassion (1:17). The affirmation of the one
God leads to the social-justice implication that his people should be "one."

Implications
Imperative verbs occur 54 times within the 108 verses in the letter. James'
imperatives reflect a socially-sensitive conscience, alert to the disadvantaged. He speaks
as a spokesman for the weak and poor—the victims of aggression, corruption, and
oppression—and says that true religion constitutes looking out for the weak who are
marginalized through no fault of their own. At the same time, the weak poor are not
obviated from their work-ethic as well. Genuine faith is no mere verbal confession but
also includes complementary works. Such works include sensitivity to the poor,
awareness of socio-economic stratification, and commitment to the righteous poor; the
poor are also summoned to fine conduct. James reveals his broad social concerns when
he speaks of victims of unjust wage agreements and the vulnerable, weak, poor, widows,
and orphans. He indicts the rich businessmen, the large landowners, and those who show
partiality to the powerful rich. He exposes the sin of omission—not obeying the
commandment to love one’s neighbor—as a major concern. Further, he envisions the
"grand reversal" when the tables will be turned.
In the 21st Century, the letter reveals the need for compassionate concern,
sacrifice, and activity on behalf of the marginalized poor. James summons Christian
communities to act in sacrificial ways to meet the needs of the poor (within and without
the Christian community), without enabling the irresponsible poor to further their
irresponsible lifestyle. James' approach is by no means exhaustive; however, his
instructions reveal timeless principles, which need to be acted upon by the Christian
community as it reflects upon issues of social justice.
James summons the individual and the community to integrity, unity, and
consistency, warning that doubt or double-mindedness allies one with the devil. Love for
riches leads to disunity, and social justice requires a life of "completeness," both
personally and in the community. Neither the rich nor the poor are immune from
responsibility for a "faith that works." Faith that works necessarily entails the giver's
sacrifice and the recipient's efforts towards self-help (fine conduct). Christians should
constantly search for opportunities to help.
Jim is the president of a business located in the Tidewater area who experienced a
 major change in his perspective and approach to his relative wealth.  In the earlier
years of his profitable company, he expressed that he had been driven by
numerous selfish and materialistic goals, within his own spiritual context of
nominal church attendance.  An emergency hospitalization, due to work-related
stress, "woke him up" to an honest re-evaluation of his priorities, reflected in his
finances.  A friend, Dwight, introduced Jim to the Book of Malachi, which Jim
believes was marked by the divine indictment, "You have robbed me" (3:8).  As a
result of his reading the Book of Malachi, Jim gave and continued to give a
meaningful sum to the Samaritan House; his Christian commitment meant not
only his treasures but also his time and his talents.  He incorporated tithing and
offerings, not only in his personal life, but within the life of his business. Jim
developed and included a “tithing calculator” at the bottom of his company’s
monthly financial statement to remind him and to quickly calculate for him the
amount of his “corporate tithe,” thus involving the company and its employees in
giving. To maintain some anonymity, Jim only makes donations with corporate
checks.  Jim continues to be motivated not simply by the command to give, but by
the higher principle of "giving back" in light of the blessings and resources he had
received.  In his involvement with the Samaritan House, Jim has made a personal
goal of helping the Samaritan House acquire enough shelters and beds to meet the
need. This means that, in the future, a mother and her children will not be turned
away for lack of space.  He always listens intently for opportunities to "give back"
in practical ways. To Jim, helping others has evolved into a divine calling and a
life purpose. In his giving, he feels himself to be blessed as he gives to others. 
Jokingly, he mentioned that perhaps his "giving" is somewhat selfish since he
feels he has been the recipient of so much more blessing.19
Jesus says, "Blessed are they that hear God's word and keep it." James says,
"Blessed is the doer in his deed." "Both say the same thing."20 Jim is one such individual
who links his faith with doing. Proper hearing, knit together with doing, constitutes
genuine faith. "There is a false doing and a false hearing. We cannot examine whether
our hearing and our doing are true or false; indeed this will depend precisely on whether
or not we entrust this examination entirely to the knowledge and judgment of Jesus."21
Thus the empowered Church faces an imperative of economic responsibility that is
moved with compassion and courage to provide for the legitimate needs of the
impoverished and the needs of the rich, through its witness through words and actions.

19 A personal interview with a businessman in the Hampton Roads area who wishes to remain anonymous.
20 Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Ethics, (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1962), 170.
21 Bonhoeffer, 170.
 Form Criticism and Examples of the Discipline at Work
(Mk. 5:24b-34; Mk. 2:23-28)

Introduction
You practice Form Criticism but don't know it. As I sit in my office this soggy
Monday morning, I look at our copy of the Virginia Pilot and glance at representative
types of information, entertainment and advertising that constitute a newspaper. I see
some of the following entries in the newspaper:
Front page material: Major headlines concerning the war in Iraq and the
progress of the Democratic Party and Virginia Tech's win over the University of
Virginia.
Second page material: A summary of Today's Top Stories that also serves as a
table of contents for the entire newspaper
Health: A tender story about conjoined twins, their successful separation and
their trip home (a combination of a medical miracle coupled with a human interest
story).
Weather: A standardized portrayal of the highs and lows and the prediction for
the following week (Who says that weather reports are infallible?), and various
maps of the region and country with a special article devoted to a menacing storm
in the Caribbean Sea.
Commentary: A section of political commentary from the Democratic Party and
Republican Party as to balancing the extremes, coupled with various editorial
comments on the two parties.
Advertisements: Full-page advertisements offering same-day purchases with no
money down, no-interest for three years, free delivery followed by the disguised
fine print that tells its readers how they can so quickly lose the credit standing that
they once had.
Letters to Abby: Story about a person with a problem and a desperate cry for
help.
The various elements of the paper are part of the whole newspaper and also
constitute the newspaper itself. The newspaper is the combination of all of its constituent
elements. Without thinking about the process of reading a newspaper, the average reader
comes to assume and expect that certain genres (types, forms) will be part and parcel of
the various elements of the newspaper. Without conscious awareness, the reader is doing
Form Criticism. She expects that a weather report will include the elements expressed
above. If he reads a Dear Abby column, there will be certain structural elements that are
expected in this form:
Dear Abby,
Statement of the Problem,
Statement about the Length of Time that the Reader has Struggled with the
Problem,
Unsuccessful Attempts to Resolve the Problem,
Asking for Advice to Resolve the Problem,
Signed (with an adjective that describes the person, e.g., "hopeless." This Dear
Abby-genre has nothing in common with the genre of a lead story on the front page. The
editor of the Dear Abby column no doubt adapts the submitted stories, to fall in line with
the above structure. The editors have "edited" the submissions, i.e. they have redacted
the various letters.
In a similar way, the Gospel stories are filled with understood structural elements
that are appropriate to the specific genres of the paragraphs that are similar in nature. For
example, the birth announcements of John the Baptist and Jesus in Luke 1 follow a
certain structural form:
a. Self-revelation of God (Theophany, Christophany, Angelophany).
b. Overwhelming effect—fear (mysterium tremendum [ R. Otto]).
c. Announcement of the child's mission or promise (verbal).
d. Human objections raised.
e. Human objections are overcome.
f. (Signs).
The structure of the birth announcements in the Gospels parallels any number of OT
announcements, e.g., announcements to Manoah and his wife concerning the birth of
Samson (Judges 13).
Thus, the audience and readers of the various passages would expect a similarity
in terms of structure, not at the conscious level, parallel to the way in which a reader of
the newspaper would unconsciously expect certain things (structural elements) about a
sports report of a game: Winners + Points Scored, Losers + Points Scored, Highlights of
the Game, Explanation for Why there was a Win or Loss. The only persons, who must
consciously follow this pattern of a genre, would be the various reporters, whose job
performance is based upon their adherence to the basic structure.
For the writers of the Gospels, such common structures enable the preacher to
remember the material, preach in a clear manner and enable the listeners to follow the
various narratives and know where she is in the story.
What process was at work behind the transmission of the Gospels as we now
possess them? How did the Early Church and its preachers communicate the Jesus-story
in terms of its original "life-setting" (Sitz im Leben)?
Following the ascension of Jesus and the gift of the Spirit, we catch glimpses of a
period of oral tradition in which the expectation of the Lord’s return was so high, that it
did not seem to be appropriate or relevant to take the time to write anything down, i.e.,
"Since Jesus will return within this generation, there is no need to write down the
tradition. How can we communicate the wonderful message? Surely, with the preaching
of stories, since Peter and others preached so effectively on the Day of Pentecost."
Something along this order no doubt affected the Early Church as the faith-communities
struggled with how to communicate the Jesus-story. This would represent roughly the
period from A.D. 29-49. During this period of oral tradition, the preachers might have
selected a story that would lead to a pronouncement story and summary statement. This,
in turn, would lead people to make a confession of faith in Jesus.
Our brief treatment of this discipline assumes that the preaching office held a
special role in the earliest proclamation of the Gospel-tradition. The Early Church,
through its evangelists, preachers, teachers and exorcists used the oral tradition to
communicate the wonder of the Jesus' event. Paul, who pre-dates the Gospels, certainly
highlights the importance of the preacher/evangelist, who faithfully transmits the Jesus-
story to different audiences:
14 "But how are men to call upon him in whom they have not believed?
 And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard?
And how are they to hear without a preacher?
15 And how can men preach unless they are sent?
As it is written,
'How beautiful are the feet of those who preach good news!'" Rom.
10-14-15).
In rhetorical fashion, Paul envisions a set sequence or chain of events, which govern the
entire process of the Good News, which embraces both the Proclaimers and the Hearers.
A Divine sending results in proper hearing/believing/calling upon, as is suggested in the
following chart:
The Proclaimers The Hearers
Feet of those who preach good news Hearing
Preaching ones are sent (by God-Divine Believing in Him they have never heard
passive) Calling upon Him in whom they have
Preachers enable hearing never heard

Being sent with the good news leads to  Preaching  Preacher  Hearing,
Believing and Calling upon.
The positive response that the Hearers are enabled to make is ultimately
dependent upon the Diving sending of the preachers. The content of the message is the
preaching of Christ:
17 "So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching
of Christ" (Rom. 10:17).
The various paragraphs in the Gospels may be cast in the form of a dialogue or
controversy-story, a parable (mashal), a miracle story, a teaching, an exorcism, etc. We
make the assumption that the driving force behind each paragraph is to be found in "the
anticipation that it will disclose something of God's activity in Jesus."1
It may have been possible that there were some documents, which may have been
circulating that would contain something like a book of what is sometimes called
Testimonia—or OT proof-texts that were regarded as prophetic promises of something
that occurred in the life and witness of Jesus. Maybe some of the sayings of Jesus were
generally collected into various groupings, e.g., miracle stories, conflict narratives.
However, the use of stories to respond to the needs of the Early Church do not
presuppose that the Evangelists created the stories with no historical basis in reality or
that they were like "pebbles in a stream, which are carried off and would become more
rounded off. They are not isolated "beads on a string" without a string. There is a clear
statement in Luke's prologue (Lk. 1:1-4) that expresses his dependence upon those who
were "eyewitnesses" (aujtovptai 1:2); Luke was not one of the "eyewitnesses."
He is dependent upon the progression from "eyewitnesses," "servants of the Word" (i.e.,
early preachers" to himself as the editor.
It seems reasonable to conclude that the isolated pericopes (i.e., paragraphs)
circulated as groups of stories that shared a commonality, e.g., collected paragraphs in a
block of material (Mk. 4; Matt. 13), i.e., parables of the Kingdom. The four Gospels find
their point of origin in the Resurrection of Christ, which means the Divine vindication of
1Ralph P. Martin, New Testament Foundations I, (Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975),
pp. 44-45.
the Jesus-event. Guided by this "once-for-all" event, the earliest preachers are able to
look backwards to the individual Jesus-stories (history) so as to communicate the various
stories about Jesus and their significance (theology)—all in the light of the Easter-event.
During the period of oral tradition, the stories may have followed certain patterns
(e.g., law of 3, principle of contrast, pronouncement stories, speeches, historical
narratives) various paragraphs soon developed.

Particular Examples of the Discipline of Form Criticism

We choose to illustrate the discipline of Form Criticism through an analysis of the
structure of a miracle story (Mk. 5:24b-34) and a pronouncement story (Mk. 2:23-28).
So as to help the reader, we will lay out the common structural elements for the genre of
healing narrative in the first column, which parallel the text of Mk. 5:24b-34. Comments
are listed below:
The Structure of a Healing Narrative Mk. 5:24b-34
Introduction or Setting (v. 24) 24 And he went with him.
And a great crowd followed him and
thronged about him.
Person in Physical Need (v. 25) 25 And there was a woman who had had a
flow of blood for twelve years,
Desperate Plight of the Needy Person (v. 26 and who had suffered much under many
27) physicians, and had spent all that she had,
and was no better but rather grew worse.
(Unspoken) Plea for Jesus' Help from the 27 She had heard the reports about Jesus,
Needy Person (vss. 27-28) and came up behind him in the crowd and
touched his garment.28 For she said, “If I
touch even his garments, I shall be made
well.”
Actual Healing (v. 27) 29 And immediately the hemorrhage
ceased; and she felt in her body that she
was healed of her disease.
Result of Healing (v. 20) 30 And Jesus, perceiving in himself that
power had gone forth from him,
immediately turned about in the crowd, and
Question by Jesus (v. 30) said, “Who touched my garments?”31 And
Scorn by Bystanders—Disciples (v. 31) his disciples said to him, “You see the
crowd pressing around you, and yet you
say, ‘Who touched me?’”32 And he looked
around to see who had done it.33 But the
Dialogue with the woman (v. 33) woman, knowing what had been done to
her, came in fear and trembling and fell
down before him, and told him the whole
Affirmation of her expression of faith (v. truth.34 And he said to her, “Daughter,
34) your faith has made you well; go in peace,
and be healed of your disease.”

Comments
· Many of the structural elements in this particular story are reflected in other
healing stories in the Gospels. Some of the healing narratives may use a simpler
structure, e.g., the healing of Simon's mother-in-law: Introduction of a Sick
Person—mother-in law with a fever (Mk. 1:29), Jesus' Healing of the Sick
Person—takes her by the hand and she is healed (vss. 30-31a), Effect of the
Healing—she is well enough to serve them (v. 31b).
· Mark provides extensive detail concerning the desperate condition of this woman
(v. 27): she is a social and religious outcast, i.e., unclean. Her hemorrhage has
continued for twelve years. She had sought the treatment of physicians in the
hope that she could improve—all to no avail, and thus, her hopes are
crushed—the physicians worsen the pain and she became worse. In addition, the
needy woman has become financially destitute—she has spent all of her "bank
account" on physicians and thus, depleted her account.
· Why does Mark highlight the desperate conditions of the woman?—surely to
magnify the power and compassion of God at work in Jesus, although He does not
volitionally decide to heal the woman. God rewards her faith in Jesus, who can
heal her, even apart from His cognition. This would reflect Mark's preaching
concerns for the community, i.e., God will similarly meet you in your desperate
conditions like He did for this distressed woman; He looks for the receptivity of
faith.
· In terms of the healing, we read very simply that the hemorrhage ceased; the
blood stopped flowing. And the woman herself knows that something within is
occurring.
· In terms of the healing, both the woman and Jesus know that something
extraordinary is occurring in terms of power that proceeds from Jesus to the
woman (vss. 29-30).
· The scorn of the bystanders, in this case, the disciples is reflected in their sarcastic
response to Jesus as to how he could even ask the question, "Who touched me?"
in the light of so much pushing and jostling by the crowd (v. 31).
· Jesus affirms the woman's faith (v. 34), which, in this context, signifies the
dogged faith and determination to push her way through the crush of the people to
touch Jesus, with the certainty that she would be healed. Nothing can discourage
her or serve as an impediment to her faith-certainty. For the readers, nothing
should deter them from reaching out to Jesus who will meet them at their point of
need.

Such a healing story would be traceable to a sermon about this event, a preaching
story (kerygma) that would communicate the way in which Jesus responds to those in
desperate condition and honors their expression of trust in His power and
compassion. Such a story would circulate as an oral tradition that was preached to
various faith communities in the 1st Century. Surely the content of the preached
sermon would highlight Jesus' compassion and power to help those in dire need and
the central role of faith in these healing/exorcism stories. This message would
certainly have spoken to the Early Church. Subsequent to the period of oral
circulation, such stories found their way into written form, and then, were included in
the various Gospels.
 At this point, the Redaction Critic notes the literary, historical and theological
context of this healing story and notes how this paragraph finds several parallel
stories in terms of Jesus' miraculous power (disciples out at sea in a storm—Mk.
4:35-41; Exorcism of the Gadarene demoniac—5:1-20; the raising from the dead of
Jairus' daughter—5:21-24a, 35-43).

A pronouncement-story is another genre that follows an understood format. They

are expressed as short stories about an action or controversy that leads up to a climactic
pronouncement on a given story. In Mark 2:23-28, we find a pronouncement story that
leads to the climactic statements of Jesus, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for
the Sabbath; 28 so the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath." This dual-
pronouncement serves as a "punch-line" of the story:

The Structure of a Pronouncement Story Mark 2:23-28

Introduction or Setting (v. 23) for the
Ensuing Accusation
Accusation—Rhetorical Question (v. 24)
Jesus' Response to the Accusation (vss. 25- 25 And he said to them, “Have you never
27)
Climactic Pronouncements (vss. 27-28)
23 One Sabbath he was going through the
grainfields; and as they made their way his
disciples began to pluck heads of grain.
24 And the Pharisees said to him, “Look,
why are they doing what is not lawful on
the Sabbath?”
read what David did, when he was in need
and was hungry, he and those who were
with him:26 how he entered the house of
God, when Abiathar was high priest, and
ate the bread of the Presence, which it is
not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and
also gave it to those who were with him?”
27 And he said to them, “The Sabbath was
made for man, not man for the Sabbath;28
so the Son of Man is lord even of the
Sabbath.”

Comments
· The Introduction or Setting for the Accusation (v. 23) provides the information as
to the location—in the grainfields, the time—on the Sabbath and persons
involved—Jesus, the Disciples (Pharisees) and the occasion—the disciples are
plucking grain on the Sabbath. The Introduction is not superfluous to the story or
the pronouncement (position of the Form Critics) but ties the pronouncement to a
given historical occasion.
· The Accusation is expressed through a rhetorical question. The disciples are
violating some type of religious legislation; however, they are not directly
addressed. Instead the religious critics accuse Jesus for allowing this violation
among His group.
· Jesus' Response to the Accusation (vss. 24-27) involves a substantiating
comparison of a leader with his group (David with his men; Jesus with His
 disciples.
Occasion
Leader: "He was going . . ." (v.
23)
Group: "His disciples made their
way"
Action of Leader and Group:
"pluck ears of grain" (v. 23)
Violation: "they did what is not
lawful on the Sabbath" (v. 24)
Jesus' Response
Leader: "what David did" (v. 25)
Group: "those who were with him"
(v. 25)
Action of Leader and Group: "ate
bread of the Presence" (v. 27)
Violation: "which is not lawful for
any but the priests to eat" (v. 27)

Jesus' substantiates the activity of His disciples by comparing it to the action of

David and his men. In each case, there is a certain relationship between the leader
and his group, wherein the freedom that is accorded to the leader also holds true
for the members of his group. Further, there is a comparison between the hunger
of His disciples and the ravishing hunger of David's men. Thus, the leader is able
to violate the religious legislation because of the physical needs of the members.
What holds true for him also "spills over" to the members. Thus, Jesus
substantiates the freedom of the disciples by their relationship to Him by pointing
out the way in which David and his men were allowed to violate the religious
legislation.
· The Climactic Pronouncements (vss. 27-28) provide a summary statement that
builds upon the preceding narrative—in this case, a controversy story, which
allows for a teaching pronouncement as to why the Sabbath was made—to be
subordinate to people, not vice-versa. The second pronouncement proclaims
Jesus' Lordship over the Sabbath, i.e., "what He says . . . goes." If He declares
freedom to express the Sabbath's purpose—that freedom "spills over" to the new
community that He builds.
· This pronouncement story directly relates to questions that would have arisen
during the period of the Early Church: "What is the purpose of the Sabbath?"
"What is Jesus' attitude to the Sabbath?" "How does the new community of faith
relate to its rich heritage in Judaism as it bears upon OT legislation, particularly to
the Mosaic Ten Words?" "What meaning does the Sabbath have for Gentiles?"
"How does Jesus' Lordship affect the way that new Christians should regard the
Sabbath?" These are the types of questions that arose in the 1st Century, which
then occasioned the Evangelists to draw from the "fund" of the oral tradition, and
then narrate a story about a supposed "violation" of the Sabbath with its
pronouncements. Another example of a life-setting might occasion the question:
What is the Christian attitude towards wealth supposed to be? Such a question
might occasion passages such as Mk. 10:2-9, 10-13, 13-16, 17-22. Many of the
more radical form critics would argue that the Early Church created de nova such
stories to meet the needs of the early Christians in different parts of the
Mediterranean Sea. Further, the radical Form Critics also argue that the tradition
emerged from Hellenistic soil; thus, they argue that the tradition is really
secondary.
 Form Criticism is a helpful discipline in that it makes us aware of the oral
tradition and the role of early preachers in communicating the various paragraphs as
sermons to the community. As we consider the life-situation (Sitz im Leben) in the Early
Church of the Gospel tradition, we are reminded of the fact that there was an oral period,
e.g., as Acts shows. Further, the Gospels can "come alive" as we reckon with the use of
the Jesus tradition in the earliest Christian churches.2 We are made aware of the structure
that would have been readily understood by the audiences and the readers of these
paragraphs. Form Criticism may provide some guidelines for interpreting the individual
paragraphs. Each paragraph represents a different genre and needs to be read in light of
that genre's understood structure. Questions about a particular literary form do not attack
the historicity of an event. In our earlier illustration, a lead article in a newspaper must
be read in a different way than an advertisement or a comic.
To be sure, there are dangers inherent in the more radical approaches to Form
Criticism. It makes the Evangelists responsible for laying out the various paragraphs
with a "scissors and paste" (Copy and Paste) approach. The Form Critics argue that the
four Evangelists are "compilers" of the Jesus-tradition rather than creative and thoughtful
editors of the tradition. Thus, in Form Criticism, there is no allowance given to the
theological concerns of the Evangelists. A certain type of historical skepticism often
accompanies discussions or writings about Form Criticism. Some of the more radical
Form Critics, such as Bultmann, ascribe a highly creative role in the formation of the
tradition to the Christian community, which he said, felt entirely free to ascribe its own
insights to Jesus. This results in a kind of "slope," in which the solid historical
foundation of the Jesus-event seems to dissolve. We find an utter contrast between a real
Jesus who desires personal relationship with Himself and the spirit-like figure, who has
disappeared from the sphere of history, relegated to the dust of the more radical Form
Criticism.
The lasting contribution of Form Criticism is its concern for the period of oral
transmission, through the Early Church's preachers. As readers, we need to appreciate
the contributions of Form Criticism, but we also need to be cautious. Even though some
of conclusions can be rejected, this does not invalidate the legacy that this discipline has
contributed to our understanding of the transmission of the Jesus-tradition.

Further Reading
The books related to Form Criticism in the Gospels are numerous—too many to
list. What we offer are some books that represent the various approaches by the Form
Critics. They range in approach from liberal to evangelical to fundamentalist:
Herman Gunkel and Julius Wellhausen—already developed Form Criticism for many
portions of the OT
Rudolph Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition, (Oxford: Blackwell, 1963).
Martin Dibelius, From Tradition to Gospel, (Cambridge: J. Clarke, 1934).
Bernard Gerhardsson, Memory and Manuscript, (Lund: Gleerup, 1961).
W. Kelber, The Oral and the Written Gospel, (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983)
E. V. McKnight, What is Form Criticism, (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969).
Vincent Taylor, The Formation of the Gospel Tradition, (London, Macmillan, 1933).
A series of four commentaries from the Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives, e.g.,
Ralph Martin, Mark Evangelist and Theologian, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan
2 From unpublished notes from my colleague, Dr. Charles Holman.
Publishing House, 1972).
Four Females who Encounter Jesus:

Introduction.
Amidst many texts in the Gospels that provide more lengthy interactions of
women with Jesus, there are four brief stories (often overlooked) in the Gospels that
express Jesus' concern for women; Jesus provides healing or life, particularly for those in
an unclean status, expressed through the language of the taboo. In the first three contexts,
there is an unclean person, either in an unclean status, due to the loss of blood, having an
unclean spirit, or in the sphere of death. The last story notes the male objection of the
synagogue official with respect to the time of the woman's healing; she is a woman who
lives in the sphere of the unclean ("having an unclean spirit" – Lk. 13:11) and is
exorcised/healed "on the Sabbath." In each situation, Jesus is unresponsive to the
objections concerning religious and social taboos; he abrogates such distinctions and
critiques.

Jairus' Daughter and the Woman with the Hemorrhage (Mk. 5:21-43 par.).
There are two miraculous encounters with females in this paragraph, expressed
through a beginning (Mk. 5:21-24a), interruption (vss. 24b-34) and a sequel (vss. 35-43).
Jairus' daughter is present in the agonized and desperate plea of her father, a local
synagogue president. He requests that Jesus lay his hands upon the girl in order to heal
her; Jairus underscores her desperate condition through the expression, "at the point of
death." This daughter comes from the highest rung of the Jewish social and religious
ladder while the interrupting narrative informs the reader of a nameless woman, who
stands on the lowest Jewish rung; she is religiously unclean, discouraged, socially and
religiously ostracized, and financially destitute. Bonnie Thurston notes, "the woman is
marginalized on four counts. She is female, without a male relative to be her advocate
(we know this because she is not identified by male kin), without financial resources (she
has spent her money on doctors—first-century gynecologists? (v. 26), and she is subject
to the blood taboo. Leviticus 15:19-30 sets out the limitations on menstruating women.
Not only is this woman considered 'unclean'; she makes 'impure' anything or anyone she
touches."1 Continuity is evident in the two stories, that while Jesus is in the midst of a
great bustling crowd, He nonetheless takes time to respond to two desperate needs of
individuals. In fact, there are three situations of extreme need within three paragraphs in
Mk. 5:
5:2-5—desperate condition of the demoniac spelled out in detail, "a man from the
tombs in the sphere of an unclean spirit, superhuman physical strength,
masochistic, unable to be tamed, crying, gashing himself with stones"
5:23—"my little daughter is at the point of death" . . . daughter died (5:35)
5:25-26—"flow of blood for twelve years, and who had suffered much under
many physicians, and had spent all that she had, and was no better but rather grew
worse."
Due to the woman's gender and the nature of her "unclean" condition,2 she
approaches Jesus in a covert manner. She hopes that she can receive healing from Jesus'
garment without having to identify herself: 27 "She had heard the reports about Jesus,
1 Bonnie Thurston, Women in the New Testament: Questions and Commentary, (New York: The
Crossroads Publishing Co., 1988), p. 71.
2 Due to a loss of blood there is a loss of life (Lev. 17:11), thus rendering a person unclean.
and came up behind him in the crowd and touched his garment. 28 For she said, 'If I
touch even his garments, I shall be made well'" (5:27-28). As a result, the woman and
Jesus both perceive some sort of change from within, without any verbal interchange or
recognition of each other:
29 "And immediately the hemorrhage ceased; and she felt in her body that she
was healed of her disease.
30 And Jesus, perceiving in himself that power had gone forth from him,
immediately turned about in the crowd, and said, "Who touched my garments?'"
Jesus is not directly involved in the healing, a fact, which is underscored by His revealing
question, "Who touched my garments?" noted in three verses (29, 30, 31). No direct
intercession is made to him; if the woman makes intercession, God—not Jesus is the
person to whom intercession is made. Jesus is aware that power had gone forth from
himself (v. 30), but he does not know who had touched him so as to be healed. The
personal power of Jesus is also the power of a personal God. While Jesus does not make
a decision for healing of a woman, God does; God controls His own power by HHHis
free and personal decision. In this case, God is concerned for wholeness of life for a poor
and desperate woman; He acts on the basis of her need and internal reasoning. When
Jesus responds to her, he does not reply in a way that the woman would ever suspect.
Instead of reproof, Jesus interprets her covert action as faith, blesses her with peace and
declares long-term health instead of suffering (5:34). This woman models the
faith-response that Jesus looks for—a trust that God is acting in a special way in Jesus.
While her initial trust may be a superstitious belief in Jesus' cloak, nevertheless, she does
manifest faith in God coupled with a trust in Jesus' power that could be found in his
cloak. As such, the exemplary woman is contrasted with the male disciples, who ridicule
Jesus' question (5:31). The disciples' query to him about the futility of such a question in
the midst of a pressing crowd is noteworthy, because it indicates that the woman's touch
was one of faith, an action distinctly different from the jostling of the crowd."3 This
woman is a barometer for measuring the male disciples' "unfaith." In a similar way,
Jesus' response to Jairus and the hopeless situation of a dead daughter also reveals the
deep-seated misunderstanding of the mourners. They disbelieve; they believe that Jesus
can heal but once a girl has died, she has passed into a sphere, in which they regard that
Jesus is impotent. From their standpoint, this is surely no occasion for faith—she has
"passed the point of no return." By His double-entendre, Jesus states that though the girl
is dead, from his perspective, her death is but a mere sleep, from which he would awaken
her. As with Simon's mother-in-law, Jesus takes the young girl by the hand (a condition
of "defilement") and raises her. He speaks to her in Aramaic. There are three stories in
this segment, in which Jesus does not hesitate; he involves Himself with situations of
uncleanness:
5:2—a male demoniac in the sphere of the tombs
5:24b-34—a woman with an unclean hemorrhage
5:35-43—a daughter who has died
Thereby, Jesus allows Himself to be "defiled" in situations of uncleanness by a
man (for his daughter) and by two unclean females (from the Jewish perspective); he
affirms the full worth and dignity of women and their place within His new community.
The family of faith and the physical family are not mutually exclusive categories; they
3 Mary Ann Tolbert, "Mark," Woman's Bible Commentary, ed. by Carol A. Newsome and Sharon H. Ringe,
(Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998), p. 268.
are both affirmed. Jesus expresses a fatherly concern for a little girl and celebrates with
joy as he gives this young girl to her parents. We find the familiar "silence" charge in
Mark—with the witnesses inside the house; however, it is impossible to imagine that this
event would have remained secret. With the woman healed of her hemorrhage, there is
no silence charge; rather, it is an event that needs to be made public, although the healing
has been in secret.
The Widow of Nain's Son (Lk. 7:11-17).
In Lk. 7, we find another instance of paired stories of a male Centurion's concern
for a slave (v. 2) and a widow's supreme loss of an only son (v. 12). In the case of the
widow, Jesus sees a funeral procession, is filled with compassion for the widow, and then
interrupts the procession, approaches and touches the coffin (thereby incurring
defilement) and speaks to the young man, who sits up in his coffin and begins to speak.
Jesus gives him back to his grieving mother. This is surely a genuine act of compassion
for a widow, whose only source of hope was her son—now dead; the son would have
been able to provide support for her needs. Not only is she bereft of a husband, but her
family line is severed. This raising of a dead son does not involve forgiveness or faith;
however, the motive is clearly "compassion" (v. 13). The outcome is reverential fear,
praise to God, and the resulting affirmation that a great "prophet" has arisen, God has
surely visited His people (v. 16), and a widespread fame (v. 17).
The story clearly demonstrates Jesus' concern for women, especially widows.
Through this encounter, Jesus illustrates His rejection of false distinctions between clean
and unclean; He eliminates the idea of prejudicial treatment for those in need, especially
women. More than once in Luke's Gospel, the stories are knit together as they express
Jesus' mission to the "outsider." In this chapter, as elsewhere, He tampers with the
religious, racial and social taboos of Jewish particularism. A slave of a Gentile centurion
is healed by Jesus' word (7:1-10). Jesus then proceeds to halt a funeral procession, touch
the coffin,4 and raise up a deceased young man, the only son of a widowed mother (7:11-
17). And, as He defends the ministry of John the Baptist, Jesus is recognized to be the
friend of tax-collectors and sinners (7:18-35) as well as a great prophet (v. 16). In Luke
7, Jesus responds in such positive and warm ways to a Gentile centurion and his needy
slave, a Gentile, a widow, tax-collectors and sinners—the people who are most aware of
their broken condition. His attitude towards outsiders is an amazing truth to consider.
Healing/Exorcising a Woman on the Sabbath (Lk. 13:10-17).
While Simon's mother-in-law is healed on the Sabbath with full approval, a
woman is healed on another Sabbath and thereby criticized by a synagogue president.
This male synagogue official, in response to the Sabbath issue, directs his comments, not
to Jesus, but to the crowd. While he vainly solicits their response to the "when" of her
healing, Jesus answers the Sabbath question. This woman has suffered with a "spirit of
sickness" and "being bound by Satan" for eighteen years (13:11, 16). The woman is
unable to stand erect, which does not prohibit her from entering the synagogue—on the
Sabbath. The woman rejoices (v. 13) for now she has a new reason for rejoicing, i.e., her
healing even in the midst of her opponents' opposition. She is also called "a daughter of
Abraham" (v. 16) even in her demon-possessed condition. Nowhere does this specific
term occur in the Gospels, much less does it refer to one who is demon-possessed. Jesus
reveals his opponents' hypocritical treatment and their resultant shame. By way of
4Touching a coffin incurs one day's defilement (Numb. 19:21-22); by touching a corpse, Jesus would
contract uncleanness for a week (Numb. 5:2-3; 19:11-20).
contrast, the crowd (like the woman) was rejoicing (13:17) at his wonders—on the
Sabbath. The woman's response is contrasted with his male opponent—the synagogue
official and the "opponents." In English, the word opponent refers to both masculine and
feminine adversaries; in Greek usage, either in the NT or LXX, not only is the word
"opponent" a masculine gender word, but it is only used of masculine adversaries in the
NT.

Conclusion.
Jesus nullifies religious and social taboos as he responds to the needs of four
females, who are in the sphere of the "unclean." A hemorrhaging flow of blood, death,
having an unclean spirit—these are no barriers to his life-giving responses. He even
raises people from the dead when there is no intercession; it is simply Jesus' observation
of a funeral procession that causes him to stop the procession. He sees that the creation
celebration means a joyous festival, which now finds realization in acts of healing, e.g.,
the woman "having an unclean spirit," who is unable to stand erect. Far from her being
unclean, she is called a "daughter of Abraham." Further, three of the four occasions
narrate how certain male figures are the ones who object to Jesus' open stance towards
the female gender. Jesus heals women, takes them seriously. He openly affirms their
worth and dignity through miraculous encounter. He neither trivializes nor patronizes
these women but models his acceptance and affirmation of these females in the context of
the taboo; he easily dismisses such social and religious taboos.
Galatians 3:23-4:10
Observations

Introduction
In the Pauline letters, the term "adoption" (uiJoqesiva) is used either of
the Jews (Rom. 9:4) or of Christians (Gal. 4:5; Rom. 8:15; Eph. 1:5) as sons (daughters)
of God. In these letters, Paul seems to presuppose that his readers would know what he
means by the use of the term. The term "adoption" (Gal. 4:5) speaks to both a Jewish and
Graeco-Roman audience and is clearly used in a theological context. Adoption is the
means by which God's people become His children. While the language of the passage
highlights "sons" (Gal. 3:26; 4:6, 7, Rom. 8:14, 19; 9:26) the term is inclusive, and is
expressed in other texts as "children" (Rom. 8:16, 17, 21). In II Cor. 6:18, which borrows
the language from Isa. 43:6, the idea broadens in the inclusion of daughters:
Isa.43:6 I will say to the north, Give up, and to the south,
Do not withhold; bring my sons from afar
and my daughters from the end of the earth.
The text under discussion serves as one of the answers to the issue of religious anxiety.
When some of our basic needs (love, security and meaning) are not met, we feel and
express anxiety. Within the Bible we find all sorts of human attempts to find security.
Humans try to use the Law as a means of codifying the divine-human relationship, which
in a very real way is a human attempt to find security. Through meticulous observance of
certain codes, life becomes manageable and controllable.

The Larger and Immediate Context

The letter to the Galatian churches is a passionate letter that expresses anger at
times and is reflected in the way in which the letter is introduced. In 1:1-4, Paul avoids
the normal niceties of letter-writing as he immerses himself into the problem infecting the
Christian community in Galatia. Throughout the letter, Paul is arguing for the primacy of
the Gospel message; the Gospel is promise not law, received by personal trust not human
performance, and issues in freedom not bondage. Throughout the letter, Paul expresses
his disappointment of the Galatian Christians who are "toying" with the possibility of
substituting human performance and religious regulation ("circumcision") for the
freedom that has been effected in Christ Jesus. Genuine freedom was an important
question as it is significant today as well. Through careful argument, Paul affirms the
wonderful news of freedom from anxiety, religious performance, religious pride and false
substitutes. Freedom is also positive in nature as a Christian is oriented to the positive
expression of what the new life offers and the security which is afforded to Christians.
In Gal. 3:1ff., Paul argues for the primacy of the promise of God through
several contrasts:
q The Law does not alter the divine promise. Paul demonstrates the priority of the
divine promise in that a promise was made to Abraham four hundred and thirty
years prior to the giving of the Law, which was not annulled by the giving of the
Law on Sinai. The promise, which focused on Christ (Gal. 3:16), still remained
valid; the promise looked beyond Abraham, Isaac and the growth of the Hebrew
 people to embrace the Christian community years later. Paul also uses an
illustration from legal custom to seal his point:
Gal. 3:15 To give a human example, brethren: no one annuls even a man’s will,
or adds to it, once it has been ratified.16 Now the promises were made to
Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to
many; but, referring to one, “And to your offspring,” which is Christ.17 This is
what I mean: the law, which came four hundred and thirty years afterward, does
not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void.
q The Law does not serve the same purpose as the promise. The Law served as a
measuring rod to show the disease of the human condition, "the Law was added
because of transgressions" (Gal. 3:19). The Law could correct but not cure. By
way of contrast, the promise served to make alive. Paul expresses the positive
through a contrary-to-fact conditional sentence in which both halves are regarded
as untrue: "for if a law had been given which could make them alive [which it
wasn't], then righteousness would indeed be by the law" [which it is not] (Gal.
3:21).
q The Law is temporary while the promise is eternal. In 3:23-24, Paul argues
against the broad sweep of time to underscore the temporary nature of the Law
that came late while the promise of God covers a much broader time period.
While the Law began with Moses and concluded with the death of Jesus Christ,
the promise begins with Abraham and will be concluded by the return of Jesus
Christ, who will inaugurate a transformed eternity.
q The Law is limited in its scope while the promise is comprehensive in nature. In
3:26-29, Paul demonstrates the freedom of the promise, the new relationship, the
intimate nature of the new life and the unifying promise of the new relationship in
the full gamut of fractured human relationships.

Structural Analysis

There are three main paragraphs in this section that are vitally related:
The new position as sons [children] of God (3:23-29)
Explanation of what sonship means—freedom (4:1-7)
Contrast with Galatian error about sonship—bondage (4:8-11)
Paul affirms the wonderful new position that has been made real in Jesus Christ, being a
son (daughter) of God with an altogether new freedom, an adoption that is personal and
intimate, with the solid promise of a glorious inheritance yet in store. Above all, the new
life means freedom. For Paul, the Galatians have slipped back into bondage and have not
fully realized the glorious nature of their freedom as sons and daughters of God.

Interpretation

Verse 3:23
3:23 Now before faith came,
we were confined under the law,
kept under restraint until faith should be revealed.
 There is a temporal contrast between the time of faith and the time of the law,
made explicit by the adverbs, "now", "until”:
"Now before faith came," contrasted with "until faith should be revealed"
The clause, "Now before faith came," is compared to the clause, "we were confined
under the law."
Explanation is given for the expression, "confined under the law" by the
clause, "kept under restraint." What does the expression, "kept under restraint mean"? (a)
The two verbs, ''confined" (frourevw) and "kept under restraint" (sugkleivw)
are used in contexts of imprisonment by military guards (see II Cor. 11:32; Acts 9:24).1
In a derived sense, both verbs emphasize the fact that law holds people in prison,
confined, with no escape. The NEB translates the clauses, "we were close prisoners in
the custody of the law."
The purpose of the period of restraint is expressed by the clause, "should be
revealed." Thus, the reign of the law was divinely ordained to prepare for the reign of
Christian freedom (4:3).

Verse 24
24 So that the law was our custodian until Christ came, that we might be justified
by faith.

The result of the temporal contrast is stated with the introductory "so that":
"so that the law was our custodian until Christ came"
The custodian, boy-leader or tutor, was a slave charged to lead a boy to and from
school and to watch over his conduct while still a minor. The custodian was not involved
in education but served the primary purpose of discipline. In ancient drawings the
custodian is depicted having a rod or cane in his hand. J.B Phillips thinks that a modern
equivalent of the term is a "strict governess.” Freedom from this custodian is predicated
upon the coming of Christ.
By applying the metaphor of the custodian to the law Paul stresses two points:
1) The Law’s function is to impede and hold down sin, 2) The tenure of the Law is
limited. Since all are "under sin" (3:22) and "under the law," they have all under a curse
(3:10), the curse of the Law (3:13).
Thus there is continuity between two metaphors, the jailer and the strict
custodian which are compared with the law. The law expresses the will of God for His
people, informing them of commands, negative and positive, and the warnings for
disobedience. Like a jailer the law confines people. Like a custodian, the law rebukes
and punishes for sin.
The result of Christ's coming is that "we might be justified by faith.” What are
the implications of this new status of being justified by faith? God did not intend that this
period of imprisonment and discipline would be permanent. The oppressive work of the
law was merely temporary which awaited the coming of Christ so as to effect genuine
freedom. It is clear that only Christ can deliver His people from the law's harsh discipline
and punishment. The purpose of the Law was to shut up people in prison until Jesus
should set His people free; the other metaphor expresses the truth that people are put
under tutors until Christ should make His people free as sons and daughters.

1 The same verb is used metarphorically, referring to God's peace and power which guards.
Verse 25
25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a custodian;

Contrast is apparent in the introductory adversative, "but.” Because of the new

reality of faith, this means that the relationship to the custodian is no longer in effect:
"we are no longer under a custodian"

Verse 26
26 for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith.

Explanation is given of the implications of the new status of faith:

"for in Christ Jesus you are all sons/daughters of God"
The status of being children of God is contrasted with being under a custodian, confined,
and kept under restraint (3:23).
"for in Christ Jesus you are all sons/daughters of God"
This means that God is no longer the Judge who punishes or Tutor who disciplines His
people, but is the Father who has accepted and forgiven His people. Fear and dread are
replaced with security and enjoyment.
Instrumentality is expressed in the phrase, "through faith." That is to say, the
means by which the new state is effected is through faith:

Verse 27
27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Progression is evident in the way in which the Galatians became sons/daughters

of God, through faith. It was not only accomplished through faith but also through being
"baptized into Christ." Baptism is that sacrament which is the complement of faith, a
sign of union with Christ, and a public commitment of death and resurrection with Christ.
It is noteworthy that baptism is spoken of once, while faith is mentioned five times in this
paragraph. Justification occurs through faith and baptism is the outward and visible sign
of faith-union with Christ. In a letter in which Paul is dealing with the issue of
circumcision, it is inconceivable that he would substitute another human work, which
would lead to justification.
Progression is also apparent in that the language of sonship/daughtership is
expressed by the clause, "put on Christ." Not only are you sons and daughters but you
have put on Christ as well. What does the phrase, "put on Christ" mean? (a)
The reference here is closely allied with the practice of newly baptized converts
putting on new garments, following their baptism in the water, as a sign of their new life.
Perhaps the metaphor is also related to the toga virilis, which a boy would put on, upon
entering into manhood; it served as a sign that he had grown up.

3:28
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek,
there is neither slave nor free,
 there is neither male nor female;
for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

The result and implication of the new status is given, one person in Jesus Christ. In
Christ, His people belong only to God and to each other as brothers and sisters,
irrespective of race, religion, economic and class distinction, or gender.
With this three-fold pairing, we find the utter abrogation of differences, which had
formerly separated these groups, Jew which had been hostile to Gentile, slaves which
were bitterly opposed to their free masters, and the hostility which characterized the
male-female relationship, particularly in a patriarchal society.

Explanation is offered for why all such differences have been abrogated:
"for you are all one in Christ Jesus"
Paul wants to make it crystal clear that the one common meeting ground in the
face of differences of race/religion, economic and social status, and sexual disharmony--
is Christ Jesus. Secondary differences, which hitherto had separated, now vanish through
the incorporation of believers in Christ. The differences are still there, but they do not
matter; they have been abrogated and should not create any sort of barrier to vital
fellowship. All are to be recognized as equals in Christ Jesus.

Verse 29
29 And if you are Christ's,
then you are Abraham's offspring,
heirs according to promise.

There is a cause-effect relationship between being in Christ Jesus (3:27),

"Christ's" and the new status of being "Abraham's offspring":

Cause Effect
"in Christ Jesus"(3:28) "Abraham's offspring" (3:29)
"Christ's"(3:29) "heirs according to promise” (3:29)

To become a valid offspring of Abraham is not dependent upon performance vis-

à-vis the law; rather, it is faith that makes one a child of Abraham in a real sense.
Explanation is offered as to what it means to be Abraham's offspring, in that it
means being "heirs according to promise." Drawing upon the previous metaphor and
discussion Paul affirms that when sons are old enough, they pass from life under the Law
to life as a full heir of the promises of God.
Drawing upon the former observations, there are three results, which follow from
being in Christ:
1. We are sons/daughters of God (vss. 26-27)
2. In Christ we are all one (v. 28)
3. In Christ we are Abraham's seed and heirs (v. 29)
God's people find their place in eternity, related properly to God as sons and daughters,
related to each other as brothers and sisters, and related to the holy history of God's
people through the ages. Genuine conversion affects one's entire worldview and way of
understanding and relating to others.

Gal. 4:1
1 I mean that the heir, as long as he is a child,
is no better than a slave,
though he is the owner of all the estate;

This paragraph (4:1-7) is related to the former paragraph in that Paul explains
what it means to be an heir. Both the opening and closing verses of this paragraph deal
with the explanation of what it means to be an heir. Paul compares human status with
that of the freeborn orphaned son. The opening words, "I mean" clearly point the readers
to see that Paul is explaining what he formerly stated in 3:29 about the new state, of being
Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise. His argument, taking the past into
purview, affirms the glorious position of sonship and freedom and contrasts the new
relationship with the fear and bondage of slavery. He then agonizes over the present fact
of the matter, "How, then, can you turn back to slavery?" (vss. 8-11).
In vss. 1-2 Paul draws a temporal and ideological contrast between the child and
the slave. For a set period of time, there is no observable difference between the bona-
fide child and the slave. The difference between the child and the slave will become
apparent at the "date set by the father".

Period of Time as a Son (Minor) Date Set by the Father (Adult)

Son
1. no better than the slave
2. owner of all the estate (but not apparent)
3. under guardians and trustees
Slave
1. same position as the son
2. no ownership of estate
3. under authority of all
1. better position than the slave
2. owner of all the estate (apparent)
3. no longer under guardians and trustees
1. lesser position than the son
2. no ownership of estate
3. under authority of all

Paul draws from his Palestinian background in which a father appointed a

guardian who could handle the son's possessions in his interest. Outwardly, and for a
time, the minor son was not free, but beholden to the guardian. Thus, through this
comparison of the child's status with that of a freeborn, he explains the interim character
of the law. It was only for a period of time.

4:2
2 but he is under guardians and trustees until the date set by the father.

Vss. 1, 2 present the generalized principle of the child and slave and
corresponding position of the child at the set time that is followed by the particularized
application to the readers, made explicit by the opening words, "So with us":

When we were children But when the time had fully come
“we were slaves to the elemental spirits “God sent forth His Son, born of a
 of the universe” woman, born under the law to redeem
those who were under the law so that we
might receive adoption as sons”

A certain comparison is made between the old status as children, which is

likened to the position of slaves, subject to the elemental spirits of the universe. What are
the implications of this comparison? He has told his readers that the law was given to
Moses by God not Satan, and mediated through angels (3:19), good spirits not bad. What
Paul may mean is that Satan took a good thing (law) and twisted it in order to enslave
men and women. God intended the law to lead people to Christ, as a stepping-stone to
genuine liberty. Satan uses the law to drive men and women to despair in the face of the
impossible, from which there is no escape.
We can also observe a certain comparison between "slavery to the law" and
"slavery to the elemental spirits of the universe". What does the term, "elemental spirits
of the universe" mean? (a)
The meaning of the term, stoiceiva tou' kovsmou is disputed: It
could mean "elements, rudiments of learning (ABC's) as in Heb. 5:12, or "elemental
substances" (earth, air, fire, water), or "elemental signs of the Zodiac", or "spirit-
elements", i.e. celestial beings who govern the direction of the world. Perhaps the
clearest referent is "slaves to spirit-elements," parallel to those described in 4:8 as no
gods. In Col. 2:8 they are contrasted to Christ and appear to be like principalities and
powers.2 What are the implications of this comparison? (e)
People find it hard to enjoy the full inheritance as children of God because they
are slaves to superstition. Some look to magical spells and secret ceremonies to drive
away the hostile demons and to placate the good spirits. Others consult the astrology
section of the newspaper so as to determine their day, in the hope that the right match-up
of stars will bring them luck. Things like private charms, lucky numbers, ouija boards,
good luck coins--all are signs of superstitious bondage--ancient and modern. The
shocking thing is that Paul seems to include the Jews in this picture of slavery. The God-
given law had become so distorted through abuse that its true intention had, in fact,
become a superstition as well. It bound its followers in prison, punished them for failure,
and sapped their energy with fear. In the words of J. B. Phillips, God becomes the
Cosmic Policeman, leading to the anxious concern, "What if we do the wrong thing?”

4:4
4 But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son,
born of woman,
born under the law,

The Son is particularized in the clauses, "born of woman, born under the law".
The first clause emphasizes the necessary human condition for the fulfillment of His
mission, while the second clause underscores Jesus’ submission to the Law, which
allowed Him to be able to fall under its curse.

2 Col. 2:8 See to it that no one makes a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human
tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ.
4:5
5 to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as
sons.

The purpose of God's sending the Son is expressed in two ways:

1. In the infinitive clause, "to redeem those who were under the law"
2. In the clause introduced by the conjunction, "so that":
"so that we might receive adoption as sons"
What does the term "send" mean?
The verb in the early Church denoted a specific sending of someone in the service
of the Kingdom with authority fully grounded in God.
There is continuity apparent in the "Son" and "sons" and also contrast in terms of
"the Son" and others who are "adopted sons/daughters." The adoption language may well
reflect the Graeco-Roman practice wherein the adopted minor is emancipated from the
authority of his natural father and is placed under the authority of his adoptive father.
The new position of privilege, authority, security and inheritance, are clearly expressed in
the preceding verses, through the several temporal contrasts. From the Jewish
perspective, the term "adoption" may signify the history of God's interaction with his
people Israel. As heir to the Abrahamic promise, Israel was redeemed from slavery in
Egypt at the time of the Exodus (Gal. 4:1-2; Hos. 11:1; Gen. 15:13).

4:6
6 And because you are sons,
God has sent the Spirit of his Son
into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!"

A cause-effect relationship is expressed between the status of sons/daughters and

the subsequent sending of the Spirit in human hearts, made explicit by the preposition,
"because":
"And because you are sons/daughters...God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our
hearts..."
There is repetition of the verb "send":
"God sent forth His own Son" (4:4)
"God has sent the Spirit" (4:6)
The particular role of the Spirit in the human heart is spelled out in the phrase, "crying,
Abba! Father!" Abba is an Aramaic diminutive for "Father". It is the word that !Jesus
uses in intimate prayer to God. J. B. Phillips translates the expression, "Father, dear
Father".
We can observe progression between the status of sonship (vss. 4,5) and the
privilege of sonship (v. 6). Divine adoption is clearly connected with the gift of the Spirit
in the human heart (Rom. 8:15) as well as the Abrahamic promise of universal
sovereignty (Gal. 4:1). Rom. 8:15 as well as Gal. 4:5 contains elements of the Exodus
typology, heirship with Christ, the ability to pray the "Abba-prayer," and a future
fulfillment. Believers, who have received the gift of the Spirit, eagerly await their future
fulfillment, their public glorification, consisting of the transformation of their body. The
divine purpose of sending His Son was to procure sonship and daughtership; the divine
purpose of sending the Spirit is that His sons and daughters might experience sonship and
daughtership. The indwelling Spirit witnesses to the new relationship and prompts
Christian prayer.

4:7
7 So through God you are no longer a slave
but
a son,
and
if a son
then an heir.
This verse is related to the former verses by way of summary made explicit
through the opening conjunction, "so". Paul summarizes the new status of
sonship/daughtership, which also means being an heir, which in turn, is contrasted with
the former status of being a slave. The Christian's real position is that of freedom.

4:8
8 Formerly, when you did not know God,
you were in bondage to beings
that by nature are no gods;

This paragraph is related to the former paragraph by way of contrast. Paul

reminds the Galatians of their former way of life, which was bondage. His readers have
come to know God (4:9) with an implied freedom and new status, but have reverted back
to their former condition of bondage (4:9). Correspondingly, he agonizes over their
reversion to bondage; instead of living in freedom they slip back into bondage. As an
incentive to freedom, Paul is compelled to make his readers remember their former way
of life.
Explanation of the former condition of not knowing God is given in the clause,
"you were in bondage to beings that by nature are no gods." Paul reminds the Galatians
of their pagan background, contrasted with the Christian background of knowing God, so
as to highlight the utter illogicality of reverting back to a situation that was bondage to no
gods; such reversion is preposterous, a denial of what the people of God have become.
Contrast is apparent between "God" and "no gods".

4:9
9 but now that you have come to know God,
or rather
to be known by God,
how can you turn back again to the weak and beggarly elemental spirits,
whose slaves you want to
be once more?

Paul draws a temporal contrast between "formerly" and "now," made explicit by
the conjunction, "but":
"but now that you have come to know God"
 Paul also draws an ideological contrast between, "when you did not know God"
(4:8) and "now that you have come to know God."
Paul explains what it means to know God in the concessive clause, "or rather to
be known by God." That is to say, knowing God, means being known by God. The
Galatian's knowledge of God did not arise from within the readers, but is the result of
divine choice, divine election, an idea which is consistent with the OT portrayal (cf.
Amos 3:2; Jer. 1:5; Gen. 18:19).
The question in 4:9b is rhetorical in that Paul does not really expect an answer:
"how can you turn back again to the weak and beggarly elemental spirits, whose
slaves you want to be once more?"
His question is really a rebuke. By their legalistic bent, they utterly reject their true status
as sons/daughters and heirs, spelled out in 4:1-7.
There is a repetition of the idea of slavery to the "elemental spirits" in 4:3 and 4:9
"we were slaves to the elemental spirits of the universe" (4:3)
"turn back again to the weak and beggarly elemental spirits, whose slaves you
want to be once more?"
The adverb "once more" continues the idea of their "former" (4:8) condition of
bondage.

4:10
10 You observe days, and months, and seasons, and years!

The bondage is particularized with reference to the observance of days, and months, and
seasons, and years. Special days like the Sabbath and Yom Kippur are meant. The
months such as the New Moon, and seasons like Passover and Pentecost are intended.
The observance of years might be linked to the sabbatical year (Lev. 25:5). Paul states
that their irreligion has degenerated into external formalism and is no longer the free and
joyful relations and communion of a child with a father. Vibrant experience of a healthy
father-child relationship has been replaced by a dreary routine of rules and regulations.

4:11
11 I am afraid I have labored over you in vain.

There is a cause-effect relationship between their regression into bondage to

elemental spirits and observances of times and Paul's fear that his work at Galatia was for
nothing.

Application:

Between these three paragraphs, we find the second paragraph (4:1-7) related to
the first paragraph (3:23-29) by way of explanation in that Paul explains the implications
of what it means to be a bona-fide child and heir. The third contrast is a sharp contrast to
the second paragraph in that the Galatians are desirous of opting for bondage and slavery
as opposed to genuine freedom as children.
What are the implications of this apparent regression to bondage? Why is it true
that people at times choose bondage and slavery as opposed to genuine freedom and
vibrant experience? It is one thing to say, "I don't deserve being made an adopted child".
It is altogether a different matter to say, "I do not desire it. I prefer slavery to being a son
or daughter." Legalism is attractive to the alternative of genuine freedom, because
freedom at times can be more threatening than legalism. Legalism offers security in that
this approach to the Christian life tells you what to do. It is predictable. It demands a
corresponding discipline and gives people the feeling that they are working very hard to
please God, and thus He ought to be pleased with their efforts. Legalism also caters to
human pride in that it can give an air of distinctiveness as you keep regulations that
others ignore. It can also offer a sense of belonging to others in that you are living life by
the same dictates. Why is it that children who grow up in military schools and then spend
20 years in the military will often feel utterly incapacitated when they go into retirement?
Bobby Ferguson lived in the Iowa State Penitentiary. For about 40 years he had
lived there. In fact he was born there. His mother was a prisoner at the time of his birth.
Recently, Bobby Ferguson was released from prison, encouraged by the warden to make
a new life for himself on the outside. He could not do it. He begged the governor of
Iowa and the warden of the prison to allow him to return within the guarded walls that
had been his lifetime dwelling. His petition was granted and Bobby Ferguson worked as
a custodian in the penitentiary that he called home until the day that he died. What
governed Bobby Ferguson? Surely the cry for security. Freedom for most of us is
difficult to bear. We say on the one hand that we want it, but then find it hard to live
with. Part of our role as physicians of the inner person is to help people realize the true
position that is inherent in a faith-union with Christ. People that are anxious, who have
regressed from their faith-position in Christ, need to be set free from the legalism, that is
in fact, a desperate attempt to find security. It really is a no-win situation. Instead of a
simplistic exposure of legalism (whatever form that may take), people need to understand
the glorious privilege of being children of God, knit together with Jesus, baptized into
Christ, children of Abraham, heirs according to the divine promise, endowed with the
precious gift of the Spirit, who guarantees a "Father, dear Father" relationship with God.
"For you have not received a spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received
a Spirit of adoption as sons/daughters by which we cry out, 'Abba! Father'" (Rom. 8:15).
 General Overview of the Parables
Mark 4:2 He began to teach them many things in parables

More than one-third of Jesus' recorded teaching is delivered by means of parables.

Through the parables Jesus expresses truth and reality in the form of stories rather than by
theological statement or argument. While they faithfully transmit the vital message of Jesus,
parables represent a genre of literature that is sometimes difficult to understand; therefore, it is
not strange that diverse interpretations abound. At the same time, the parables have had a
striking influence on English idiom. Without thinking, we use the idioms "counting the cost,"
"building on sand," "using your talents," "burying your talent," and "passing by on the other
side."
Most children are well-acquainted with the game of kickball; thus its rules are a helpful
model for teaching them the new game of T-ball or baseball. In education we learn on the basis
of what is already known. Likewise, the parable is a form of teaching through stories in which
comparison is made between the known and the unknown. The parables are used to show how
knowledge can be applied in new and different situations. Common ground is a means of
discovering and applying new truth.
Parables are natural expressions of a mind, which sees truth in word-pictures, rather than
abstractions or linear logic. Jesus never aimed at a systematic or logical presentation of His
teaching--as in the logical manner of a professor in a classroom. A logical presentation divides a
subject into its parts, the different elements of an outline, and deals with them separately. Jesus'
method of parabolic instruction may indicate that analysis and logic are not the primary
motivations for important life decisions.
Jesus directs the parables to people who can see truth in concrete picture stories. Instead
of using abstractions such as "Don't be ostentatious when you give to the poor," Jesus says,
"Thus, when you give alms, sound no trumpet before you as the hypocrites do in the
synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by men. Truly, I say to you, they have
received their reward.
But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing.
(Matt. 6:2-3)
The latter picture is ludicrous, but its application to benevolent giving is powerful.
Jesus' thoughts are full of such illustrations, figures and striking expressions: "I send you
as sheep amidst wolves"; "Be as wise as serpents and harmless as doves";
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem...how often would I have gathered your children together, even as a hen
gathers her chickens under her wing." These figurative expressions invite twentieth century
readers, no less than they did the first century audience, to proceed beyond the metaphor to the
teaching's primary aim and application, thereby avoiding the pitfalls of literalism. Thus, when
Jesus says, "It is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye than for a rich man to enter the
of " (Mk. ), He issues a serious warning about the peril of riches which blocks entrance into the
KingdomGod.
Parables convey a deeper level of understanding to the serious as opposed to the casual
hearers or readers. Consider, for example, the crux interpretum in Mk. 4:11ff. Rabbinical
history shows that after a Rabbi shared his wisdom, he would be followed to his home by the
more avid hearers with whom--under questioning--he would then share deeper truths. This may
be the situation in Mk. , for when Jesus was alone, "Those who were about him [!] with the
twelve asked him concerning the parables." Accordingly, the famous "in order"(i{na)-clause
in v. 12 may indicate a result, rather than a purpose. No, He does not intend that His teaching is
not to be understood but such non-understanding is the inevitable result when a hearer is only
casually interested in what He says.
On a deeper level, there is usually some truth that listeners need to grasp, for they do not
see the problem before them. If the parable is merely an illustration, then Jesus contradicts His
own stated purpose of speaking in parables,"that seeing they may see and not perceive, and
hearing they may hear and not understand..." (Mk. 4:11f). Parabolic speech does not merely
illustrate truth that the simple-minded can understand; it speaks to an audience with specific and
pressing needs and aims to meet those needs

Definition of Terms

Old Testament Background. The Greek term, “parable” (parabolhv), also found in
the LXX, should point us to a likely OT background. The Hebrew term, mashal (lv*m*) refers
to several forms of speech: "proverb," “a taunt” (an object of popular contempt),1 “similitude,”
"parable," “prophetic figurative discourse,” “poem,” “the sayings of the wise man,” i.e., “riddle.”
Similarly, the verb lv^m*, means “to be like,” thus establishing a comparison. Generally, the
noun lv*m* refers to an indirect way of saying something as contrasted with plain speech.2
Similarly, in the inter-testamental period the term is used to refer to “hidden meanings” that "the
one who devotes himself to the study of the law of the Most High!" is able to perceive (Sirach
38:33).
Sirach 39:1 He seeks out the wisdom3 of all the ancients and is concerned with
prophecies;
2 he preserves the sayings of the famous and penetrates the subtleties of parables;
3 he seeks out the hidden meanings of proverbs and is at home with the obscurities of
parables.
We find here a parallelism between wisdom, prophecies, subtleties of parables, hidden meanings
of proverbs, and obscurities of parables. The idea of hidden meaning implies the conviction
held by many of the Jews that many of the sayings in the Bible have a deeper meaning and are
dark sayings intended to stimulate thought. When God utters a word, He means more than what
is stated on the surface. For example, when He inspires a prophet to make a prediction in
somewhat allegorical terms, there is more than meets the eye. The term, mashal can also mean
an apocalyptic prediction, such as by Balaam (Num. 23:7, 18, 24). Thus, the meaning can imply
a comparison to some secret meaning.4
The Hebrew mashal is always at least one full sentence and is expressed by Jesus in a
variety of ways:
Matt. 5:4 "You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hid.
1 As Manson notes, Jesus does not use the mashal in the sense of a "taunt-song" or "byword." The closest
approximation would be heard from mockers at the crucifixion, "He saved others; himself he cannot save.", T.W.
Manson, The Teaching of Jesus, (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1931), pp. 61-62.
2 Ezek. 18;2
3 Jesus' parabolic teaching differs from the wisdom teachers who dealt in very practical ways of living within

society, e.g., choosing a wife, treatment of friends. In the intertestamental period wisdom was linked with prophecy
and Torah.
4 Thus hd*yj! is rendered in the LXX by parabolhv as a riddle or perplexing saying (Ps. 48:4; 78:2; Ezek.

17:2.
 Form of a question
Mk. "Salt is good; but if the salt has lost its saltness how will you season it?"
An imperative
Lk. "And he said to them, 'Doubtless you will quote to me this proverb: ‘Physician, heal
yourself; what we have heard that you did at Caper'na-um, do here also in your own
country.'"
With a pointed application
Matt. "When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables they perceived that
he was speaking about them."
The antecedent of "his parables" refers to the trilogy of parables beginning with .
The term, “parable,” in the Gospels. The noun “parable” (parabolhv), found 52
times in the NT, is almost exclusively found in the Synoptic Gospels.5 The term “figurative
saying” or “likeness” (paroimiva) is found only in the Gospel of John. Note should also be
taken of the related Synoptic adjective “like” or “similar” (oJvmoio") and the related verb “I
shall liken” (oJmoiovw)--idioms that may also introduce a parable.6 The aorist tense of the
verb, similar to the Hebrew perfect tense, is used to establish some fictional event told in
narrative form.
The term “parable” (parabolhv) is cognate with the verb, “to cast alongside”
(parabavllw). The preposition “along/alongside” (parav) can be used in a purely
local sense to mean “on the side of."7 In this sense, the parable is told in human or natural terms
and is thereby cast alongside the truth or its application. The preposition “alongside”
(parav) also implies a note of authority, as in the verb “to hand over” (paradivdwmi),
used in connection with the oral tradition. Paul “hands over” the tradition he has received to the
CorinthianChurch in such a way that his will and authority prevail.8
This idea of “to place alongside” carries over in the Gospel parables. In Classical Greek
the term only denotes a reference while in the Gospel tradition it conveys a note of authority.
Jesus exercised authority and fixed the meaning of a truth or application by a parable.9
We find a rather broad way in which the term, "parable" is used and translated in the
Gospels. At least seven fairly distinct uses of the word "parable" are distinguishable in the
Gospels.
A parable:
Mark With many such parables he spoke the word to them as they
were able to hear it,
A parable which expresses everyday experience:
Mark "From the fig tree learn its parable: as soon as its branch
becomes tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near.
The natural experience of a fig-tree putting forth its leaves which evidences the nearness of
summer is used as a parable for another truth.
5Itdoes occur twice in Hebrews:
Hebrews 9:9 (which is symbolic [h{ti" parabolhV] for the present age). According to this
arrangement, gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper,
Hebrews 11:19 he considered that God was able to raise men even from the dead; hence, figuratively
speaking (kaiV ejn parabolh/') he did receive him back.
6 “The KingdomGod is like...(Matt. 11:16).
7 "Alongside the river" (Acts 16:13) or "alongside the sea" (Matt. 13:1).
8 Judas Iscariot, the betrayer, is “the one who hands over” (oJ paradivdou"). Judas delivers Jesus to the

authorities.
9 See Friedrich Hauck, "parabolhv,", TDNT, vol IV, pp. 758-760.
 Sayings of a wise man--mashal
Mark "And he called them to him and said to them in parables, 'How
can Satan cast out Satan?'"
Here the rhetorical questions is a vital part of the parable.
General truth expressed as figurative sayings10
Luke " He told them a parable also: 'No one tears a piece from a new
garment and puts it upon an old garment; if he does he will tear the new, and the
piece from the new will not match the old.'"
The term parable here is an extended metaphor and overpowers the listener/reader by the weight
of generalization, i.e., Who can possibly argue this natural principle?
Proverb
Luke 4:23 "And he said to them, 'Doubtless you will quote to me this proverb,
`Physician, heal yourself; what we have heard that you did at Caper'na-um, do
here also in your own country.'"
Here, the term parabolhv is used of a popular proverb.
Story-parable
Luke 10:29-37—The Parable of the Good Samaritan
Mixed forms
Mark 4:1-9, 13-20—The Parable of the Soils
Different verbs are used to introduce the parables: “said,” “told” or the verb “place before"
(parativqhmi).
While the noun "parable" come from Greek language and culture, this does not mean that
the parables are to be interpreted from the context of Greek literature.11 The Greek parable refers
to a literary unity, a metaphor, that is part of a sentence. Jesus' use of parables differs radically
from that of the Greek orators, for whom the parable was often a mere adornment of speech used
to highlight their persuasive power. The parables of Jesus, however, need to be positioned
within the language and thought of the OT. They were not an altogether innovative way of
speaking introduced by Jesus, but He did use parables with a different purpose and force,
investing the form with new meaning and pointed application.
Parable and metaphor. Many of the NT parables are, in reality, metaphors that have their
roots in the Old Testament, e.g., “You are the light of the world.” The parable is a secret that
bears upon the lives of the listeners and readers. On the whole, the parable is a story that
confronts its listeners with a message that is not obvious and that, through a comparison of two
dissimilar things, drives its point home. C.H. Dodd has provided a classic definition of the term
"parable."
At its simplest, the parable is a metaphor or simile drawn from nature or common life,
arresting the hearer by its vividness or strangeness, and leaving the mind in sufficient
doubt about its precise application to tease it into active thought.12
In a similar way Caird notes:
If a comparison is explicit, we call it a simile, and it is meant to be taken literally. If it is
implicit, we call it a metaphor, and it is non-literal . . . All the more complex forms of
comparison--fable, parable, allegory, and typology--are elaborations of these two basic
types.13
10 Not so much as a specific secret but a general truth that implies the spread of God’s Kingdom.
11 contra A. Jülicher who draws clear distinction between simile, metaphor, similitude, and allegory which he argues
is taken over from Greek rhetoric. Die Gleichnisreden Jesu, (Freiburg: Verlag von J.C.B. Mohr, 1899), I, p. 52.
12 C.H. Dodd, The Parables of the Kingdom, (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1961), p. 16.
 The parable is a creative fiction that contains a corresponding analogy to a life-situation.
It may contain a character or central figure whose story invites reflection and application by
providing a warning, an example, or an encounter with the wonder of the Jesus-event. "The
immediate object of the story is to be intelligible and interesting in itself; but its ultimate aim is
either to stimulate the conscience, or to awaken religious insight in the hearers, or both
together."14 Many of the parables can only be understood if the hearer/reader is driven to the
point of making a decision15--only to discover that one has waited too late. By the time the story
is over, the listeners have already passed judgment upon themselves. One of the great values of
parabolic speech is that it does not impose truth upon humans from the outside, but puts people
in a position where they discover and ponder the truth for themselves. The parables strike for a
verdict and demand an opinion on the story or its outcome, before the probing "bite" is
understood. Jesus tells a parable and "demands that the hearer react . . . in the power of the story
to attract and hold one's attention."16 In an allegory, metaphors substitute for known facts.
However, the known material form is communicated in an altered form. When reading the
parables and trying to position them in their own life-setting one can sense that the parable has a
new message that is not known. The unknown message is one that the audience needs to grapple
with, but cannot look at directly.
The parable's use of metaphorical speech implies the presence of some sort of problem
that must be faced. The question then becomes how to bring the hearers face to face with the
problem, directly or indirectly. If we can allow A to stand for the meaning (application), then B
stands for the metaphor. Jesus uses B when he means A. Why? Often the reason is that the
audience is blind to A or that if A were to be expressed directly, the response would surely be
negative. Funk writes:
The true metaphor, it was said, reveals a mystery...The poet directs attention to B in order
to allow A to come into view, for A is not there to be looked at directly.17
For example, in Lk. 7, Simon the Pharisee is blind to the divine forgiveness that has already been
extended to and gratefully received by the prostitute which is now motivating her lavish display
of emotion and gratitude. Far from rejoicing in the grace of God, He is embarrassed and critical.
He is also blind to the limitations of his own gratitude. Jesus directs his attention to the Parable
of the Two Debtors to explain the woman's gratitude--she "loves more" (, 47)--and to expose his
own lack of gratitude--he "loves little" ()--truths that Simon is unable to perceive directly.
The parable is an exercise in imagistic thinking and is a literary type basic to the Hebrew
mind which has a logic all its own. The intent of the parable is not primarily conceptual or
rational; rather it conveys a particular aspect of the KingdomGod that needs to be heard and
acted upon. The parable seeks to evoke an impression and create an experience as well as to
provoke a response. The parable's effectiveness lies "in the responsiveness of those to whom it is
addressed."18 If Jesus were to express such parabolic truth in the twentieth century no doubt he
would use images and stories from our culture, such as stoplights, policeman, sky-scrapers, bull-
dozers, truck-drivers, and labor unions. Perhaps we may look at the interpretive task as
understanding the widening circles around the parable. Parabolic teaching contextualizes truth
as it makes application to the life-situation of the hearer and reader.
14 Manson, p. 65.
15 The most popular example is found in Nathan’s Parable of the Poor Man and the Rich Man
16 Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral, (Downer's Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1991), p. 236.
17 Robert W. Funk, Language, Hermeneutic, and the Word of God, (New York: Harper & Row, 1966),

p. 145.
18 Manson, p. 66.
 One must view form and structure of a parable to ascertain the intention of Jesus relating
it. In proceeding to the interpretation of various parables the audience must see itself as the
hearer, aware of the differences of language and culture, but yet vitally cognizant that it stands in
great need of understanding, obedience and trust. The parables must make a similar appeal to
religious life and conscience. One needs to be sensitive to the ways in which the parables can be
applied to new situations.19 The attempt must be made to take the various texts on their own
terms and to make--with care--an application of each that is consistent with its original sense.

Stylistic Aspects of the Parables

The parables follow popular stylistic methods that are very similar to those used by their
Rabbinic contemporaries:
Introduction. The parable is usually introduced by a standard formula usually from the
Evangelist. The normal introduction, “The Kingdom of God is like . . .,” refers specifically to
the entire story, not simply the opening individual or thing within the story. The parables also
exhibit certain rules or principles of storytelling that are found in many cultures and folklore20:
 Repetition and parallelism (everything is the same in the Parable of The Two Builders
except for the foundation--Matt. 7:24-27).
 The rule of three in which the emphasis is placed on the third and last member (Priest,
Levite, Samaritan in the Parable of the Good Samaritan--Lk. 10:25-37).21
 Rule of contrast (Two Sons, Matt. 21:28-32; Two Houses, Matt. 7:24-27).
 Stress on the end (Laborers in Vineyard [reckoning scene], Matt. 20:1-16; Four
Soils[the good soil], Matt. 13:1-9 par., the sending and fate of the beloved son in the
Parable of the Wicked Tenants, Matt. 21:33-44). Often the conclusion of the parable
evokes a judgment, decision, reversal of action or thinking.
 Single theme or unified perspective (Wedding Feast, Matt. 22:1-14 [banquet goes on
while a major military attack is being launched]).22 Feelings and motives are only
important as they bear upon the story.
 Popular details omitted (Prodigal Son, Lk. 15:11-32; Description of the innkeeper in
the Parable of the Good Samaritan, Lk. 10:25-37, Friend at Midnight, Lk. 11:5-8;
Dishonest Manager, Lk. 16:1-8; Unforgiving Servant, Matt. 18:21-35).23
 Role or position reversal (Pharisee and Tax-Collector, Lk. 18:9-14).
 Importance of action instead of words is highlighted (Dishonest Manager Lk.
16:1-8).24 In the Parable of the Two Debtors (Lk. 7:36-50) the action of the creditor
19 The exclusive concentration on history has been reflected in both fundamentalist and liberal scholarship and has

led to distortion or recklessness with the biblical text.

20 Bultmann highlights many of the stylistic laws that seem to be part of the structure of many parables. See Rudolf

Bultmann, History of the Synoptic Tradition, pp. 188-192 for further examples of these rules.
21 With 3 obstacles to growth of the seed.
22 The speakers and writers did not have footnotes. Thus, it was not necessary to relate how the entire military war

was being waged while the food was still “hot on the table.” The characters of the parables are not intertwined
except as is necessary for the story.
23 We do not learn of the Prodigal Son’s mother, the wife of the friend who is awakened in the middle of the night,

how the steward had gotten himself into debt, nor how the servant could owe such an astronomical debt.
24 The stress seems to fall upon his action in view of the impending crisis. No attempt is made to exonerate his

actions; the focus of the story is not to be found in long dialogues--but rather, activity--reducing the respective
debts.
 alone is singled out without dialogue or explanation.
 Concluding word or question makes the point explicit (Two Debtors)25
 Effect of parable is seldom mentioned.26
While the simile or similitude presents a typical pattern overcoming the listeners by sheer
weight of generalization, the story-parable tells a freely invented story with a series of verbs in
the past tense. We are told of a particular event or fictional instance (although analogous), which
does not overpower the reader through what is universally acknowledged. The parable can help
the reader “assimilate the improbable without bursting the story.”27 The discipline of form-
criticism has helped us to see many of the conventional literary forms that are important aspects
of parabolic speech.

History of Parable Interpretation

From the time of Jesus till the twentieth century, the interpretation of the parables has
reflected an ongoing tension between a one-point approach and a full allegorical method.
Apostolic age till the end of the middle ages. The earliest interpreters (e.g., Origen)
interpreted the whole of Scripture as allegory and were indebted to the method used by Philo.
Underlying this method is the assumption that the revealed documents contained Christian
doctrine that was sometimes veiled. Origen was not interested in the historical method, but tried
to find specific meaning in each element of a parable. Thus a parable did not present a story but
interpreted elements in a cipher-like manner.28
The allegorical interpreters, from Philo onwards, based their understanding of parables on
a presupposed triad (body, mind, and soul). They argued that the truly spiritual interpreter is
able to press beyond the first two levels of Scripture to the third level--the spiritual meaning.
The tendency of a thoroughgoing allegorical approach is to destroy the basic unity and thrust of
the story-parable as to dissolve it into independent points.
The Reformation and post-Reformation era. During the time of the Reformation and
post-Reformation era, both Luther and Calvin repudiated the thoroughgoing allegorical method
of earlier interpreters; the outspoken Luther likened the former interpreters to "clerical jugglers
performing monkey tricks."29 He even went so far as to say that Origen's exegesis is worth "less
than dirt." As Scripture was translated into the language of the people, new attention was given
to the plain and obvious meaning of the text. Calvin stated: "We ought to have a deeper
reverence for Scripture than to reckon ourselves at liberty to disguise its natural meaning."30
In the nineteenth century, Trench’s book on parables was the standard work on the
parables of Jesus. Although he does not define the term “parable” (parabolhv), he likens
the parables to another parable: "Each one of the parables is like a casket, itself of exquisite
workmanship, but in which jewels richer than itself are laid up; or like fruit which, however
lovely to look upon, is yet more delectable in its inner sweetness."31 While he argues for the
25 e.g., "What will the lord of the vineyard do?" (Matt. 21:40), "Which of them will love him most?" (Lk. 7:42).
26 Rudolf Bultmann, History of the Synoptic Tradition, (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1963), pp. 178-205
for further examples and analysis.
27 Via, p. 12.
28 Thus, for example in Origen's treatment of the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant, the lord = the Son of God,

servants = stewards of the Gospel, reckoning = the final judgment, unforgiving servant = Antichrist or the devil.,
Origen, Commentary on Matthew XVIII.
29 Noted by Fredrick W. Farrar, History of Interpretation (London: MacMillan and Co., Ltd., 1886), p. 328.
30 John Calvin, Harmony on Matthew, Mark and Luke III, p. 63.
31 R.C. Trench, Notes on the Parables of Our Lord, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1948 reprint),
central point, he nonetheless finds many independent meanings within the parables, e.g., the ring
is the gift of the Spirit in the Parable of the Prodigal Son.32 We contend that the background of
the terms should be found in the OT thought and should be interpreted through that perspective.
Also in the nineteenth century, Jülicher wrote a significant book, Die Gleichnisreden Jesu
(1888), in which he stemmed the tide of allegorical interpretation. He argued in a compelling
way for two central principles: 1) Jesus' parables are similitudes (extended similes) not
allegories, and were designed to make but one point. He looked for the one "point of
comparison" (tertium comparationis) in each parable, not three or four; 2) Each point of each
parable can be reduced to a moral expression of the most general nature. For example, he
suggests that the point of the Parable of the Dishonest Steward is "Wise use of the present is the
condition of a happy future."33 His theory and method drew almost exclusively from rationalism
and Greek rhetoric, causing him to interpret the parables in the Gospels as moral applications.
Happily Jülicher freed the parables from the subjectivism of thoroughgoing allegories;
however, his basic frame of reference is questionable, because he limits the parables to stories
that convey general moral sayings. Another of his basic assumptions is that the parables are not
necessarily transmitted as Jesus told them. He argues on the basis of doublets, i.e., that stories
reveal two different settings or contexts (Matt. 24:28 = Lk. ). For example, the lost sheep in
Matthew 18:10-14 is an individual, a brother who has fallen into sin and needs to be sought out
and restored, while in Lk. 15:3-7 the lost sheep embraces a group--the tax-collectors and sinners.
It is possible that Jesus told some of the parables on different occasions. In the process of
oral transmission there was no doubt some transformation and updating of the parables to meet
the needs of the early Church. Certainly a thematic grouping seems to be evident in the Gospels,
e.g., the Kingdom parables grouped in Matt. 13 as a portion of one of Matthew’s five “books.”
The parallels between Matthew and Mark are not complete, but they do represent different stages
in the transmission of the Gospel material.
Jülicher struggled with the legitimacy of allegorical exegesis and confidently affirmed
that any interpretation, which finds more than one point, is wrong. This limitation means that the
stories can never say anything more than can be expressed in a one-point sentence. For example,
he argues that the Parable of the Four Soils can have no sub-points or allegorical referents, which
are found in the interpretation of the parable, e.g., the thorns and thistles = cares and anxieties of
this life which choke out the Word of God. Jülicher did not believe that Jesus ever spoke in any
sort of allegorical forms. Therefore, in Jülicher's view, any text that seems to contain some
allegorical allusions (explicit or implicit) is the creation of the Church--not Jesus.
In the twentieth century two scholars, Dodd and Jeremias (1935-1970), armed with
Jülicher's basic one-point approach, positioned the parables within the eschatological context of
the KingdomGod. Eschatology means the doctrine of the end (ejvvscaton), the
realization of God's eternal purpose in history. Both Dodd and Jeremias argued that the parables
of Jesus must be understood within the saving act of God in Jesus Christ. Although they
followed Jülicher's lead, by looking for the central point of comparison, they deviated from his
second premise of a general moral truth and positioned the parables within salvation-history in
which the living God acted upon the stage of human history for salvation. They argued that the
appointed time had happened; the end of the ages had come. Jesus' preaching was not about a
moral disposition in human hearts, but was the announcement of God's radical and decisive
activity for salvation, signaling the presence of the future KingdomGod in the person, work and
words of Jesus.
32 Thus, for instance he likens the oil in the Parable of the Ten Maidens as either faith or good works.
33 Adolf Jülicher, Die Gleichnisreden Jesu, II, p. 495.
 In the 1920's the discipline of form criticism came on the scene (Dibelius and Bultmann).
This discipline argued for the period of oral tradition in which the parables, pairs, or trilogies
circulated in the early Christian communities through their preachers and teachers. They argued
that during this period of transmission, many of the original contexts were forgotten or lost--at
which time the early church preachers re-applied (updated) them to their own needs. Thus, the
form critics sought to restore the parables to a genuine life-setting in the ministry of Jesus. Their
basic purpose was to find the proper setting for the individual parables. Jeremias, for example,
positioned the parables of grace ("God's mercy for sinners") as Jesus' defense of his table-
fellowship with tax-gatherers and sinners.34 The more radical form criticism appeals to certain
primal laws that become the means by which specific parables are judged as authentic or
inauthentic. The form critics also subjected the miracle stories in the Gospels to the same type of
analysis.
Form criticism must be taken seriously but the application of its principles seems to be
somewhat subjective. Jeremias, one of the most radical form critics, argued that the evangelists
significantly altered the Gospel tradition by embellishment and changes of audience (especially
Luke).35 He argued that the Church made the parables serve as exhortation for the early
Christian churches. When Dodd interprets the Parable of the Wedding Feast (Matt. 22) and the
Great Feast (Lk. 14), he allows little room for the specific application in the Jesus-setting.36 He
argues that the life-setting of most of the parables is the conflict of Jesus with His opponents and
he does not allow for direct use of the parables to the disciples. Moreover, for Jermias, most of
the parables deal with eschatology and position the KingdomGod within an eschatological
framework. Jeremias argues that parables that deal with the Parousia were originally directed to
the members of the early Church who were struggling with the delay of the Parousia and who
needed to hear the message: “Don’t be sluggish because the Parousia is delayed. Be alert, even
though...” He contends that allegorization took place during the period of oral transmission
within the primitive Church and extended through the Evangelists.
C.H. Dodd, along with Jeremias, stressed the centrality of eschatology in the presence of
the KingdomGod--not the moralisms of Jülicher. Dodd applied the central message of the
KingdomGod to all of the parables. God had a purpose that was foretold by the Old Testament
prophets and fulfilled in Jesus and His work. Dodd's eschatology was realized eschatology in
that the entirety of God’s saving activity is seen in Jesus. Thus, any passage that speaks of a
future fulfillment is non-genuine or spurious. Dodd maintains that everything relies on the
ministry and work of Jesus. He argues that parables, which deal with the harvest, relate to the
time of Jesus' earthly ministry. This, however, means that Jesus had only the present time in
view. Dodd leaves no room for the coming of Jesus in glory with a new heaven and earth when
faith will give way to sight. For example, there is no room in his eschatology for a day of
judgment as is portrayed in the following:
Lk. 12:46 the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him
and at an hour he does not know, and will punish him, and put him with the unfaithful.
Both Dodd and Jeremias measure the Gospel records by their own understanding of eschatology.
Consequently, if a parable does not fit with their view, then this is a sure sign that the parable or
its future fulfillment is not attributed to the words of Jesus. Often parables and parts of parables
are eliminated if they do not fit with their understanding of eschatology. However, it is rather
34 Also A.T. Cadoux, Parables of Jesus
35 This is one of the reasons that Jeremias looks to the versions of parables in the gnostic Gospel of Thomas.
36 However, Jeremias is a bit more "conservative" in his affirmation that there is continuity between Jesus and the

early church with respect to the Parousia parables. p. 51.

strange to allege that the early Church misunderstood the parables of Jesus as they were given,
especially in a culture which prized the careful transmission of oral tradition.
Dibelius (also a form critic) insisted that the Evangelists transformed the meaning of the
parables by adding introductions, conclusions, and twisting the original meaning of the parables.
Like the nineteenth century writers, Dibelius said that a parable is meant to convey a moral truth.
A scholar such as Rowlinson is convinced that in the process of transmission the
circumstances and original life-setting of the parables were lost, as was their original
significance. He finds it difficult to understand the parables at all. B.T.D. Smith believes that
the applications are appended to the parables and that they are sure signs of additions by the
early Church. He argues that the original parable was obscure and thus, when clarity is found
within a parable, it is a sign that the community revised the material. Thus, he argues in a
direction opposite from that of Dibelius.
We should take careful note of the radical way in which many scholars have dealt with
the Gospel records. Jülicher is relatively mild when compared with some of the later form critics
who maintain that a good deal of the Gospels is fabricated, i.e., they are stories ex eventu (after
the fact). There is no apparent method in this procedure of the form critics. If a text does not
seem to fit with a theory, then it is dealt with accordingly. The form critics treat the Gospels as
theological treatises that present the contrast: Unorthodox Judaism receives Jesus (Galilee)
while orthodox Judaism (Jerusalem, Pharisees, etc.) rejects Jesus. They structure the entirety of
the Gospel records to fit this framework. To be sure, the parables went through some process of
alteration in the early Church, but this hardly means that they are the product of the early
Church.
Rabbinic parables. More recently, scholarship has turned to the Rabbinic parables to see
what might be understood from the parallels in form between these and Jesus' parables. The
Rabbinic parables demonstrate a fluidity of thought--from a one-point parable to a mixed parable
to a full-blown allegory. A true allegory is a string of metaphors attaching meaning to each
detail of the story. Generally, the Rabbinic parables are metaphors that are used as illustrations,
as is reflected in the common introduction, “This is hard to understand, but the situation is
analogous to...”37 Usually the Rabbis do not tell stories, but when they do the material is based
on facts are already known. Scholars such as P. Fiebig and C.A. Bugge have surveyed the 2000
plus Rabbinic parables that show similarities with Jesus' parables. Their work has been further
developed by D. Flusser, a Jewish NT scholar. The following are examples of the various types
of Rabbinic parables:38

A one-point The text, "Stand still and see the salvation of the Lord." (Exod. 4:13)
parable: Unto what was Israel like at that moment? They were like a dove
fleeing from a hawk and about to enter a cleft in the rock where there is
a hissing serpent. If she enters, there is the serpent! If she stays out,
there is the hawk!
The point of comparison is the predicament of a dove who is unable to
escape peril on either hand. This is compared to the predicament of
Israel, hemmed in on all sides either by the Egyptians or by water.
A mixed- "He found him in a desert land! (Deut. 32:10). That is Abraham.
form: A parable. It is like a king who went out, he and his army, to the desert.
37See Paul Fiebig, Die Gleichnisreden Jesu, (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck]), pp. 25ff, 34ff.
38Taken from Harvey K. McArthur & Robert M. Johnston, They Also Taught in Parables, (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan Publishing Co., 1990), pp. 42, 76-77.
 His army forsook him in a place of hostility, in a place of enemy troops,
in a place of robbers. And a certain brave man went to him and said to
him: "My lord and king, Do not allow your heart to fail, and have no
anxiety. By your life, I swear that I will not desert you until you are
back in your palace and asleep in your bed."
Accordingly it says: "And He said unto him: I am the Lord who
brought you up from the Chaldees" (Gen. 15:7)
In the parable, the king represents Abraham and the brave man is God;
the reader is led to see the protecting and guarding role of the brave
man. However, there are other items that have no independent
significance, e.g., enemy troops, place of robbers, palace, etc.
An allegory The text, "And the Egyptians fled against it" (Exod. ).
Unto what is the matter like? It is like a dove that flees from a hawk and
enters the palace of the king. The king opens the eastern window for her
and she goes out and flies away. When the hawk pursuing her enters the
palace, the king shuts all the windows and begins shooting arrows at
him. Even so, when the last of the Israelites came out from the sea, the
last of the pursuing Egyptians entered into the bed of the sea. The
ministering angels then began hurling at them arrows, great hailstones,
fire and brimstone, as it is said: "And I will plead against him with
pestilence and with blood...and great hailstones, fire and brimstone"
(Ezek. 38:22).
If we interpret the king as God, then each element of the parable
corresponds with its reality: dove=, hawk=Egypt, palace=sea,
arrows=arrows, great hailstones fire, brimstone; saving of the dove by
opening of the eastern window=Exodus

While the OT and Rabbinic traditions offer numerous parallels that are earlier
than,39 or contemporary with, the ministry of Jesus, the use of parables in the Gospels is unique
in its sheer volume. Although Jesus uses OT background material, His parables are far more
than explanations of OT texts or of Rabbinic exegesis. Jesus shifts the content from Torah
(Rabbinic exegesis) to the KingdomGod within its eschatological framework. His stories are
used in given historical contexts to instruct people who have specific issues and needs--He aims
for a verdict, conversion, change of life, and trust.
For the Rabbis, on the other hand, parables are used to prove a statement or illustrate a
text; they are not primarily intended to provoke interaction between the speaker and listener.
Jesus uses parables to bring His hearers to a new realization, to confront them with decisions that
have not yet been made, to bring about a change in the misery of others, to stir inertia, or to
expose the blindness of the audience. Often the parables become the weapons of conflict,
prompted by a problem or a question that is not found in the Rabbinic parables. The parables of
Jesus also are used to invite people to share in the life of the Kingdom. They embody, for
example, the father's plea to his older son to come in "out of the cold" and share in the joy of a
lost brother--now found. The goal of the parable is not realized in experience unless the
conscience has been stimulated and changes are made in thought, attitude and behavior.
39 Nathan's parable to David (II Sam. 12:1-10); prophet's acted parable (I Kings 20:35-40); the Song of the Vineyard
(Isaiah 5:1-7); Eagles and the Vine (Ezek. 17:2-10); Lioness and Her Cubs (Ezek. 17:2-10); the Vine (Ezek. 19:10-
14); story from the woman of Tekoa about her two sons (II Sam. 14:5-20).
 Existential, cultural, aesthetic, and structural studies. In recent years there have been
some new contributions in the area of parable studies (A.N. Wilder, D. O. Via, G. V. Jones). The
existentialist interpreters look at the aesthetic role of the parable, which present a new
understanding of human existence and summon a human response. Kenneth Bailey's work is
especially helpful in terms of the cultural setting and cultural implications of various parables.
In the last two decades, a new approach called structuralism has developed as a discipline
or method. Most notably, J. D. Crossan looks at various parables in terms of movement and
category (e.g., servant-parables), reversal, opposition, resolution, etc. Some of the categories
that are used may be helpful in looking at the broad structure of individual parables. On the
whole, the various studies have not produced substantial exegesis of the text that takes the text
and its context seriously. Frequently, this approach does not take the given literary and historical
context seriously and is hampered by a subjectivism that lacks a clear method.

Recent "Re-thinking"

Traditional stock metaphors. There has been a growing awareness that rigid distinctions
between parable and allegory are artificial and impose upon the NT parables a grid that is
arbitrary since the “dividing line is hard to draw.”40 This is especially true for the parables in
which some of the traditional or stock metaphors are used--metaphors that suggest natural
meaning or common referents, e.g., King = God; Father = God; supper = Messianic Feast. There
are a number of images used in the OT that naturally carry allegorical significance, e.g., God as
the Shepherd of Israel, Israel as the vine with God as owner of vineyard. Jesus’ and the
Evangelists’ audience, steeped in the OT, would naturally recognize these Old Testament
metaphors where they occur in the stories of Jesus. This does not mean that the parables are
thoroughgoing allegories but that they contain allegorical elements that remove them from the
category of one-point parables (Jülicher). This is expressed as a multi-plex approach, by Craig
Blomberg, who has argued against a clear distinction between parable and allegory.41
Interpreters should be aware of the OT background that may lie behind the NT
parables—allusions, which would have been natural and unforced to the original hearers and
readers.
The parables with a history. Many of the metaphors found in Jesus’ teaching
demonstrate the unity of the Bible in terms of historical connection. For example, Isaiah’s Song
of the Vineyard (Isa. 5:1-7) is taken up in Matt. 21:33-46 (par.) and the two parables share
common vocabulary, themes, typology, promise-fulfillment and unity of perspective. The same
God, who acted in creation, the Exodus, the conquest, and the exile, has acted in history in the
person of Jesus Christ and moves history forward the eschaton. Just as Isaiah warns Judah that
her fate is well deserved (Isa. 5:1-7), so he also prophesies of the eschatological vineyard of
promise (Isa. 27:2-6--apocalyptic). The same themes of judgment and promise are taken up in
Jesus' Parable of the Wicked Tenants and are illustrated by the destruction of the wicked tenants
and the emergence of a new people who will render fruit (Matt. 21:43). This unity between
parables separated in their telling by 500 years, demonstrates that God has a unified purpose for
40 Via, p. 14.; Brown writes, “Certain parables cry out for an allegorical interpretation of their details.” Raymond
Brown, “Parables and Allegory Reconsidered”, New Testament Essays, (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1965), p.
256; Matthew Black, “The Parables as Allegory”, Bulletin of the John Rylands Literature, (1959-60), p. 248. J.J.
Vincent, “The Parables of Jesus as Self-Revelation,” Studia Evangelica, (1959), pp. 85-88; J. Arthur Baird, “A
Pragmatic Approach to Parable Exegesis: Some New Evidence on Mark 4:1-11, 33-34”, Journal of Biblical
Literature, 76, (1957), p. 207.
41 Craig Blomberg, Interpreting the Parables, (Downers Grove: The InterVarsity Press, 1990), pp. 29-70.
His people that embraces the whole of Scripture. As Hasel points out, “On this pilgrimage there
are many stops and many initial fulfillments, but each one of them becomes a point of departure
again until all promises will finally be fulfilled at the end of time.”42
Reinterpretation. The progressive work of reinterpretation of metaphors and symbols in
Jesus’ stories is being re-evaluated. This is consistent with the writers of Scripture who use
Scriptural metaphors from earlier generations and reinterpret them in light of current events and
future hope. It is also consistent with von Rad’s central point that salvation history encompassed
a process of reinterpreting old images and early traditions.
This continuous reinterpretation to which the old stories about Jahweh were submitted,
did not do violence to them. Rather, they were predisposed to it from the very start.
Their intrinsic openness to a future actually needed such fresh interpretations on the part
of later ages; and for the latter it was essential to their life to take up the tradition in this
way and give it a new meaning.43
This process is what Bultmann calls “radical openness for the future.”44 Stock metaphors like
the fig-tree as a metaphor for Israel are used to portray a new word of God to a new situation;
then they are reinterpreted so as to embrace the old and the new. This means that the old
metaphor, new word, and new event are incorporated into the mainstream of salvation history.
Cullmann writes,
Salvation history does not arise by a simple adding up of events recognized in faith as
saving events. Instead, each time corrections of the interpretation of past saving events
are undertaken in the light of new events. This of course never happens in such a way
that an earlier account is disputed. Rather, aspects formerly unnoticed are by virtue of
the new revelation now placed in the foreground creating a correspondingly wider
horizon.45
Typology. The words "typology" or "typological/typical" do not refer to the naive
approach of the seventeenth century in which a hidden allegorical meaning was regarded as the
key to unlocking the secrets Scripture, e.g., details of the furniture of the wilderness tabernacle
were given double meanings as types of Christ and salvation. Rather, a proper working
definition of typology reveals the organic unity of Scripture. Dunn notes:
Typology sees a correspondence between people and events of the past and of the future
or present. . .For its part, typology does not ignore the historical meaning of a text, but
rather takes that as its starting point. Typological exegesis then is based on the
conviction that certain events in the past history of Israel, as recorded in earlier scriptures,
thereby revealed God’s ways and purposes with men and did so in a typical manner.46
The typological approach does not ignore history, but rather affirms it. With the eye of
faith it looks beyond the history of circumstances to discern the purpose and activity of God
within the larger salvation history. As Wright notes, “To convict a New Testament writer of
error or questionable exegesis in individual passages does not in the least necessitate the
assumption that his interpretive attitude and point of view were wrong. Indeed, typology . . . is
more of an attitude that a precise methodology.”47 This attitude is one by which the exegete
42 Gerhard Hasel, New Testament Theology: Basic Issues in the Current Debate (Grand Rapids: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978), p. 196.
43 Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology, vol. II, translated by D.M.G. Stalker, (New York: Harper & Row

Publishers, 1965), p. 361.

44 Rudolph Bultmann, Primitive Christianity, (New York: Meridian Books, 1956), pp. 180ff.
45 Oscar Cullmann, Salvation in History, translated by Sidney G. Sowers, (London: SCM Press Ltd., 1965), p. 88.
46 James D.G. Dunn, Unity and Diversity in the New Testament, (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1977), p. 86.
47 G. Ernest Wright, God Who Acts: Biblical Theology as Recital, (London: SCM Press, Ltd., 1969), p. 64.
looks at the events and words from two perspectives: 1) the literal historical meaning and 2) the
typological meaning as foreshadowing future events. The task is that of uniting historical
exegesis with the broad view of salvation history that allows for “the prophetic power resident in
the Old Testament prototypes”.48
Receptivity. The parable reveals something new that is unknown except by a right
interpretation. At times, the disciples need an explanation, and thus, they turn to Jesus for the
proper understanding. As at one time He opened the OT Scriptures to the Emmaus disciples (Lk.
24:32), today, by the Holy Spirit, He is ready to teach modern disciples the meaning of the
parables that He once told. We must let it speak to us directly if we are to understand it at all.
We must allow ourselves to be moved so as to know what the speaker of the parable is getting
at.49 This does not mean a complete subjectivism, but it means that we must also approach the
Scripture with a similar receptivity. In brief, faithful understanding of the parables depends on
the air of expectancy with which we approach them. To be sure, various methods must be used
to discover the meaning of the text, but we are most likely to understand the original intent of a
parable if we approach it with humility and spiritual receptivity--as the disciples often did.

The Grouping of Parables in the Composition of the Gospels

Different groupings and ordering of the parabolic material in the Gospels appear to be
arranged by theme.
Markan grouping. In Mark 2, the ministry of Jesus is viewed as a wedding celebration.
Jesus is the reason for the celebration (2:19ff.). In Mark 3, the ministry of Jesus is no
celebration, but a conflict with Satan (-25). Jesus must first bind the strong man (Satan). In
Mark 4, the writer continues his account with three parables (4:1-32) including a concluding note
on Jesus' parabolic method. Jesus has gathered twelve disciples around Him. (-19). He has
encountered misunderstanding; His own family believes He has lost His mind (-21). Soon after
the Parable of the Strong and Stronger One (-27), the three parables of chapter 4 follow in
succession. Mark presents the parables of the Kingdom. Jesus speaks in enigmatic language; He
is aware of misunderstanding, yet He is also buoyant and confident that His ministry will not be
futile. The three parables show the reality of the different responses to Jesus and His message.
The Parable of the Seed Growing Secretly is unique to Mark (-29).
In ch. 11, we read of the first events of Passion Week with the triumphal entry, cursing of
the temple, cursing of the fig-tree (parabolic action). Chapter 12 offers the Parable of the
Wicked Tenants (12:1-12), followed by two parables in Mark 13 (the Parable of the Budding
Fig-Tree in -29 and the Servant Entrusted with Supervision in -37).
Matthean grouping. Matthew highlights the King, who has both fulfilled and embodied
the Davidic hope by manifesting His dignity and power. Matthew uses the parables to portray a
broad sweep of "salvation-history" (the parables in Matthew 13 and at least two trilogies of
parables in Matt. 21-22 and Matt. 25). The bulk of Matthew's parables occur in chs. 12-13, 18,
20-25; twelve are unique to his Gospel. He organizes the parables to allow the reader to see the
past, present and future of the KingdomGod. The past and present are used with a very pointed
thrust. In the past, God's people rejected the prophets; now they reject both John the Baptist and
Jesus. They did not casually neglect God's messengers but they did violence to them. Thus, the
48 von Rad, vol. II, p. 373. See Raymond E. Brown, “Hermeneutics”, The Jerome Biblical Commentary, ed. by
Raymond Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmeyer, Roland E. Murphy, (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968), pp. 605-
623. Also James Barr, “Typology and Allegory”, Old and New, pp. 103-148.
49 Eduard Schweizer, Jesus, (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1972), p. 26.
judgment that fell upon them was well deserved. These parables express the warning, "Be aware
that the same divine judgment can happen to you who are the new people of God." Several
parables and groups of parables seem to be grouped together in response to some ecclesiastical
and catechetical issues, e.g., church discipline and discouragement about the delay of the
Parousia
Lukan grouping. The parables in Luke function in a different manner since the
eschatological framework is not as prominent. Luke is more interested in the response of people
to the deeds of Jesus, a response, which is crucial in the Fourth Gospel. While Mark and
Matthew stress the newness and immediacy of the events, Luke longs for greater understanding
of the meaning of Jesus. Fifteen parables, unique to his Gospel, are largely found in the "Travel-
Narrative" (chs. 10-19).
Matthew and Mark press their readers to discover what these things mean. The Gospel
writers, along with Paul, do not write to satisfy curiosity or to impart esoteric knowledge to the
"initiated", but to call forth faith.50 The reaction of individuals to the Jesus-event is crucial--in
fact it is a matter of life and death. Luke's parables often highlight trust as the response to God's
grace.

Purpose of Parables

Mark provides his readers with a setting that includes the geographical, historical and
biographical terms, which introduce the parables, explanations of some of the parables and the
purpose for His parabolic teaching.
Mk. 4:1 Again he began to teach beside the sea. And a very large crowd gathered about
him so that he got into a boat and sat in it on the sea; and the whole crowd was beside the sea on
the land.
The graphic detail of this text gives us the character of the historical event, i.e., that Jesus
taught from a boat so that He would not be crushed by the crowd (Mk. 3:9; Lk. 5:1), but it may
also reflect Jesus' intent of putting some distance between Himself and others. There is more in
His parables than the crowds can apprehend. Likewise, there is a certain descriptive simplicity
in the Gospels wherein both a simplicity and depth is seen. Our experience may be similar to
looking at the bottom of a deep but very clear lake. The transparency of the water is deceptive in
that it makes the lake appear to be shallow. So it is with the parables. Jesus deals with
mysterious divine secrets. Jesus the Teacher wills to impart things to people, but is painfully
aware of the results in people who do not understand or cannot fathom the depth of His message.
Mk. When he was alone, those who were around him along with the twelve asked him
about the parables. 11 And he said to them, "To you has been given the secret of the
kingdom of God, but for those outside, everything comes in parables; 12 with the result
that they may indeed look, but not perceive, and may indeed listen, but not understand; so
that they may not turn again and be forgiven.' "
The parables both reveal and conceal the KingdomGod; they also reveal and conceal the divine
purposes for speaking in parables. Jesus uses language that conceals the truth with the result that
certain people might not be able to understand, repent, and be forgiven.51
According to Mark, Jesus is primarily the Eschatological Son of Man. In Him, God
50 The Gospel of Thomas, by way of contrast, is a kind of theosophy, to be found by the one with the true knowledge
(gnw'si").
51 contra Via's rendering of the "in order (i{na)" clause. Dan Otto Via, The Parables, (Philadelphia: Fortress
Press, 1967), p. 8.
accomplished all He had in mind for His chosen people. Mark's emphasis on teaching
(didavskein) is missing in Schweizer's work.52 This is an element Schweizer overlooked
when he emphasized Jesus as the eschatological preacher of the soon-coming-kingdom. To be
sure, Jesus is the preacher who preaches an imminent eschatology. However, this does not
necessarily exclude the teaching aspect of Jesus' ministry. Jesus comes as the Messiah; one of
His tasks is to instruct and confront the people of God with what God is doing in this last hour.
Often the parables are weapons of conflict spoken in the heat of the moment as Jesus deals with a
particular problem or issue that has surfaced in His dealings with others, especially His critics.
The parables reveal that God's people must know what He is doing because Jesus desires
His people to participate in His kingdom and share in His work.
Mk. 4:2 And he taught them many things in parables, and in his teaching he said to
them: 3 "Hear! A sower went out to sow.
The text indicates the close relationship between parables, teaching, and hearing (listening). The
verb "to hear/listen" (ajkouvw), found thirteen times in Mk. 4, is the NT equivalent of the
Hebrew verb "to hear" (um^v*) which means far more than the physical activity of hearing with
one's ears. The verb implies a perception, response, and relationship between what the speaker
says and how the person or audience responds to the message. The verb implies weighty
matters or things of great importance.53 The living Word of God forces people to make decisions
which either convert or harden. The same work of God brings both salvation and destruction:
Isa. 28:13 Therefore the word of the LORD will be to them precept upon precept, line
upon line, here a little, there a little; that they may go, and fall backward, and be broken, and
snared, and taken.
Jer. Is not my word like fire, says the LORD, and like a hammer which breaks the
rock in pieces?
In Mk. 4:12, Jesus quotes from Isaiah 9:6:
with the result that they may indeed see  but not perceive,
and
may indeed hear  but  not understand;
lest they  should turn again,
and
 be forgiven."
In its own context, the passage in Isa. depicts the later results of Isaiah's ministry read
back into the "prophetic-call" itself. The text in Isaiah's time, as well as in the mission of Jesus,
affirms that God has His own ways in carrying out His purpose. People have the organs of
perception, yet they are yet unaware of what they perceive or hear. The issue is how people
52 Albert Schweitzer, The Mystery of the KingdomGod, (1913), pp. 94-115.
53 Deuteronomy 6:3-4
rv#a& twc)u&l^ T*r=m^v*w+ la@r*c=y! T*u=m^v*w+ 3
rB#D! rv#a&K^ da)m= /WBr=T! rv#a&w~ i*l= bf^yy!
bl*j* tb^z* Jr#a# i=l* i*yt#b)a& yh@l)a$ hw`hy+
p .vb*d+W
.dj*a# hw`hy+ Wnyh@l)a$ hw`hy+ la@r*c=y! um^v = 4
Deut. 6:3 Hear therefore, O Israel, and be careful to do them; that it may go well with you, and that you
may multiply greatly, as the LORD, the God of your fathers, has promised you, in a land flowing with milk and
honey.
4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD;
respond to the given word.
The clause, "lest [unless] they should turn again and be forgiven," is difficult and has
been variously explained.54 We should bear in mind that the conjunction of result "so that"
(i{na) is followed by two doublets. The first doublet includes the participle, "while seeing,"
which gives the positive statement that reveals only appearance for it is negated by the reality,
"they might not see." The second doublet offers the positive appearance, "while hearing," which
is negated by the reality, "they might not understand." The statements of rejection and judgment
prepare for the final purpose clause, "in order that they might not return," which is also negative
in thrust.

Result Positive (appearance) Negative (reality)

with the result while seeing they might not see (mhV
that (i{na) (blevponte") i[dwsin)
(with the result while hearing they might not understand
that—i{na) (ajkouvonte") (mhV suniw'sin)

All of the people (crowd, large group, the twelve) possess the ability to hear, which Jesus
presupposes by His opening word "Hear" (ajkouvete). But in Isaiah, the Israel that the
prophet addressed did not care, and thus the prophetic voice resulted in the further hardening of
the peoples' hearts, which is similar to the response of many people in Jesus' day. In like
manner, Jesus is aware of His critics and of the elements in the crowd that did not respond to
Him in a positive fashion.
Because of their rejection of Jesus, God rejects such people and takes away whatever
they had (Mk. ). The text of Mk. 4:10-12 affirms that Jesus chose the parabolic medium so as to
"symbolize God's judgment upon his opponents."55 We prefer to hear of the God of grace rather
than the God of judgment. However, the hardness of heart in Isaiah's time (Isaiah 6) means that
the will of God can only be carried out by a remnant who will do the work of God (Isa. 1:9).
Jesus does not appear to want the majority to return because He knows that their "turning" will
not be genuine. Snodgrass notes: "The strong words in Isaiah 6:9-10 were not an indication that
God did not want to forgive people. They were a blunt statement expressing the inevitable.
People would hear, but not really understand."56 In a general way, the crowds understood that
Jesus was speaking about the central reality of the KingdomGod, but they did not perceive that
Jesus was Himself the fulfillment of the Kingdom. Thus, the parable communicates truth to His
disciples, while hiding the truth from unresponsive and hostile opponents. Osborne's
identification of the parable as an encounter mechanism is helpful57 in that the parable allows for
a wide variety of purposes: to challenge, to force a decision, interpret, invite, grasp and hold
attention, evoke both positive response and self-judgment. For those who are hardened the
parables evoke further judgment and hardening. For those who are open, the parables lead to
faith and committed discipleship.
54 See Everett Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, (Grand Rapids: William Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1968), p. 103. Joachim
Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus , pp. 13-18 argues that the clause is a shortened form of "in order that it might be
fulfilled." Instead of the suggested result clause, "...for those outside, everything comes in parables with the result
that..."(i{na), is a mistranslation of a relative clause, "...all things come in parables to those outside who..." (oi{)
p. 78.
55 Osborne, p. 238.
56 Klyne Snodgrass, "Parable" Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1992), p.

597.
57 Osborne, p. 239.
 What occurred under the old covenant was a faint foreshadowing of the KingdomJesus
for He senses that a remnant (Isa. 1:9)--not an entire nation--will constitute His Kingdom. In
Mark 4:12, the phrase "with the result that" (iJvna),58 expresses the result of His parabolic
teaching. The very use of parables by Jesus accords well with the nature of His ministry for His
parables are not intended for all people. It is true that God's redemptive purpose is for all--yet
God lays down His rules, which are vital to His redemptive plan. Even though His message
would encounter misunderstanding and hardness of heart, Jesus teaches in parables to elicit trust
and obedience. It is noteworthy that in Jn. , the same text of Isaiah 6 is used of a hardening
process; resulting not from parables but from "signs" (shmei'a).
Some scholars maintain that there is a difference between the plain sayings of Jesus and
the parables in that the parables are enigmatic. One may ask, however, if even the sayings of
Jesus are always "plain." Some of His sayings are difficult to grasp; their meaning is not
immediately obvious. The sayings of Jesus, no less than His parables, call for careful thought.
Take, for example, the saying, "Blessed are those that mourn." There is a contrast that requires
some thought. There often appears to be as much implied in the sayings of Jesus as in the
parables. Of course there are interpretive problems with the parables, but it is clear that these
picture stories convey a secret meaning that is both concealed and revealed.

The Audience of the Parables

The Gospel narrative presents us with three separate groups who heard the parables: 1)
the crowd, 2) the group larger than the disciples, 3) the twelve disciples, as may be seen in the
following texts:
Mk. 4:1 Again he began to teach beside the sea. And a very large crowd gathered about
him so that he got into a boat and sat in it on the sea; and the whole crowd was beside the
sea on the land.
10 And when he was alone those who were about him with the twelve asked him
concerning the parables.
The crowd. The crowd, which is outside, realizes that Jesus speaks to them in the form of
a mashal, but they do not understand the message. A vital relationship with Jesus is needed to
understand His parables. He intends that His message be understood by His audience, whether
large or small. Therefore, He questions the crowd about the parables and urges them to open
their ears.59 Although the crowd may or may not be able to fathom the content of the parable,
Jesus believes that the crowd is able to perceive something unique in the parables.
Mk. 4:3 With many such parables he spoke the word to them, as they were able to
hear it; 60

The masses realize there is something new and strange about Jesus' parables although the
message of the particular parables is not always clear and obvious. It forces the hearers to think
and to be ready to change their attitude and behavior. Via says, “It is true that Jesus’ parables
58In Matthew, the conjunction is "so that" or "with the result that" (wJvste) and introduces a clause of result.
59Mark 4:9, 30; 7:14; 12:9; Matt. 18:12; 21:28; Lk. 6:47; 18:
60Mark 4:21 And he said to them, "Is a lamp brought in to be put under a bushel, or under a bed, and not on a stand?

There are two questions in v. 21, one prefaced by a mhv, "not" (which expects a negative answer, ["of course
not"]) and one prefaced by, oujc, "not", (which expects a positive answer ["surely"]). And the verb is "comes"
(e[rcetai) not "is brought into" (eijsfevretai). "A lamp does not come (into a room) does it? Does it
not come in order to be placed on a lampstand?"
draw upon the familiar world, but the familiar is used in a new way. Thus old ways of thinking
are challenged, and resistance to change may impede understanding. So in this way a parable
may be hard to understand more because of the existential situation of the hearer.”61
We find that the crowd in the Gospels is confused and divided (scivsma Jn. ), not
only about Jesus' identity, but also about His parabolic teaching. We see a full array of opinions
and reports about Jesus and His parables, resulting in a wide spectrum of opinions about Him
(Jn. -13, 25-27). Those who are "outside" have not experienced the power of God in Jesus'
words and works. They see a strange prophet or a wandering Rabbi who has gathered a few
"hard hat" workers, a tax-collector, and some fishermen from the GalileanSea. The outsiders
failed to see the new age of the Spirit emerging before their very eyes.
In the parables, Jesus shows Himself as the same enigmatic character that His miracles
reveal. He healed and He cast out demons, but never for the purpose of drawing misguided
attention to Himself. He revealed God's redeeming love in His deeds, but no less in His words.
His entire work is mysterious, yet openly manifest. As the Servant of God's royal power, He is
the means of ushering in the KingdomGod.
The group larger than the twelve. The group larger than the twelve appears to be a
company of people who follow Jesus with regularity, but were not among the twelve. In Mark 3
this group was composed of "those whom he desired," from which Jesus made His selection of
the twelve. From the evangelists, evidence suggests that some of these were women (Lk. 8:1-2;
Acts 1). Given the nature of these disparate groups, the aim of a parable may differ from one
group to another. Much will be dependent upon the readiness of individuals in one group or
another to hear the lesson that a parable imparts.
Mk. And he went up on the mountain and called to him those whom he desired; and
they came to him.
14 And he appointed twelve to be with him, and to be sent out to preach
This group is similar to the remnant in Isaiah's time (Isa. 1:9). God will reach His goal through a
remnant; a goal that has all in view. As Manson notes: the use of "those around him" with the
twelve designates the general sense of "followers," "partisans," or the "retinue" of someone.62
As a whole, this group with the twelve is presented in contrast to the crowd. What places a
person or group in one class or another is an understanding of "the mystery" and the response to
the parables. "Those in whom religious insight and faith are awakened by the hearing of
parables press into the inner circle for more."63
The twelve. The twelve alone are given the interpretive key to the parables,
notwithstanding their frequent perplexity at their meaning (Mk. ; ). As these disciples are given
the parables, they become much like children who receive a new toy but do not know what to do
with it, how to wind it up, how to assemble it, or what the toy is supposed to do.
Understandably, the new and mysterious nature of the KingdomGod means the disciples will
often be perplexed. But Jesus assures them that they have a special position. By following
Jesus, God's power will be manifest to them and they will come to discern the meaning of His
parables. Jesus says to them, "You are in a privileged position, more than all people."
Matthew 13 portrays a clear contrast between the insiders and the outsiders; expressed
with a number of nouns and pronouns:

The Outsiders The Insiders

61 Via, p. 10.
62 Manson argues from the use in II Macc. p. 75.
63 Manson, p. 76.
 2 Such large crowds gathered around him 10he disciples came to him and asked,
that he got into a boat and sat in it, while "Why do you speak to the people in
all the people stood on the shore. parables?"
9 He who has ears, let him hear.
"Why do you speak to the people in
parables?"
but not to them. 11 He replied, "The knowledge of the
secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been
given to you,
Whoever does not have, even what he has 12 Whoever has will be given more, and he
will be taken from him. will have an abundance
13 This is why I speak to them in parables: 16 But blessed are your eyes because they
"Though seeing, they do not see; though see, and your ears because they hear.
hearing, they do not hear or understand.
14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of
Isaiah: "`You will be ever hearing but never
understanding; you will be ever seeing but
never perceiving.
15 For this people's heart has become
callused; they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise
they might see with their eyes, hear with
their ears, understand with their hearts and
turn, and I would heal them.'
34 All this Jesus said to the crowds in 36 Then he left the crowds and went into
parables; indeed he said nothing to them the house. And his disciples came to him
without a parable. saying, "Explain to us..."
35 This was to fulfill what was spoken by
the prophet: "I will open my mouth in
parables, I will utter what has been hidden
since the foundation of the world."

There is a clear distinction here between the hearers--a fundamental separation between
the insiders and outsiders. The question is: "Who is outside and who is inside?" "Great
surprises may be in store when God will throw open his books. He himself says that the first will
be last, and the last will be the first. These words about those outside and those inside are
certainly not spoken in order to make us feel secure between our churchly fences, as if we were
those inside and the others--the pagans, the godless, the unbelievers--were those outside."64 The
peril of the disciple is a "deadly self-satisfaction"65 that hinders the effect that a parable might
otherwise have. In essence, hardness of heart defeats the intended purpose of parables.
The crucial issue is understanding the mystery (musthvrion). There are two ways
of being related to the mystery--to be on the inside or outside. The insiders understand the
mystery of the KingdomGod. On the other hand, despite being insiders, the disciples may fail to
understand the mystery of the KingdomGod:
Mk. And he said to them, "Do you not understand this parable? How then will you
64 Emil Brunner, Sowing and Reaping, (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1965), p. 10.
65 Manson, p. 78.
understand all the parables?

Theology of the Parables

The KingdomGod = God is at Work in Jesus in a Special Way. Jesus' message is that
God's Kingdom is "on its way" with the radical change that it brings. No longer is the "good
news" directed only to the Jewish people; it embraces all human longing. The word "Kingdom"
(basileiva) does not simply imply a corporate identity, but intimates a process in which
God rules in the present time, anticipating the Day in which all powers will be subject to Him.
Jesus desires to make God real to the people. As Jesus and His disciples preach, it is clear that
this is only the beginning of a process that culminates in the eschatological rule of Christ. God
takes the initiative, and the response of trust (pivsti") means the listener truly hears the word
of the Kingdom. Jesus proclaims that God is at work establishing His reign on the earth, but He
does not say how this will be done. What He does do is call people to complete obedience. The
clearest claim of the presence of the Kingdom is the Parable of the Strong and Stronger One in
which Jesus views His own ministry of exorcism as a sign of the presence of God's rule (Matt.
12:28 par.). The very fact that people flocked to Jesus is a sign that God's power is at work in
Him in a special way. He possesses a real drawing power and charm that magnetizes the people.
Many of the parables are introduced by words such as "To what shall we liken the
KingdomGod." Thereby we are urged to compare the image created by the parable to the reality
portrayed. To understand the central point of a parable means to apply it to the reality of the
KingdomGod. Both the Baptist and Jesus announced God's royal rule. The message is
paradoxical: If He is Lord, why does He come? If He is not Lord, why should He come? In
Jesus, God was adding something. In Jesus, God unfolds His purpose of salvation and judgment.
In the OT, God's coming was not a localized concept limited by space and time, but the
saving activity for humankind. The message, "The Kingdom of God is at hand," means that God
manifests His royal power. He is not controlled but controls everything and brings about what is
new. The world, as we know it, will be transformed. His Kingdom is neither a natural or
historical development, which was the great misunderstanding of the Jews in Jesus' day. He is
no arbitrary potentate, nor is He beholden to a favored nation with its national hopes, political
opportunities and aspirations, including the overthrowing of enemies. Many Jews and Christians
believe the KingdomGod is embodied by the present State of Israel. On the contrary, the
emergence of the State of Israel in our day represents no fulfillment of the KingdomGod. In the
OT, people were never able to anticipate what was the next step of God in His Kingdom. God's
divine activity in His coming is the fulfillment of His purpose.
Mystery of the Kingdom. The secret of the Kingdom, given to the disciples,
distinguishes them from all others. The "mystery(ies) of the Kingdom" (taV musthvria
th'" basileiva" tw'n oujranw'n) is both revealed and hidden. The term
"mystery" (musthvrion) refers to something that formerly had been hidden, but that
suddenly becomes open; it refers in Ladd's words, to "a revealed secret."66 It means the
communication of something that was otherwise unknown. C.F.D. Moule defines the term as:
"The idea that God's thoughts and ways are not men's but that they are his secret which is not
obvious to human wisdom but which he may reveal to those whom he chooses was familiar to
everyone who listened attentively in the synagogue."67 The community spoke of a "secret
66 George Eldon Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
1974), p. 93.
67 C.F.D. Moule, "Mystery", Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), p. 480. See
purpose" (zr*), which likewise was used in connection with the Kingdom (tWKl=m~). God's
Kingdom does not function by political policy, but by the act and power of a King. God pursues
His goal by establishing His Kingdom, the very "secret" which He reveals to disciples.
The disciples stand in a wonderful and privileged position because they have been
entrusted with the secret, i.e., it has been given to them.68 In other places in the Gospels the
mystery revealed is the identity of Jesus (Mk. ), the knowledge about Jesus as the Messiah. In
extra-biblical sources there are other types of secrets that are revealed. In the Gospel, however,
the basic revelation consists of the mighty acts of God in Jesus of Nazareth. The special goal is
God's royal rule on earth (Matt. ). Mark says:
he did not speak to them (the crowds) without a parable, but privately to his own
disciples he explained everything.
34 cwriV" deV parabolh'" oujk ejlavlei aujtoi'", kat·
ijdivan deV toi'" ijdivoi" maqhtai'" ejpevluen pavnta.
The so-called "plain sayings" are always on the human level, e.g., "let him come after
me" (Lk. ), but they do not reveal the way in which God acts through His Kingdom on earth.
The parables are not intended to give ethical pronouncements or some kind of "interim-ethic"
(Schweizer). If we try to find a mere moral meaning in the parables, we miss their intent.
However, this does not mean that the parables are only eschatological and that no practical
application intended. What is Jesus' concern? He directs His listeners to the plan that calls for a
whole-hearted response and commitment reaching down into every area of life. In the light of
God's ultimate revelation we cannot go on with business as usual. Nor can parables be taken
simply as ethical exhortations; they are positioned within the wonderful act of divine grace,
which effects an inner transformation and expresses that changed life in appropriate ethical ways.
If Jesus is only regarded as a teacher of ethical principles, no explanation exists as to why He
met so much opposition, which ultimately led to His death on the cross.
If the parables convey the secret of God's Kingdom, then we are dealing with a person
who cannot be dismissed as another desert prophet or wandering Rabbi. According to Bultmann,
Jesus is a Rabbi who had His own ideas and what He said had little significance either for the
early Church or for us.69 However, it is important that through the secret or mysteries of the
Kingdom, Jesus enables His disciples to share in the secret of God's purpose:
Matt. All things have been delivered to me by my Father; and no one knows the Son
except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and any one to whom the Son
chooses to reveal him.70
Through the revelation of the secret, imparted by God to Jesus, Jesus the Son is thereby able to
pass on the spiritual truth of the Kingdom to His disciples. Jesus begins the prayer (v. 26) with
the praise of the Father for concealing His truth from the wise and intelligent and revealing it to
infants (). The contrast is striking and yet it becomes the basis for the Son's confidence and
invitation which follow:
"Come to me, all you who are heavily burdened" ().
According to Jewish rule 1) The bearer of the truth had a responsibility to pass it on, and
2) The recipient had no right to alter the form by which God had communicated it to him. In this
prayer (Matt. 11:27ff.), Jesus claims a special unmediated relationship to God, which must be
68 The perfect passive form, devdotai ("it has been given") is significant. It implies that God has given or

revealed this mystery to the disciples for all time..

69 Rudolph Bultmann, History of the Synoptic Tradition, Theology of the New Testament
70 This verse is regarded by Bultmann as a "bolt out of the Johannine blue", and thus is spurious. However, there is

absolutely no textual tradition which would warrant such a conclusion.

shared with others. Obviously Jesus was convinced that what He had was not His own, but came
to Him by divine revelation. Accordingly, what He hands down to His disciples are not simply
the literary metaphors--King, Father, and Shepherd. Far more He is committed to impart the
special purpose of God--that God is acting in Jesus the Son in a special way. God pursues His
goal by establishing His Kingdom; the very secret that He reveals to the disciples and which
refers to the will of God and the comprehensive secret of God for the new age.
Doctrine of God. As we encounter the parables, it is made plain that God stands behind
these parables in actual experience and relationship--not in mere systematic theological
categories. He is, for example, the King, the Master, the Fisherman, the Owner of the Vineyard,
etc. To say the least, the stories are diverse. Apparently Jesus could sense the extensive
diversification of God's dealings with humankind, such as with homeowners, widows, tax-
collectors, peasants, farmers, children playing make-believe. And God is portrayed in His
kindness, mercy and goodness. Jesus does not affirm that the world is basically good, but He
does imply that God is a God who has planned from eternity that His benevolent nature be seen
in human life. In the Parable of the Four Soils, God provides food and gracious care for His
people. Moreover, His people are the instruments through whom His grace will be given to
others: "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst...for they shall be satisfied" (Matt. 5:6). In the
Parables of the Treasure Hidden in the Field and Pearl of Great Price, God is the One who offers
such unheard-of "lucky-finds." Behind the Parable of the Good Samaritan lies God, with a
vested interest in humanity--a God who comes to people on a rescue mission out of groundless
compassion.71 The Parable of the Friend at is not intended to be a mere admonition on true
friendship, but reveals a compassionate God who does not need to be awakened before He
responds to His people when they earnestly and continually pray.
The Divine Initiative. Consistently, the argument moves from the lesser to the greater,
"how much more will God. . ."72 In the Parable of the Fig-Tree (Lk. 13:6-9), God does not owe
anything to humanity; nevertheless, God is long-suffering. In the ministry of Jesus, God offers
humankind a new chance. For through His ministry there can be a new beginning--a beginning
that people are only able to make by a positive response to Him, based on God's prior offer. God
maintains the positive goal He has in view, just as the gardener maintains the vineyard and fig-
tree with the expectation of the final harvest. In the Parable of the Lost Sheep, God takes the
initiative and does not wait for the sheep to come to its senses. The human situation is not one in
which "all's well that end's well." It is just the opposite. People refuse to take the redemptive
work of God seriously. The human race has already advanced to edge of the abyss and except
for the grace of God and the restraining arm of God--humankind will be lost. The Parable of the
Laborers in the Vineyard affirms that God Has his own ways, which are contrary to human ways
(Isa. 55:8-9). Nonetheless, He finds a way to inspire people to participate in and to partake of
His redemptive purpose in Jesus Christ.
God’s activity. Taken as a whole, the parables proclaim a God who acts. They do not
present a concept of God but reveal the activity of God.73 Something wonderful and unheard of
is taking place in the world in space and time. The parables are about a God of goodness and
mercy who manifests Himself in the face of human callousness. At the same time, the parables
affirm the supremacy and superiority of God. Although the universe and the world are hostile, it
is the activity of God that makes life meaningful, not fortuitous chance. The parables make us
71 This does not mean that we are warranted to make the parables into extended allegories, as with Augustine.
72 Qal W}h!ômer
73 This is a contrast with the god of Plato who sits and contemplates, while only the Demi-Urge acts with respect to

creation.
aware that God will reach His goal; nothing can defeat Him--not even a mixed community
(Parable of the Weeds, Parable of the Dragnet). In the Parable of the Weeds, God's
superabundant wisdom overrides the plan of the servants and it foils the wisdom of "the Evil
One" who sowed the weeds. The parables assure us that God oversees all unfortunate events and
follows through with His steadfast purpose.
God's power. The parables present no mystical view of God or life. The difficulties,
hardships, and enemies of God are all taken seriously. The sowing parables affirm that, in spite
of failure, God will still overcome all obstacles and barriers to life and productivity. God's
omnipotence is not abstract, but is made real in Jesus' promise that “with God all things are
possible.”
The parables make it clear that the opposition and enmity of others is not merely directed
against disciples but is directed against God Himself. Nevertheless, the difficulties and obstacles
encountered will not hinder God from achieving His redemptive purpose. God has so arranged
this world that despite all of the forces of distrust and destruction that people bring upon
themselves; God's goal of redemption never falters.
The parables also present us with a God who establishes a moral order underlying the
world. A moral law is evident in the parables although it is not uniform everywhere. There is a
clear cause-effect relationship between the unbelief and actions of the Jewish leaders in
Jerusalem and their final destiny. God not only works in the world but acts upon it. This needs
to be kept in mind when we think of Jesus as the One who is in the world. At the same time,
God's activity in world events is not the same as His action in His Kingdom, but through these
events God acts upon the world. There is a teleological goal--the eschatological KingdomGod.
It is a magnet which imperceptibly draws things and people to the end for which they are
destined. The parables present us with pictures of the Kingdom as a Wedding Feast or a
Messianic Banquet. They tell us that the end, the eschatological goal, will be reached and
thereby, they inspire hope for the future.
The Parables of the Mustard Seed, Leaven, and Seed Growing by Itself emphasize the
non-violent way by which God reaches His goal. This goes contrary to our human way of
thinking. Through the parables Jesus notes how the presence of God in this world transforms
and engenders growth rather than causes destruction. Jesus never allows His opponents to tell
Him how He should act--He even rebukes the militant zeal of his disciples, when, on more than
one occasion, they opted for some type of violence or retaliation (Lk. -55). Jesus does not give
His disciples options from which to choose. Even more so, He leads them to follow Him to the
goal, the true goal He reaches for.
Other parables reveal the sovereign power of God as He establishes His rule as Lord. He
is really King of this world; even in the face of its unbelief. God will choose the moment for His
action and until He gives the sign, the coming KingdomGod cannot be consummated. Jesus
constantly prepares His disciples for this divine purpose. The landlord will not return to the
wedding feast until all aspects of preparation have been accomplished. Furthermore, God does
not send a message to the thief in advance of His coming. In the Parable of the Ten Maidens, it
is certain that the bridegroom is coming.74 In the Parable of the Rich Fool, the farmer has been
successful and can retire early. To be sure, we find work and a social order in the parables, but
the real error comes in thinking there must be some reward for human accomplishment, i.e., a
material future that one is owed. When God calls the rich man a fool, He implies that the rich
man did not take God seriously.75 The necessity of working hard is part of the curse placed upon
74 The Greek present participle, " the One who is coming" (oJ ejrcovmeno") used with a futuristic meaning
is parallel to the Hebrew Qal active participle, "the One who is about to come" (aB*h^).
humans for sin (Gen. 3)--hence work is not the way of salvation. The Parable of the Dragnet
reckons with the reality of final salvation and judgment that He and His angels will effect. Not
everything that goes into the net will be kept; nevertheless the Church needs to be reminded of
Her role in bringing men and women into the net. The Church is an instrument that God uses, but
God alone is in control of human destiny.
In the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, Abraham speaks in God's name; with no
reason given why God should arrange special miraculous signs so that everyone can be
converted. Our ways are not God's ways (Isa. 55:8). God's sovereign power is the only "right of
way." In the Parable of the Talents, no reason is given for the differing amounts. God is free
and exercises His right to give as He pleases. He is utterly free to violate social decorum and
convention as He passes by the "upper echelon" to reach to the outcast.
In many ways, Jesus shows that our narrow concepts and exclusive human views are
much too limited for God. His desire is inclusive; God wills that all should be saved. Human
egoistic thinking often conveniently classifies humankind into groups, which are restrictive in
nature. But, the parables of Jesus make sense only if we see a divine purpose at work in the
world for all of humanity. Some parables are replete with details about the consummation and
its joy. In the parables of the consummation of the age, Jesus offers the opportunity of
harmonious and joyful fellowship with Himself--not the sumptuousness of the meal. While
people often take "sonship" and "daughtership" lightly, Jesus makes us aware of how far God
transcends human love by offering the almost unbelievable joy of fellowship with Him.
Fellowship with God is not a sentimental experience or a psychological state; it is a true miracle
of God's grace. Human beings are made sons and daughters of God with Christ as Lord.
Humanity receives no ongoing contract with God as a Cosmic Employer. The son in the far-off
country does not inherit the farm, but he is offered a home with joy and celebration. At one time,
he lived a life of his choosing, but then found through various reversals that life lived recklessly
and selfishly could never satisfy his soul. And so he made his way home. We can and do feel at
home here. Nevertheless, God's goal lies in the direction of another world that bursts the narrow
boundaries of our limited thought and language.
The Place of Christ in the Parables. Reading the parables also makes us aware that
they embrace Jesus and His mission. Parables are dependent upon the presupposition and
recognition of Jesus as the Anointed of God who inaugurates the inbreaking of the KingdomGod
in His person, including His words and His works. Indeed, without the recognition of the
inbreaking of the KingdomGod the parables are meaningless. While some of the parables
contain allusion and inference, as a whole they proceed on the presupposition of the Messianic
presence.
We need to sense the emphasis on what Jesus (not the Church or Israel) is doing. Jesus
does not publicly proclaim Himself as Son of God. Even His use of the term, "Son of Man," is
in the third person. He leaves it to his audience, the Evangelists, as well as the early Christian
communities to make the necessary inferences not only from His plain sayings but from His
parables. In the interpretation of the Parable of the Soils, the Sower who sows the Word of God,
the "good news" (eujaggevlion) is equivalent to Jesus. In a similar but veiled way, in
the Parable of the Wicked Tenants, Jesus speaks of Himself as the one who comes to Israel, His
vineyard (cf. Isa. 5:1-7). Outwardly, the work of Jesus compares well with the work of prophets
before Him. He--like the prophets--faced stiff opposition. He appears only after the prophets
have run their course. As in the Parable of the Wicked Tenants, Jesus appears in all probability
in the Parable of the Wedding Feast as the Son for whom the banquet is held.
 In the Parable of the Seed Growing by Itself, Jesus points to the eschatological process;
the growth of the seed independent of human activity. The progress of God's Kingdom is
certain, but it depends on the initial work of sowing, i.e., by Jesus. The growth of the seed is
gradual, but steady.
Jesus draws others into ministry with Him. His success is bound up with the success of
His servants (Parable of the Talents/Pounds). The reference to servant-language in Isa. 53 is
mirrored in the numerous references to servant(s) in various parables.
Likewise the predictions of the passion are not ex eventu ("after the fact"), as seen in the
fact that in some of the parables we find simple references to antagonism, labor, risk, and its
implications for discipleship. If the early Church had wanted to fabricate parables ex eventu,
then we would expect that a number of the parables should contain more detailed references to
the whole of the Passion Story. In one parable (Lk. 15:3-7), Jesus risks the loss of the whole
flock for the sake of one lost sheep. He is well aware of the implication that His program of
salvation would entail when extended to all; thus His critics malign His table-fellowship with the
"low-lifes" of society (Lk. 15:1-2).
Moreover, in the parables Jesus acts in the name of God. He represents God as He tells
the parables; He desires to lead the audience along the path that He wants them to follow. As
Son, He does not want to claim the Father's place, only as a Servant, He will live in conformity
to the Father's will. In our time, it is easy to lose the idea of representative action of the one for
the many. While Jesus, during His last week, anticipates the Messianic Feast (Lk. -18), He faces
the unnerving prospect of the cross (cf. Jn. ). At the same time, He contends with disciples who
are intent only on positions of prestige in His Kingdom (cf. Lk. ). Once again, Jesus dons the
servant mantle. He is the Servant, intent on His redemptive death (Mk. ). Quarreling disciples
should find their pattern of service in Him.
Creation. Jesus finds certain signs within the world of God's rule over nature, more than
in the powerful manifestations of His power.76 He looks to the fields with their wildflowers, to
the trees with their birds, sparrows, and ravens. God is at work in both creation and providence
with simple yet miraculous events such as growth, harvest, and the changes of weather. His rule
embraces His entire creation of beauty and order; His commitment to that creation implies
providential care over all His creatures--animals and humans. The picture of God making
clothes for the flowers and preparing meals for the sparrows is the picture of a God who is Lord
of Creation by being the servant in love of all his creatures."77
The Human Person. What does Jesus think of human beings? Each person possesses,
He affirms, infinite and inestimable worth. Even the very hairs of your head are numbered
(Matt. ). He reminds His people of this through His stories, describing an inestimable worth that
exceeds by far the worth of the birds of heaven. The argument moves from the minor to the
major. "If it is so that God cares for ravens in this way, are you not worth much more than they?
Then rest assured that God will provide for you."
On the other hand, Jesus is also very aware of human sinfulness. He argues that the
security of human beings is not to be found within themselves (The Parable of the Rich Fool and
the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus). Security can only begin with the plea, "God be
merciful to me, the sinner." The parables reveal that the person who acts in a righteous manner
is the exception, rather than the rule (The Parable of the Good Samaritan). Whereas Paul tends
to express doctrinally what sin means, Jesus uses parables (cf. Lk. 18:9-14) to portray the ways
that sin manifests itself. By means of the parables, Jesus breaks through a false and illusory self-
76 Psa. 19:2; I Kgs. 19:11; Psa. 18:7-16; 104; 114; Hab. 3: Job 38ff.
77 Manson, p. 163.
satisfaction to awaken people to a better quality of life in the present. He shows what people
may become when they turn away from the passing illusions of this life and place their trust in
the Creator and Redeemer, by accepting the life He offers.
The Human Response. The divine invitation to new life comes to an audience that
needs to hear the precious summons of God to be His people. The invitation comes with the
expectation of a response.78 God remains the initiator and humans respond as the objects of
God's plan. In the wedding feast parables, the host is embarrassed if his house is not full of
guests.
Election. The parables contain the mysterious amalgam of the divine will and human
response (negative and positive). We read that God acts for the benefit and well-being of people.
The idea of election is a characteristic feature of the new age. It is not up to the human farmer to
determine how much grain should be grown, but to the divine Farmer. God decides that only the
good grain is to be harvested and in what proportion; he then harvests the wheat and burns the
chaff in His own time. God bestows intrinsic value on people whom He chooses. As the
Fisherman, God can decide which fish are good and which fish are not, and He demands respect
for His power and authority. The man without a wedding garment comes to the wedding feast
clothed as he is, thinking that it does not matter (Man Without a Wedding Garment); he fails to
acknowledge that he is living in a monarchy. The proper response to God means a trust in God's
power and a correlated trust in God's plan
Commitment. Through the use of simile, metaphor, and story-parable, Jesus calls for a
wholehearted commitment that disdains material treasures through an awareness that no one can
serve two masters. The parable concluding the Sermon on the Mount is the Parable of Two
Foundations; it calls for doing the words of Jesus--thus insuring a foundation that will withstand
the hostile forces of life. Jesus' parables about forgiveness, likewise, show the necessary
obligation of the forgiven one to likewise forgive others. The Parable of the Dishonest Manager
tells of a rogue who demonstrates his commitment to a sure future. Radical and committed
discipleship is the focus of the twin-parables (The Parable of the Tower-Builder and the Parable
of the King Going to War).
Activity. The Parable of the Ten Bridesmaids suggests that election and commitment
imply activity--the wise bridesmaids prepare for the wedding procession with oil sufficient to
cover the delay of the Bridegroom. And God gives the opportunity to people to respond in
action to His plan. He will make every effort to help His people, to support them, and to give
them the courage to respond in appropriate and meaningful ways for He provides work for them
to do.
One of the great dangers of eschatological preaching is to use it as a cloak for human
laziness. In the parables activity is crucial. The poor laborer is at work in the field when he
finds the unexpected treasure. The pearl merchant is intent on his business when he finds the
choice pearl. Seeds germinate and fruit trees are expected to produce good fruit. Those who
receive the talents and pounds are expected to do something with what they have received in
trust.
Humility. In the midst of their activity people are to sense that what they have been given
is of supreme value and they must leave ultimate evaluation to God. The shepherd knows better
than the sheep what real freedom means. The laborers in the vineyard must acknowledge that
their master is free to be gracious and is in no way beholden to their narrow view of a work-ethic
which demands remuneration. The servants (disciples) are not to be premature separators
This goes against the grain of theologians such as Strauss and Feuerbach, who say that in religion men give a
78

mythological interpretation of social events.

between wheat and weeds. The parables emphasize both a human response to the unmerited
grace of God and a corresponding human inability to raise an objection to God's utter freedom to
act as He will. People are to realize that the value of the KingdomGod is not only for the
individual but for others (mustard seed, crop of wheat). There is a risk factor implied in the gift,
for some will be lost. People are challenged to make a decision. When they decide for the
KingdomGod, their response also entails a commitment to others in need (Parable of Sheep and
Goats; Parable of Good Samaritan).
Astonishment and joy. The parables reveal that a vital part of the trust-response to Jesus
lies in a sense of awe and wonder that should characterize the people of God. To use C. S.
Lewis' phrase, they should be "surprised by joy" and amazed at the goodness of God, which not
only reaches them, but which must be shared. Whether the people of God be other shepherds,
women of a Palestinian town, servants, or an older brother, they are called to celebrate their
joyful find. People should be grateful for what they receive.
Responsibility in light of the future. The parables indicate that the people of God are to
be expectant of a future in which God's royal power and plan will be realized. People are to be
fully appreciative of the first fruits, but also aware that a full harvest is yet to come. They are to
respond to the Kingdom because God invites them out of a world that fails to make sense and
certainly offers no hope. A number of parables of the consummation speak of the glorious future
when the plan of God will be ultimately realized. Exception has been taken to Jeremias and
Dodd because of their neglect of this issue. To be sure, many of the parables announce the
necessity of decision now. At present the dough is still being leavened and the dragnet continues
to be cast. But the future will come when the lump of dough is fully leavened and the total catch
of fish is caught, at which time God will do the sorting. These parables and others affirm a
glorious future and final divine goal that are yet to be realized. It is true that those who hear the
parables live in the present, not in the future, but they are encouraged by the knowledge of the
future that will surely come. This future goal includes human responsibility and insight that the
Parable of the Unjust Steward shows. The people of God will experience that final goal that will
certainly be attained as their supreme good. The banquet will be celebrated and is in no way
conditioned upon the acceptance of all.
Responsibility with wealth. More than the other Evangelists, Luke underscores the
proper attitude towards the material aspects of life and the appropriate use of resources. Several
of the parables in Luke's "Travel-Narrative" are unique to Luke. They point the readers to the
true value of human life and the corresponding need to use money and possessions in a way that
enhances life and relieves the hardship of others. True disciples know how "to travel light" and
to have their priorities in order with respect to their finances and the needs of others. The
humorous story of the rogue in Luke 16 (Parable of the Dishonest Manager) points the disciples
in the direction of the shrewd use of money so as to make friendships with eternal benefits in
view (12:33). The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus points to the dire consequences of
mercy-less living. Life is on loan from God () and brings with it distinct accountability.
Prayer. The parables teach Jesus' disciples to pray; thereby, they can expect God their
Father to act. The Lukan parables on prayer underscore the wide gulf that exists between human
behavior and God's willingness to respond to His disciples who pray. The argument moves from
the lesser to the greater and also from the negative to the positive. If a nasty judge (Lk. 18:1-8)
will act because a fearless widow nags him, or if a groggy neighbor will get up in the middle of
the night because of his neighbor's persistence--then how much more will God act on behalf of
His people who pray and pray persistently. He is not like the judge or the groggy neighbor, but
is a heavenly Father who is more than ready to respond to His people.
Expectancy for the future. Parables reveal that the eschatological end is often far
different from our expectations. Who could possibly conceive that such a small mustard seed
would emerge as the largest of trees? In parables where the chief figure goes away and returns,
we learn that the realization of God's ultimate purpose requires a period of time in which God is
seemingly absent. These parables affirm that, in spite of His absence, He will return. And, at
that time, people will have to render account of their stewardship of the Kingdom. The return of
God will mean both judgment and blessing. The returning Master (King) does not aim to trap
His people; the intervening period will test them as to whether or not they have taken the
Master's claims seriously. A future reckoning is sure to occur. The Master's return will reveal
Him in a real and personal way to the people of the Kingdom. The problem with much of the
language of the consummation is that we are dealing with limited language trying to express
ineffable benefits and eternal results.
Responsibility not calculation. His coming can take place at any time. The parables do
not indicate precisely the time of His coming, but they nonetheless point to the proper human
attitude and response to His coming. The Parable of the Ten Maidens tells how the people of
God need to allow for the delay of the Parousia and to live faithfully in the interim. Speculation
and calculation of times and seasons demands nothing from people. The mere fact of the future
casts an irrevocable responsibility on the people of God to live in such a way that reflects that
future. The parables leave no doubt that the coming will mean evaluation and sifting that leads
either to reward or penalty. People are not masters of their own lives, but must live with
accountability to God, in view of what they have been given. The overriding message is "Enter
into the joy . . . Enter the hall . . . Respond to the grace of the Kingdom."
Service and availability. The proper response also entails service. People are to be
attuned to how God might use them. If people are transformed by the power of God, they
assume the servant mantle. As Jesus takes the form of the Servant of the Lord, disciples likewise
are to be transformed into His servants, alert to the divine demands. We are to accept the
position that God gives to us, and the conditions in which we find ourselves. It is not a matter
about having ten talents or one, but about a willingness to work according to His plan.
Realism. The people of God are also to realize that they are confronted by a world that is
indifferent to what they do, and, therefore, they must develop their own sense of identity and
being. Unfeeling response by the world is a sign of enmity, which is not overcome by power and
aggression. The people of God must realize that they are not ultimately responsible for the
failures of others that may occur on the pathway of obedience.
Reward. In the parables, Jesus does not say that the disciples are to make the right
response to obtain a reward. The idea of a future reward, however, makes humans aware of the
goodness of God. The Pharisees had their own doctrine of calculable pay for their efforts, but
disciples are called to render their service freely with no thought of pay differential (The Parable
of the Laborers in the Vineyard). Moreover, God's system of reward is not doled out by some
sort of "sliding scale." The parables rather affirm His sovereign right to give out rewards as He
wills--He is not beholden to human ideas (cf. Isa. 55:8-9).
Repentance, trust, and obedience . Only those who repent, i.e., "return," will share in the
Kingdom. The verb "repent" or "turn" (bWv) does not primarily mean "to feel sorry" but to
make a radical "turnabout" and return to one's true position. The Hebrew verb implies that
people have gone astray and a radical change in attitude towards God's saving work and moral
laws is essential. Repentance (metavnoia) is not moralistic ("I'll try harder") or
compensatory ("If I just do this then perhaps God will reward me"), but involves a
transformation of the entire person who acknowledges "I have deserted the Lord" (cf. II Sam. ).
Closely related is the response of "trust" (pivsti"), wherein one is able to participate in the
saving event. True discipleship means to risk one's life for the KingdomGod. Discipleship--
always at the forefront of Jesus' teaching--finds expression through the parables. Stories such as
the Parable of the Two Builders and the Two Sons emphasize a discipleship of active obedience.
The builder who is wise does the words of Jesus, even as the son who does the will of the father
is the son who goes to work in the vineyard. Discipleship is obedience not in mere words, but in
deed. The Parable of the Master and Servant (Lk. 17:7-10), for example, reveals God's
expectation of plain obedience without thought of reward.
Mercy and forgiveness. The parables also affirm the need to extend the same mercy and
grace that one has received to others in need. The Parable of the Unforgiving Servant reveals
that divine forgiveness of a human debt ought to make a difference in the way that the spirit of
forgiveness is extended to another. The Parable of the Good Samaritan emphasizes how to
become a neighbor whoever that person may be, "Go thou and do likewise," Jesus said (Lk. ).
The Antagonist. The reality of an antagonist is expressed in various parables. Jesus
speaks of the "Strong One", indicating that the KingdomGod is no mere organic process (e.g.,
the Parable of the Mustard Seed), but a conflict between Jesus, who ushers in God's redemptive
purpose, and Satan. If there be "automatic growth" (see Mk. --aujtomatikw''") such as
Dodd's "realized eschatology" proposes, then it can only be due to the power of the Gospel. One
cannot, however, dismiss the opposition and destructive power of the Evil One. The Parable of
the Weeds makes us aware than Satan pursues his goal in a clandestine way. In the Parable of
the Four Soils, he opposes the work of Jesus by snatching away the seed that is sown. Numerous
parables affirm that God's Kingdom faces stiff opposition. However, the parables also point to
the ultimate victory over Satan. The Stronger One (Jesus) invades the house of the Strong One
(Satan), ties him up, and then is able to ransack his house and give new life to those who are
thereby exorcised.
 p. 1

The Holy Spirit in Pauline Thought

Introduction

The area of pneumatology in the Pauline material is difficult to probe, since the
Spirit is the very power by which we look at the Spirit. Christology is the theological
understanding of the Jesus-event: His pre-existence, historical existence and his post-
resurrection existence. However, when we come to pneumatology, we deal with a private
and personal experience, which cannot be seen. We can observe certain types of
behavior and observe a particular manifestation of the Spirit such as tongues or healing.
However, these gifts are not the Spirit nor are they at the core of the Holy Spirit.
Pneumatology deals with the most intimate and intense experience of the divine power,
whose entrance or impact upon individual Christians or the community is clearly
discernible (I Cor. 1:4-7; Gal. 3:5). However, the personal experience of the Holy Spirit
is not so clearly noted.
Paul was a prophet and charismatic figure and has been called "the theologian of
the Spirit," for he offers a broad teaching on the person and work of the Holy Spirit,
expressed in his written dialogue with numerous churches. He did have visions and
ecstatic experiences (I Cor. 9:1, "Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?";
I Cor. 14:18, "I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all"; II Cor. 12:1-
4—Paul caught up in the third heaven; II Cor. 12:12, "The signs of a true apostle were
performed among you with all steadfastness, with signs, wonders and powers"). These
texts provide evidence that Paul assumed the legitimacy of the experience of the Spirit in
his own life; however, he fought for the proper understanding of the Spirit in personal
and community life.

I. The Person of the Holy Spirit is integral to the Trinity.

Three primary texts affirm the essential person of the Holy Spirit within the
Trinity:
Eph. 4:4-6 "One Spirit"
"One Lord" (Christ)
"One God"
I Cor. 12:4-6 "the same Spirit"
"the same Lord" (Christ)
"the same God"
II Cor. 12:13 "grace of the Lord Jesus"
"love of God"
"fellowship of the Holy Spirit"

In other less explicit texts, the terms, "Holy Spirit" and "Christ" overlap; several terms
are interchangeable: "Spirit of God," "the Spirit of Christ," "Christ," "Christ in you"
"Spirit of Him" "His Spirit"—all refer to the same reality (Rom. 8:9-11; cf. I Cor. 15:45;
Gal. 5:25; Gal. 5:16; I Cor. 12:3).
Rom. 8:9 But you are not in the flesh; you are in the Spirit, since the Spirit of God
dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to
him.10 But if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is
HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 p. 2

life because of righteousness.11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the
dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will give life to your
mortal bodies also through his Spirit that dwells in you.
If one does not have the Spirit, then one does not have Christ; if one does not have Christ,
then one does not have the Spirit (Rom. 8:9; I Cor. 12:12-13). There is no such thing as a
Spirit-less Christian. Therefore, to be a Christian, means that one is also a "spiritual
person" (pneumatikos).
Scattered throughout the Pauline corpus are a number of verbs, which point the
readers towards the personal being and activity of the Holy Spirit. As a "full member" of
the Trinity, the Spirit is deeply personal and converses in a personal way within the
Trinity and subsequently communicates personal things to people. The Spirit:
Intercedes on our behalf (Rom. 8:26-27)
Leads us in the ways of God (Gal. 5:18, Rom. 8:14),
Bears witness with our spirits that we are children of God (Rom. 8:16)
Can be grieved by sin (Eph. 4:30)
Gives life to those who believe (II Cor. 3:6)
Searches the deep things (I Cor. 2:10)
Knows the mind of God (I Cor. 2:11)
Indwells believers (I Cor. 3:16; Rom. 8:11; II Tim. 1:4)
Works all things (entire salvation process) for good (Rom. 8:28)
Communicates to the worshiping community (I Cor. 12-14)
Desires things that are contrary to the flesh (Gal. 5:17)
Teaches the content of the Gospel to believers (I Cor. 2:13)1
As a member of the Trinity, the Spirit conveys the indwelling presence of God in the "New
Temple." Fee draws together three threads concerning the experience of God that are
fulfilled by the Spirit's advent: "(1) his association of the Spirit with the new covenant;
(2) the language of "indwelling"' and (3) his collocation of the Spirit with the imagery of
the Temple."2 Paul links together life under the new covenant with the indwelling by the
Spirit of the New Temple, i.e., the body of Christ.3 The personal and corporate
experience of the Holy Spirit is linked to OT texts such as Ezek. 36:26-27; 37:14; 31:31-
33) in which God promises a transformed heart that replaces a heart of stone with a heart
of flesh and a new spirit. These promises are expressed in II Cor. 3:1-6, wherein Paul
says that the Corinthians are "written by the Spirit of the Living God" "on tablets of
human hearts" (II Cor. 3:3). Paul views himself as the minister of this new covenant.
This covenant concerns life, transformation of the inner person by the Spirit, certainly not
the abusive and demanding "letter" of the law (II Cor. 3:5-6). The renewed or
transformed spirit will enable God's people to follow God's decrees. God's Holy Spirit
will communicate the very presence of God that will reside within people, "He has made
us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the
letter kills, but the Spirit gives life."

II. The Work of the Holy Spirit

The resurrection of Jesus and the gift of the Spirit are clear indications to Paul that
the "last days" had begun. Yet Paul is also very aware that there is a "not yet" attached to
1 Cf. Fee for this list and fuller comments, p. 830.
2 Fee, p. 843.
3 Cf. II Kgs. 8:10-11; I Cor. 3:16; 12:13.

HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 p. 3

the last days, which still await a fulfillment. The Spirit is the eschatological Spirit that
belongs to tension of Christian life that is lived in community together. Since the Spirit
communicates salvation (past, present and future), it stands to reason that the Spirit's role
is evident in all three time-periods. The outpoured Holy Spirit is a clear indication that
the messianic age has already come; the Spirit provides the dynamic for personal
transformation that is experienced now. However the Spirit is also the clear guarantee of
the final consummation that lies in the future. Just as the whole of Christian faith and
experience is paradoxical, so the central role of the Spirit belongs to the paradox. The
Spirit is both the fulfillment of the eschatological promises as well as proleptic of the
final consummation. The Spirit is the present down payment of salvation that is oriented
to the future, towards the full inheritance. "The Spirit is the evidence of the one, the
guarantee of the other."4
The Christian life is the "dispensation/era of the Spirit" and the Spirit acts in
power at the beginning, the middle and the end. Christian conversion and baptism are
bound up with the experience of the Spirit; Christian behavior means to "walk by the
Spirit," the community is empowered by the Spirit's grace-gifts," Christian virtues are an
outgrowth of the Spirit's life and Christian hope for life eternal and immortality is
predicated upon the person and work of the Holy Spirit. Similarly, in I Thess. 4:8, Paul
affirms that God continues to give "His Holy Spirit to you" in the process of
sanctification. The language of the Temple is associated with words such as
"indwelling," in the individual Christian and in the midst of the Christian community.
The Spirit is spoken of being located in the "heart" (II Cor. 1:22; 3:3; Gal. 4:6; Rom.
2:29; 5:5) and is spoken of as a "dwelling" (I Cor. 3:16; II Cor. 6:16; Rom. 8:9-11; Eph.
2:22). The Spirit is located "in you/us" according to I Thess. 4:8; I Cor. 6:19; 14:24-25;
Eph. 5:18). Two other passages speak of "God's dwelling in the midst of His people" (I
Cor. 14:24-25; II Cor. 6:16); the texts build upon the language of Isa. 45:14, "Surely God
is among you" and the promise of the new covenant, "I will dwell among them and they
shall be my people" (Ezek. 37:27). The Holy Spirit is not an impersonal force but the
very presence of God who indwells His people. In many respects, the Holy Spirit can be
regarded as the experienced reality of God. The implications of this experience will be
unpacked as one grows in the Christian life. Dunn draws an analogy between a child's
experience of parental love before the child is able to talk about this love.5

A. Initial Experience (past)

1. The Spirit works effectively in the proclamation of the Gospel and mission of the
Church (I Cor. 2:1-4; I Thess. 1:5; Gal. 3:2-5; Rom. 1:1-4).
Paul's letters validate the all-important role of the Spirit in his original preaching
ministry; the Spirit initiates people into the Christian experience. A clear statement of
the Spirit's initiating role is expressed in I Cor. 2:1-4. Paul disclaims lofty words of
human wisdom. His message is Christ crucified. His speech and his message were
"in demonstration (ajpovdeixi")of the Spirit and power." The word
"demonstration" (ajpovdeixi") is a technical term in rhetoric. It does not mean
that the message is opposed to wisdom, but that human wisdom is not the source of
4Gordon Fee, God's Empowering Presence, (Peabody, Massachusetts, 1994), p. 826
5James Dunn, The Theology of the Apostle Paul, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1998), p.
428.
HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 p. 4

Paul's message. In II Cor. 4:13, Paul says, "It is written, 'I believed; therefore I have
spoken.' With that same spirit of faith we also believe and therefore speak." Paul
connects the work of the Spirit to: understanding the Gospel, to preaching and hearing
the Gospel that leads to faith—all, including both speaker and hearer are the object of
the work of the Spirit.
The work of the Spirit is in evidence in I Thess. 1:5 in successive terms, e.g.,
"power," "the Holy Spirit," and "full conviction" since the terms reflect the
Thessalonians' initial experience of faith. In Gal. 3:2, 5, Paul speaks about the
Galatian's initial reception of the Spirit by the hearing of faith. The Spirit is received
as a people respond to the Gospel, which is proclaimed to them. Christian life is
based upon the hearing of the Gospel, "How can they believe in the one of whom they
have not heard? And how can they preach unless they are sent?" (Rom. 10:14-15).
The preaching of the Gospel is both preceded by faith and accompanied by faith
(Rom. 10:14; I Thess. 2:13-14; Eph. 1:13). The Spirit enables the faith-response.
Other Pauline texts affirm the role of signs and miracles and full supply of the Spirit's
"gifts of grace" (I Cor. 1:5, 7; Rom. 15:18-19; II Cor. 12:12; I Thess 1:4-6; Gal. 3:1-
3; I Cor. 2:4-5). In turn the Spirit fills the believers with boldness and the wisdom to
testify about Jesus (I Thess. 2:2).
The powerful work of the Spirit in preaching is grounded in the resurrection. In
Rom. 1:1-4, Paul refers to Jesus as "designated Son of God in power according to the
Spirit of holiness by His resurrection from the dead." The Spirit confirms by a
demonstration of power and majesty that Jesus was appointed as Son of God. The
Spirit's role in the resurrection of Jesus was a very powerful demonstration of Jesus'
Divine Sonship. Perhaps Paul expresses the truth that death could not take permanent
hold of One with such a nature, "You will not allow your Holy One to see corruption"
(Psa. 16:10).

2. The Spirit effects initiation of people into a vibrant community (I Cor. 12:13; Eph.
4:4; I Cor. 6:17; II Cor. 3:3; Titus 3:5; I Cor. 2:6-13).
Externally, the Holy Spirit is the agent who aids in the proclamation with the
presence of confirming signs. The Spirit is the One who brings God's truth to people.
For Paul, the Spirit aids the proclaimer in articulating the message and in creating a
receptive attitude in the hearer. From an internal perspective, the Holy Spirit is the
person and the power who prepares the hearer to receive the truth and appropriate the
Gospel message. Paul reminds the Thessalonians that they had received the word
(Gospel message) with "joy in the Holy Spirit" (I Thess. 1:6). The Spirit enlightens
minds and hearts. All believers are possessors of the Spirit. There is no one who can
respond to the claims of Christ without being activated and indwelt by the Holy
Spirit.
Paul takes it for granted that God has given the Spirit to believers: "Consequently,
the one who rejects this, does not reject a man, but God who gives His Holy Spirit to
you" (I Thess. 4:8). The plural pronoun, "to you" includes all believers.

3. The Spirit initiates baptism into the vibrant community, Christ's body (I Cor.
12:13; Isa. 32:15; 44:3; Ezek. 39:29; Joel 2:28; Eph. 4:4-5).
There are different opinions as to whether this experience is identical with or

HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 p. 5

subsequent to the conversion experience. The only passage where Spirit and baptism
are definitely linked, is I Cor. 12:13, "For in (ejn) one Spirit we were all baptized
into (eij") one body . . . and all were made to drink of one Spirit." The preposition,
"in" (ejn) can be used in an instrumental sense, making the act of baptism to be the
work of the Spirit, "For by one Spirit." However, this does not agree with the other
NT instances of the verb "baptize" linked with the preposition "in" (ejn). In each of
these instances, the preposition refers to the sphere in which the baptizing activity
takes place (water, spirit). Being baptized in the sphere of the Spirit and being
drenched by the Spirit are alternate ways of expressing how people become members
of the one body of Christ. Baptism has as its goal, incorporation into the body, which
implies that no one can be in the body without the activity of the Spirit. If baptism in
the Spirit means a post-conversion experience, then it would lead to the conclusion
that there were those who were converted who were not part of the body. The
concluding statement, "All were made to drink of the one Spirit" shows the basic
solidarity of all Christians in the Spirit (image of pouring water on dry/thirsty
land—Isa. 32:15; 44:3; Ezek. 39:29; Joel 2:28).
There is a similar parallel with Eph. 4:4, where "one body," "one spirit," and "one
baptism" are all linked together. Paul's central argument for the life of the Spirit is
substantiated by the well-remembered experience of their reception of the Spirit (Gal.
3:1-5).
Paul uses several figures of speech to express the corporate and organic character
of the work of the Spirit. Paul even uses the metaphor of sexual union to express the
mutual indwelling, "He that is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with Him" (I
Cor. 6:17).
In II Cor. 3:3, Paul speaks of the Corinthians as letters written with the Spirit of
the Living God, in contrast to literal letters written with ink. He assumes that all
believers are indwelt by the Spirit at the time of their conversion, "He saved us not on
the basis of works which we have done, but according to His great mercy, by the
working of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit." In I Cor. 2:6-13, the apostle
announces that the Holy Spirit enables people to understand and believe the work of
redemption. This is no special esoteric knowledge, reserved only for those who are
initiated; it does reflect insight and trust in the historical events of the cross and the
full significance of the cross, resurrection and ascension. Taking all these texts into
consideration, the Holy Spirit assumes the major role in the initiatory experience.6 It
is the reception of the Spirit that signals the beginning of the Christian life (Gal. 3:2f.)
and constitutes the immediacy of personal relationship with God (II Cor. 3:13-18). In
particular, the Spirit is manifest by an outpouring of God's love, assuring a Christian
of being "beloved" by God, especially in situations of adversity (Rom. 5:5).

4. The Holy Spirit sanctifies (II Thess. 2:13; I Cor. 6:11).

This term is a comprehensive one, which includes everything that the NT says
about Christian living. The "holiness" word-family assembles together the past,
present and future work of the Spirit who separates/sets apart the believer for the
worship of God. In II Thess 2:13, Paul tells his readers this, "But we ought always to
6Cf. Rom. 5:5; Titus 3:6; II Cor. 1:21; II Thess. 2:13; Rom. 15:16; Rom. 2:29; I Cor. 6:17; I Cor. 6:11; Gal.
4:29; Gal. 3:2-5
HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 p. 6

give thanks to God concerning you brethren, beloved by the Lord, because God chose
you from the beginning for salvation, through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in
the truth." The Spirit plays a key role in the "sanctification/setting apart" of believers
unto God, "And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified,
you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of God" (I
Cor. 6:11). Paul maintains that believers are unable to sanctify themselves. God is
always the subject of the verb, "sanctify," i.e., sanctification is a Divine act wherein
God sets apart people for Himself. The verbal form is always passive with respect to
believers, "they are sanctified." On the Divine side, the Spirit is expressed as the
active agent who sanctifies/sets the people of God apart. The Spirit also calls the
believers to disengage themselves from certain kinds of behavior that belonged to
their previous lifestyles (I Cor. 6:11). The gift of the Spirit marks the beginning of a
life-long process of being saved, sanctified and being conformed to the image of
Christ (II Cor. 3:18; II Thess. 2:18; Rom. 8:28; 16:16; Gal. 6:8; Eph. 3:16f.).

B. Present Role

1. The Spirit draws the people of God into a corporate and inclusive life together (I
Cor. 12:13; I Cor. 12:7; I Cor. 14:5, 26; II Cor. 13:13[14].

People do not simply become Christians as individuals but are "baptized in one
Spirit into one body" (I Cor. 12:13). They are vital parts of a new social and organic
network. The Spirit creates the fellowship and is the vivifying and creative power,
who brings about genuine Christian fellowship—a mutual sharing in the Spirit. The
shared experience (koinwniva) of the Spirit is the basis of the Philippians'
common life, "if there is any fellowship in the Spirit . . ." (Phil. 2:1). The Spirit
creates an organic body, whose members come together for worship, mutual support
and fellowship, working in an interdependent manner, so forming Christ's body on
earth (I Cor. 12:4-31).
Paul equates the Spirit with the OT language of "promise," as the fulfillment of
the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 12:3). The list of OT quotes in Rom. 15:9-12,
indicates that Paul's understanding of Gentile inclusion is part of God's eternal plan.
Thus, in a couple of passages, Paul equates the Spirit with the language of "promise,"
and thereby includes the Gentiles with the eschatological people of God. Something
wonderful had happened in the lives of Gentiles when the Spirit had been poured out
on them as it had been poured out on the Jews (Acts 10:45). Gentile believers were
led into an acceptance with Jewish believers, since God has already accepted them
(Gal. 2:8-9).
In Gal. 3:14, the promise of the Spirit is equated with the blessing of Abraham:
"He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the
Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the
Spirit."
The promise is actualized in the inclusive gift of the Spirit—to Jew and Gentile
alike—and is received by both groups through faith.
In Eph. 1:13-14, Paul addresses Gentiles, and affirms the reality that they have
been sealed with the "Holy Spirit of promise" (the Holy Spirit, which had been

HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 p. 7

promised to Israel). Both Jew and Gentile receive this wonderful promise, which
unites them together in the new people of God. Jews and Gentiles alike possess the
Spirit that binds them together as fellow-heirs of the inheritance that is beyond their
wildest imagination. In Eph. 4:1-3, Paul speaks of the one hope of their calling, that
through the Holy Spirit, Gentiles have become fellow-partakers of the Good News of
God and the final inheritance that will embrace both Jew and Gentile.

2. The Spirit bestows power and spiritual gifts in the worship context (Rom. 15:18;
Eph. 3:16; I Cor. 12-14).

The Spirit assumes a vital role in the community context. Paul prays for the
Ephesians, "That he may grant you to be strengthened with power through His Spirit
in the inner man" (Eph. 3:16). If there was special power to perform signs and
wonders by the power of the Spirit, it was only for the advancement of the Gospel:
Rom. 15:18ff, "in the power of signs and wonders by the power of the Holy Spirit . . .
"
In I Cor. 12-14, Paul writes extensively about spiritual gifts, which have special
relevance in the Corinthian context. The gifts are sovereignly apportioned by the
Spirit (12:11). He underscores the truth that each Christian possesses at least one gift,
which is not for self-improvement but for the benefit, "edification" or "upbuilding" of
the community and the "common good" (12:7). The Divine apportionment of the
gifts reflects the fundamental principle of unity and diversity, designed to lead to a
full appreciation and interdependence on the giftedness of others. The spiritual gifts
are to lead to proper confession of Jesus' Lordship and edification of the other
members of the community. They are not given as tokens of one's spiritual
attainment but to provide help to the community engaged in worship. Paul requests
that the gifts be used with proper order, decorum and gracious attitudes (I Cor. 14:37-
40).
Clearly, the varied gifts, which are given to the community, are positioned with
the context of community worship. The worship in the early churches was
spontaneous, apparently orchestrated by the Spirit. Worship is a community event
and is not relegated simply to one worship leader; all participate in the worship event
(Eph. 5:18-20; Col. 3:16ff.). While all may participate (I Cor. 14:23, 24, 26, 31),
chaos is ruled out (I Cor. 14:33), and the community is to be governed by some
guidelines. As with prayer and prophecy, songs become the sphere for the Spirit's
inspiration (I Cor. 14:14-15, 26; Col. 3:16; Eph. 5:19). Paul affirms the essentially
charismatic nature of their worship by the commands, "Stop quenching the Spirit…"
(I Thess. 5:19-20). The texts in Col. and Eph. seem to indicate that the singing was
corporate Christian praise to God in a kind of charismatic hymnody inspired by the
Holy Spirit.

3. The Spirit fosters the experience of adoption into God's family (Rom. 8:14ff; Gal.
4:6).

Two passages are particularly important: Rom. 8:14ff.; Gal. 4:6. In Rom. 8:14,
Paul states that all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God. Further,

HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 p. 8

when we cry "Abba, Father," it is the Spirit Himself bearing witness with our spirit
that we are God's children. The consciousness of sonship or daughtership is directly
related to the person and work of the Holy Spirit. In Gal. 4:6, Paul says that God has
sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba, Father." In this text, Paul
contrasts the prior life under the Law and the life of faith. Life under the Law is
equated with the status of a slave, while the life of faith is compared to genuine
sonship or daughtership. His readers, although in danger of reverting once more to
slavery, are adopted sons and daughters with full privileges and a full inheritance; the
evidence of this privileged relationship is their experience of the Spirit, especially the
Abba-cry within them. Because the Aramaic form is retained, it shows the
importance attached to these words.7 It is the same Spirit who enabled Jesus to cry
"Abba, Father, who enables all adopted children to approach the Father in the same
personal way. Fee notes, "Paul's intent in both texts is to remind believers that the
reception of the Spirit is what makes them children, as is evidenced by the cry
"Abba."8 Therefore, in the term adoption, uiJoqesiva, Paul signifies the new
intimate relationship into which believers have entered (Rom. 8:23; 9:4; Eph. 1:5—a
family relationship sealed by the Spirit.

4. The Spirit illumines (I Cor. 2:10-16).

For Paul, the Spirit is active in the initial proclamation of the Gospel, in the
response given to the Gospel (internal and external), and also bringing fresh insight to
believers. The expression, "taught by the Spirit," sums up Paul's approach to spiritual
understanding. In I Cor. 2:10-16, Paul draws a parallel between natural and spiritual
discernment. He senses how natural and spiritual communication of thought are
comparable. What is the point of contact, the point of comparison between the two?
It is the need to possess the receptive faculty so that transfer of thought or spiritual
understanding can be effected. For example, two retired baseball players who may
meet each other for the first time, are able to strike up a conversation, based upon
shared experiences and feelings from the lore and lure of the baseball diamond.
Correspondingly, if people are to know anything at all about life in the Spirit, they
must drink of the Spirit (I Cor. 12:13). The Spirit, which is God's has been granted to
them; therefore, the Spirit is the common point of contact between the human and the
Divine. He writes about the depths of God of which people as a whole are ignorant.
Because only the Spirit of God understands the things of God (I Cor. 2:11), the Spirit
is in a position to reveal these things to people (I Cor. 2:11). In 2:13, Paul would
seem to say that Christians who are taught by the Spirit are able to interpret spiritual
truth to those who possess the Spirit (cf. also Rom. 8:5--"Those who live according to
the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit"; Rom. 12:2, "be transformed by
the renewal of your mind"). The revelation in I Cor. 2:10-16 is directly concerned
with the meaning of the cross of Jesus Christ, "words taught by the Spirit" (v. 13).
The Corinthians seem to have abandoned the essential message of the cross for
human wisdom and argument. The Spirit reveals what had formerly been hidden
(2:9-10), what God has given to His people through the scandal of the cross (v. 12).
In some respects, the role of the Spirit is analogous to the experience of a university
student who wrestles with a problem, only then, "to have the lights come on." In this
7Cf. Joachim Jeremias who believes that these words are traced back to the words of Jesus.
8Fee, p. 856.
HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 p. 9

text, the divine wisdom stands in total contradiction to the normal pattern of human
wisdom; God has redeemed a fallen humanity by a total contradiction in terms, "a
crucified Messiah" (Deut. 21:23). In Eph. 3:2-13, the Holy Spirit also reveals that the
Gentiles are heirs together with the Jews in the promise in Jesus Christ. The
revelation of this mystery of the inclusion of both Jew and Gentile is the work of the
Spirit (Eph. 1:13-14; 2:18).

5. The Spirit effects release from bondage to genuine freedom (Gal. 3:22; 5:1, 16;
Rom. 8:13; II Cor. 3:17)--motif of walking—Gal. 5:16; Rom. 8:1-3; II Cor. 3:17.
In Judaism, Paul had known the frustrating experience of seeking for salvation
through the works of the Law, i.e., by human performance. Ultimately, he came to
recognize that genuine freedom comes only through the Spirit and not by his own
efforts. He asks the Galatians, the pointed question, "Did you receive the Spirit by
works of the Law or by hearing with faith?" (Gal. 3:2). The question is rhetorical;
both he and his readers know the answer. They did not receive the Spirit through
human effort. We find expressions of release and positive freedom in several
passages, which cohere with the Spirit's work:
Gal. 5:1—"for freedom, Christ has set us free"
Gal. 5:16—"Walk by the Spirit and you will by no means fulfill the desire of the
flesh"
Rom. 8:13—"For if you live according to the flesh, you will die, but if by the
Spirit, you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live."
II Cor. 3:17—"Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom."
At several places within Paul's writings, Spirit and Law are contrasted. The Law,
promulgated in Judaism became sidetracked and corrupted by sin, the flesh and the
devil—a deadly combination of power spheres, bringing about bondage and ruin.
However, when the Spirit enters a person's life, the Spirit begins a process of
transforming people into a new humanity, positioning people to fulfill the righteous
requirements of the Law (Rom. 8:4). Paul urges the Roman Christians to put to death
any sinful practices—through the Spirit (Rom. 8:13). He also prays that the
Ephesians be strengthened by means of God's Spirit in the inner person (Eph. 3:16).
Fee notes, "For Paul the Spirit marks the effective end of Torah, both because the
coming of the Spirit fulfills the eschatological promise that signals the beginning of
the new covenant, thus bringing the old to an end, and because the Spirit is
sufficiently to do what Torah was not able to do in terms of righteousness, namely, to
"fulfill in us who walk by the Spirit the righteous commandment of Torah" (Rom.
8:4).9
For Paul, the Christian life is lived out in the ambiguities of the age that is and the
age to come. He expresses the tension of weakness and strength in the context of the
Spirit, "the Spirit assists us in our weakness" (Rom. 8:26). The weakness
encompasses our present existence and includes our sinful nature and behavior. This
message of the Gospel is powerful, accompanied by the Spirit's manifest power and
yet, it is proclaimed in the context of the weakness of the messenger himself (I Cor.
2:1-3; II Cor. 12:7-10). There are a number of texts wherein Paul correlates the
Spirit's power and human weakness: Rom. 8:17-27; II Cor. 12:9; Phil. 3-9; Col. 1:24;
I Cor. 2:3-5; I Thess. 1:5-6). In I Thess. 1:5-6, Paul reminds the new converts at
9Fee, p. 815.
HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 p. 10

Thessalonica that they became Christians by the power of the Spirit, but in the
context of their reception, they experienced suffering, although accompanied by
paradoxical joy. This very paradox was well expressed by the preaching of the power
of the crucified One (I Cor. 1:18-25).

6. The Spirit enables the Christian to live a new life "according to the Spirit"
(katav pneu'ma) and not "according to the flesh" (kataV
savrka).
The Christian life is a "constant struggle with the flesh,"10 expressed through a
contrast between "life before" in the flesh and "life after" (in the Spirit). The
expression, "according to the flesh" means the old way of looking at things, the
"human point of view." It describes a former way of life that has been overcome by
the advent of the Spirit, "So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of
view (kataV savrka). Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do
so no longer" (II Cor. 5:16). The new point of view (kataV pneu'ma) now
determines the meaning of human existence. As Fee notes, "The 'flesh' perceives
things from the old age point of view, where value and significance lie in power,
influence, wealth and wisdom (cf. I Cor. 1:26-31). But in Christ, all of that has
passed away; behold the new has come, the time of the Spirit, in which there has been
a total, radical restructuring of value and significance."11 The people of God are what
they are through an experience of grace and the transformation by the Spirit;
consequently, human perceptions are to be measured "from a spiritual point of view."

7. The Spirit guides and empowers for ethical conduct and prayer (Rom. 8:14, 26ff.;
Phil. 1:19; Eph. 6:18; 2:18; Gal. 5:16, 22).
The Spirit is essentially significant in guidance in terms of ethical decisions. In
describing the Christian life, Paul often uses the metaphor of walking (Rom. 6:4;
14:15; Eph. 5:2; I Cor. 7:17; Eph. 2:10; 4:1; II Cor. 5:7; Eph. 5:8; I Thess. 4:1).
Against the Jewish background of "walking," i.e., conducting oneself ethically, Paul
uses the metaphor in connection with the Spirit. "Walk by the Spirit and you will by
no means fulfill the desires of the flesh" (Gal. 5:16). There is a fundamental clash
between the "Spirit" and the "flesh"; the context highlights the vital function of the
Spirit—to empower and direct Christian behavior in the inevitable struggle. The
classic passage, which links the Spirit's work and Christian character is found in Gal.
5:22ff. In this chapter, the role of the Holy Spirit is central (Gal. 5:13-6:10) and is
frequently expressed, "in/by the Spirit" (pneuvmati). Paul tells the Galatians to
complete the Christian life by the very agency with which they began, "the same
Spirit" (3:3). They are commanded to "walk in the Spirit" with the confident
assurance, "and you will not fulfill the desire of the flesh" (v. 16). Christians who act
in this responsible manner are "led by the Spirit" and evidence the organic fruit of the
Spirit (5:22-23). They also behave "in accordance with the Spirit" (v. 25) and when
they "sow to the Spirit", they will "reap eternal life," that is also from the Spirit (6:8).
Paul speaks of the "fruit of the Spirit," and adds a list of nine virtues, which constitute
the fruit. They are contrasted with the works of the flesh; it is a contrast, which is not
10Fee, p. 817.
11Fee, p. 821.
HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 p. 11

accidental. The metaphor of fruit implies an organic relationship that is absent from
works. Whereas works are connected with self-effort, fruit is not. Just as fruit in a
garden is dependent on the Creator's supply of sunshine and rain, so the fruit of the
Spirit grows in complete dependence on the Spirit; these virtues display the
characteristics of Christ in Christians, enlivened by the Spirit. Such "fruit" covers a
very broad range of attitudes, virtues and behavior—both personal and communal.
Paul does not attempt to regulate Christian behavior with rules of behavior and
specific codes of conduct; he is convinced that the life of the Spirit is that of freedom
and empowerment. It should also be noted that there is a close link between ethics
and the joyful attitudes of the worshipping community:
"Be filled with the Spirit. Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual
songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks to
God for everything in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Eph. 5:18-20).
"Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one
another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with
gratitude in your hearts to God" (Col. 3:16).
The Spirit also fulfills a certain role in communicating God's love: "And hope
does not put to shame, because the love of God has been poured into our hearts
through the Holy Spirit." In Col. 1:8, Epaphras is said to have made known to Paul,
the Colossians' love in the Spirit.
Paul recognizes that the guidance of the Spirit is indispensable. All who are
children of God are led by the Spirit of God (Rom. 8:14). This does not simply refer
to the initial conversion experience but a day by day awareness of the Spirit's
presence and guidance.
This theme of guidance is especially meaningful in the context of prayer.
According to Rom. 8:26ff., the Spirit recognizes our weaknesses and comes to our
assistance, especially in helping the people of God to pray intelligently. His
assistance goes beyond mere support of people; the Spirit personally intercedes on
our behalf.12 The Spirit enables the Abba prayer (Rom. 8:15-16; Gal. 4:6) and directs
Christians to pray properly (Rom. 8:26); the Spirit also prays on behalf of those
whom He indwells ("groans" Rom. 8:27). Access to God is granted by the Holy
Spirit (Eph. 2:18), thus, "praying in the Spirit" is urged upon believers as an ongoing
practice (Eph. 6:18). Prayer is a distinguishing mark of the new community of faith,
the true Israel, as the community prays and worships in the Spirit (Phil. 3:3; Phil.
1:19). Paul not only believed in prayer but practiced prayer and urged the ongoing
activity of prayer (I Thess. 5:16-18).
There seem to be two major foci for the prayer concerns that Paul enjoins: 1)
ongoing struggle against principalities and powers (often human attitutudes), 2) the
penetration of the Gospel into unreached territories (Eph. 6:18-20). Paul's prayer life
is prompted by the Spirit, "in the Spirit," and accompanied with great joy and
thanksgiving for what God has done in Christ and thanksgiving for the people whose
lives have been touched. To be sure, Paul experiences some private charismatic
occurrences (II Cor. 12:1-10); however, he does not use these experiences to bolster
his own fame, reputation or status as an apostle. He keeps those experiences to
himself in a private and discreet manner.

12For other verses where the Spirit is connected with prayer, cf. Phil. 1:19; Eph. 6:18; Eph. 2:18.
HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 p. 12

C. Future Expectation
8. The Spirit is the eschatological guarantee of ultimate fulfillment
(ajrrabw'n—II Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Eph. 1:13-14 also related to sfravgi",
sfragivzw; ajparchv—Rom. 8:23).
Paul positions the person and work of the Holy Spirit within the broader context
of the "already but not yet," tension that exists within the NT. The Church lives
between the times; the Kingdom of God has come and yet the Kingdom will come in
splendor. The Spirit-filled community lives as a people whose true citizenship is in
Heaven and thus, it awaits consummation (Phil. 3:20). Christians live the life of the
future in the present evil age.
Paul uses the various word-pictures of the "downpayment," seal," or
"firstfruits"—three metaphors, which highlight the guarantee of eschatological
fulfillment of a grand and glorious future. The word "down payment"
(ajrrabwvn) is a word, which frequently appears in contracts and agreements.
A woman sells a cow and she receives one thousand drachmae as an
ajrrabwvn, which guarantees the remainder of the purchase price, yet to be
paid. There is a troop of dancing girls that are engaged for a village festival. They
are paid so many drachmae in advance as an ajrrabwvn. There is also the
stipulation that final payment will be made after the performance has been finished.
The ajrrabwvn was an advance payment, a first installment, a partial
payment, which was a pledge and guarantee that in due time, the full payment would
be made.13
The Spirit is also described as the "first fruits" (ajparchv) in Rom. 8:23—a
pledge of the full harvest that is yet to come. In I Cor. 15:20, 23, Christ is described
as the first fruits (of resurrection), the guarantee of the resurrection of Christians.
Present existence belongs to the "already" phase of the Kingdom of God (Mk. 1:15).
The future is the "not yet" phase, the time of grand fulfillment. As Fee notes, "the
first sheaf is God's pledge to us of the final harvest . . .the Spirit plays the essential
role in our present existence, as both evidence and guarantee that the future is now
and yet to be."14 Christians live "between the times," with respect to the resurrection
that has already occurred, "raised with Christ" (Rom. 6:4-5) and the future bodily
resurrection (Rom. 8:10-11).
Similar to the term ajrrabwvn, the noun "seal" (sfravgi") borrows its
significance from commercial practice. The term is found in II Cor. 1:21-22, Eph.
1:13; 4:30). When a man sealed a document or a will, he guaranteed that it was his,
and that he, through the seal, was prepared to stand by the contents and the
conditions. The seal was a stamped impression in wax and, denoted ownership and
authenticity and it also affirmed the security of the owner. A sack or a package could
be closed with a seal over a knot. This seal was the sender's guarantee that the goods
really came from him. Thus, the seal of the Spirit emphasizes the present and future
mark in which God claimed His people for His own. In these texts, the seal marks the
people of God off as God's particular possession and also orients them to the future,
"sealed for the day of redemption" (Eph. 4:30). Clearly, the Spirit is the guarantee,
which orients the believer to the sure hope of a certain and final consummation.
13 James Hope Moulton, George Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, (Grand Rapids:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1930), p. 79.
14.Fee, p. 807

HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 p. 13

In Paul's understanding, the metaphors express the conviction that the Spirit
means the inauguration but not the consummation, the present gift that points ahead
to the future reality; the Christian life is lived out in the creative tension of the two
ages. In Rom. 8, the Spirit, along with the Christian and all of creation "groan" in
eager expectation of the children of God being revealed (Rom. 8:19, 23). It is
important to note that the Spirit here is present in the context of weakness. At the
present, all believers are incomplete and the Spirit "groans" for them in their
incomplete condition. They await the full realization of God's purpose. The present
gift of the Spirit is a blessed foretaste of future glory, continuously pointing to the
eschatological redemption of the body. The Spirit guarantees the full possession of
the blessings in the present age and the untold blessings of the age to come, which
will not only include renewal of people but the entire creation (Gal. 5:22; Rom.
15:13; Rom. 5:2; Rom. 8:23-25).

9. The Spirit will effect the transformation of believers with a body like that of the
Risen Jesus.
The Spirit will enable the future transformation of believers in their
glorified bodies. The future expectation is based upon the
resurrection/transformation of Christ, which has already occurred. As Paige
notes, "The corporeality of a risen Jesus could be potentially troubling in two
ways: (1) it might seem to give Jesus a corruptible nature (because he shared in
material existence); and just as serious, (2) it might make Jesus a distant figure,
exalted into heaven but separated from the feelings and needs of his people on
earth. Paul avoids these pitfalls, preserving Jesus' exalted nature in a new body,
and at the same time, his immanent presence with the faithful in the Spirit
("spiritual body" I Cor. 15:44 does not mean 'a body made of spirit' or bodiless
existence; rather it indicates a body fit for the existence of resurrection
life—simultaneously corporeal and 'spiritual')."15 The Spirit is also the guarantee
of the future resurrection, "God will also raise us through the Spirit who indwells
us" (Rom. 8:11). The real presence of the Spirit in personal life is the solid
guarantee of the "future life" even in the context of human mortality and the
certainty of physical death in the present age (8:10).

Application

Clearly, the work of the Holy Spirit is full-orbed and embraces the entire
Christian faith, past event, present experience and future hope and is positioned within
the broad context of the overlap of two ages. People frequently isolate one particular
aspect of the person and work of the Holy Spirit, e.g., "signs and wonders," "fruit of the
Spirit" (ethical behavior), prayer, particular gifts of the Spirit—and these particular items
become a litmus test for gauging their own spirituality or the spirituality of others. Many
of these efforts reflect the human tendency to be simplistic, reductionistic and
stereotypical—all of which reflect the human need to control one's own understanding
and environment. For Paul, the work of the Holy Spirit is comprehensive—bound to the
saving event of Jesus, the Christian life and witness, the worshipping community, the life
15T. Paige, "Holy Spirit," Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press,
1993), p. 408.
HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 p. 14

of evangelism and the future hope. Life in the Spirit does not point us to what we
ourselves can do but to what the Spirit can do through us. May we grow in our
appreciation and appropriation of the Person and Work of the Holy Spirit, who may fill
us with the passion to be filled with the very life of God and express that life in a full and
complete way to a world that is desperate need of a Savior. Our time has come for a
greater search and rediscovery of the reality and empowerment of the person and work of
the Holy Spirit (Rom. 8; II Cor. 3; Gal. 5)
O God, you are my God,
Earnestly I seek you;
My soul thirsts for you,
My body longs for you,
In a dry and weary land,
Where there is no water (Psa. 63:1)
Jesus said, "Listen to the wind—You cannot tell where it comes from or where it goes.
Yet how real and powerful a thing it is. So it is with God's Spirit" (Jn. 3:7ff.). We are
like Nicodemus; we accept the mystery of the wind and the wind's effects. Similarly, we
need to accept the mystery of the person and work of the Holy Spirit although we cannot
directly see what it is. We are always in need of developing and recovering the faith that
God can work and still will work in a dynamic way in our lives.

HolySpirit.doc
J. Lyle Story
06/27/08
 Story p. 1

Introduction to Mark

Author: Mark
Date: circa A.D.65-67
Theme: The Suffering Son of Man who is in fact the Son of God
Key Words: Authority, Son of Man, Son of God, Suffering, Faith, Disciple,
Gospel

AUTHOR.
Even though the Gospel of Mark is anonymous, the early tradition is united that the
author of this gospel was Mark, the close associate of Peter (cf. 1 Pet. 5:13; Acts
12:12,25; 13:13; 15:37-39; Col. 4:10; 2 Tim. 4:11; Philem. 24). The earliest witness to
Markan authorship stems from Papias, bishop of the church at Hierapolis (c. A.D. 135-
140), a witness that is preserved in Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History. Papias describes
Mark as "the interpreter of Peter." There are different sayings from the early church
fathers which likewise attribute the Gospel to Mark. In view of the fact that the early
church was careful to connect the gospels with the apostles, it is impressive to find a
general acceptance of Markan authorship for the second gospel, even though he was not
an apostle.

DATE.
The church fathers state that the Gospel of Mark was written after Peter's death (Nero's
persecution--A.D.64,65; e.g., Irenaeus). The internal witness from the Gospel of Mark
likewise points us to the period between A.D. 65 and 70, in view of the fact that the
Jewish War (A.D.66-70) and the destruction of the temple have not yet occurred (Mark
13).

BACKGROUND
In A.D. 64, Nero accused the Christian community of setting the city of Rome on fire,
and subsequently instigated a fearful persecution in which Paul and Peter perished. In the
milieu of a persecuted church, living constantly under the threat of death, the evangelist
Mark writes his "good news." Clearly he wants his readers to draw encouragement and
strength from the life and example of Jesus. What was true for Jesus was to become true
for the apostles and disciples of all ages. The servant is destined to follow the Lord
(10:43-45). The somber shadow of Jesus' forthcoming Passion appears in the Baptist's
imprisonment (1:14), even before Jesus' public ministry begins (1:15). The Passion
becomes explicit in Jesus repeated announcement, "And He began to teach them that the
Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and
scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again" (8:31; see 9:31; 10:32-34). And
His suffering was to become the norm for committed discipleship: "Whoever desires to
come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross and follow me" (8:34). Mark
leads his readers to the cross of Jesus wherein they can discover meaning and hope in
their suffering.
CONTENT.

5/4/2015
 Story p. 2

The structure of Mark's Gospel reveals the various geographical movements of Jesus
which is climaxed by His death in Jerusalem and subsequent resurrection. After the
Introduction (1:1-13), Mark narrates the public ministry of Jesus in Galilee (1:14-9:50),
and Judea (10-13), culminating in the Passion and Resurrection (14-16). The Gospel of
Mark can be roughly seen as two halves joined together by the "hinge" of Peter's
confession of Jesus as the Messiah (8:27-30) and first Passion prediction (8:31ff.)
The Gospel of Mark is the shortest of the Gospels, which excludes genealogies,
the birth and early Judean ministry of Jesus. The evangelist moves rapidly from one
scene to another, thus, making it a Gospel of action. This is why Mark accentuates the
Gospel record with the use of the Greek word eutheos, most of the time translated
"immediately." The word occurs 42 times in Mark, more than in all the rest of the New
Testament. Mark frequently uses the Greek imperfect tense, denoting continuous action,
thus, setting the narrative of the Gospel at a rapid pace.
Mark's audience is considered to have been Roman Gentiles. The use of
Latinisms in the Gospel (see 4:21; 12:14; 6:27; 15:39) and the lack of stress on Jewish
customs and law confirm such a premise.
In the Introduction (1:1-13) Mark leads his readers to understand that the events
of (1:2-13) are "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God" (1:1). The
beginning includes the fulfillment of OT prophecy (1:2,3), the preparatory ministry of
John the Baptist (1:4-8), the baptism of Jesus (1:9-11), and Jesus' temptation (1:12,13).
The next section, the Galilean ministry of Jesus (1:14-9:50), opens with the
declaration, "Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the
gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, 'The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God
is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel'" (1:14,15). The initial declaration is
followed by the call to individual disciples (1:16-20), suggesting Jesus' purpose of
creating a new community. The disciples are formally appointed in 3:14,15, and later
sent out in mission (6:7-13).
Within this section of Jesus' Galilean ministry (1:14-9:50), we find two major
movements: 1) The growing popularity of Jesus with the masses; and 2) The rising
opposition to Jesus among the Jewish hierarchy. On the one hand, Jesus' fame as a
miracle worker and exorcist spreads (1:28, 32-34, 37, 45; 3:7-12; 4:1; 5:20,21;
6:31,33,53-55; 7:36; 8:1). Indeed, that very popularity is somewhat of a hindrance to His
central mission of preaching (1:38,45). Jesus is the One who moves in compassion
towards people in the extremity of human need (4:35-41--disciples on the sea; 5:1-20--
Gerasene demoniac; 5:21-23, 35-43--Jairus' daughter; 5:25-34--the woman with the
hemorrhage). On the other hand, the opposition of the religious hierarchy hardens. A
series of controversial stories show criticism of Jesus' forgiveness of sins (2:1-12), his
fellowship with tax-collectors and sinners (2:13-17), his refusal to fast (2:18-22), his
breaking of the Sabbath (2:23-28; 3:1-6), and the exorcising of demons (3:20-27,etc.). In
ch. 4 Jesus resorts to open-air preaching using parables to interpret the nature, growth,
fulfillment, and consummation of the Kingdom of God.
In 7:24-9:50, Jesus turns to northern Galilee, a quasi-Gentile country, and again
He shows concern for the Gentiles and their needs (7:24-30--Syrophoenician woman;
7:31-37--deaf mute). He feeds the people (8:1-10) just as He had fed the Jews (6:30-44).
The key event of this section is precipitated by Jesus' question to Peter, "But who do you
say that I am?" (8:29). Peter's confession, "You are the Christ" (8:29) is followed by the

5/4/2015
 Story p. 3

first Passion prediction (8:31) and Peter's demurral. His answer to Peter means that in the
age to come, the Christ/Messiah will be a conquering King (see Dan. 7:13-14). But now,
the destiny of the Son of Man is suffering, humiliation, crucifixion, and, yes, resurrection.
The second major section of Mark's Gospel, Jesus' ministry in Judea, begins in the
region of Judea by the other side of the Jordan" (10:1), and points forward to the final
drama which is to be played out in Jerusalem. The entire section of the gospel is
dominated by the Passion of Jesus. He proceeds to the cross calmly and resolutely. More
conflict stories appear: divorce--10:2-12, rich young ruler--10:17-22, true greatness--
10:35-45, cursing of fig tree--11:12-14, Temple-Cleansing/Cursing--11:15-19, authority--
11:27-33, Parable of Wicked Vinedressers--12:1-12, taxes to Caesar--12:13-17,
Resurrection--12:18-27, greatest commandment--12:28-34, and widow's two mites--
12:38-40. The stories develop in intensity, so much so that after the Parable of the
Wicked Vinedressers in 12:1-11, (wherein the beloved son was killed and cast out of the
vineyard), "they sought to lay hold of Him...for they knew He had spoken the parable
against them" (12:12). With a tragic sense of irony, Mark informs the readers that the
religious leaders sought to fulfill the very purpose of the parable. The Apocalyptic
Discourse (13) is occasioned by the disciples' claim concerning the greatness of the
temple (13:1) and by their question concerning its destruction as predicted by Jesus
(13:4).
The last three chapters cover the events between the plot to arrest Jesus (14:1-2)
and the visit of the women to the tomb (16:1-8). In between these two events we read of
the anointing of Jesus for burial (14:3-8), His betrayal (14:10-11), the Passover meal
(14:12-21), the institution of the Lord's Supper (14:22-26), Gethsemane (14:32-42), and
the arrest and trial before the Sanhedrin and Pilate (14:43-15:15). The remainder of ch.
15 relates the mockery, crucifixion, and burial of Jesus. Mark 16:1-8 records the
announcement to three women that Jesus is risen and that His disciples will see Him in
Galilee.
In many ways, Mark emphasizes the Passion of Jesus so that it becomes the gauge
by which the whole of Jesus' ministry and the ministry of His disciples may be measured:
"For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a
ransom for many" (10:45). Jesus' entire ministry (miracles, table-fellowship with sinners,
choice of disciples, teaching on the Kingdom of God, etc.) is set within the context of the
self-giving love of the Son of God, climaxed on the Cross and in His Resurrection.

CHRISTOLOGY IN MARK.
In reading Mark, we sense the question that concerns him, "Who is Jesus?" At times the
revelation of who He is, is a secret (e.g. 1:42-44); at other times the secret comes out into
the open (e.g. 5:19,20). As Mark unfolds his gospel of Jesus Christ through narrative,
dialogue, and teaching, he intends for his readers to come to a full understanding of Jesus'
identity.
1. Jesus' Messianic Authority. Mark presents Jesus as a person with authority,
the Messiah of Jewish hope. His authority is expressed:
a. As a teacher (1:21,22)
b. As a teacher-exorcist (1:27)
c. Over the forgiveness of sins (2:1-12)

5/4/2015
 Story p. 4

d. Over the Sabbath (2:27-28; 3:1-6)

e. Over Satan and unclean spirits (3:19-30)
f. Over the mystery of the Kingdom of God (4:10-11)
g. Over nature (4:35-41; 6:45-52)
h. Over the Law (7:1-13, 14-20)
i. Over the temple and sanctuary (11:15-18)

2. Son of God. The opening title of Mark's work, "The beginning of the gospel
of Jesus Christ, Son of God" (1:1), gives us his central thesis concerning the identity of
Jesus. We find the language of sonship both in the Baptism and Transfiguration (1:11;
9:7). Twice we read that evil spirits (supernatural) confess Him to be the Son of God
(3:11; 5:7; see also 1:24, 34). Indirectly, His divine sonship is alluded to in the Parable of
the Wicked Vinedressers in which the beloved son was sent on a dangerous mission
(12:6). Finally, the narrative of the crucifixion concludes with the Centurion's
confession, "Truly this Man was the Son of God" (15:39). While Jesus prefers the
ambiguous term "Son of Man" for Himself, Mark leads his readers to a true
understanding of Jesus as the Son of God. People thought of Jesus as a madman or
fanatic (3:21), prophet (8:28), even as the Messiah (8:29). It is in the very depth of his
humiliation on the cross, that one man--a Roman centurion--ventures to call him, "The
Son of God" (15:39). Mark arranges his material so as to lead up to this confession.
Throughout the gospel, Jesus is often defined by who He is not. His divine sonship can
only be understood in His humiliation, completed in the crucifixion, and vindicated by
His resurrection from the dead.
3. Son of Man. In 8:29-31, when Jesus asks his disciples, "But who do you say
that I am?", Peter responds with the words, "You are the Christ" (8:29). Then we read
that Jesus substitutes the term "Son of Man" for Himself as He announces His Passion:
"the Son of Man must suffer many things..." (3:31). The first of its fourteen occurrences
is found in His authority as "Son of Man" to forgive sins. It is also linked to His
authority over the Sabbath (2:29). The other uses of Jesus' self-designation are linked to:
1) His present humiliation, suffering, and death; and 2) His future coming in glory
(apocalyptic).
In the trial scene before the Sanhedrin, the high priest asks Jesus whether He is
the "Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" (14:61). Jesus answers, "I am (Christ), but then
interprets what He means: "And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of
the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven" (14:62). At this point the high priest
understands what Jesus says and charges Him with blasphemy. Jesus builds upon the
language of Daniel 7:13ff. which describes a glorious future coming of the Son of Man
on the clouds of heaven. As Son of Man, He is present in His humiliation (8:31), but He
will also come one day in glory as Son of man (8:38). Jesus did not call Himself
Christ/Messiah, because the popular understanding of this term was wrong. For the Jews,
a suffering Messiah was a contradiction in terms.
Mark, with his eye upon discipleship, suggests that Jesus' disciples must possess a
penetrating insight into the mystery of Jesus' identity. Even though people continually
misunderstand Jesus' identity and demons confess Jesus' divine sonship, Jesus' disciples,
unlike demons, must take up the cross and follow Him. The coming in glory of the
vindicated Son of Man is the coming in His unveiled power and glory. For now the veil

5/4/2015
 Story p. 5

remains.

THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK.

In Mark's Introduction (1:2-13) which he calls "the beginning of the gospel of Jesus
Christ, Son of God" (1:1), he refers to the Holy Spirit three times (1:8; Spirit in 1:10,12).
In 1:8, the Holy Spirit is used as part of a double contrast: 1) person, 2) activity. In terms
of person, John the Baptist contrasts himself with the coming One in these words: "There
comes One after me who is mightier than I, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to stoop
down and loose" (1:7). The second statement in 1:8 contrasts John the Baptist's present
activity of baptizing with water with the future activity of the coming One:

"I indeed baptized you with water,

but He will
baptize you with the Holy Spirit"

John administers the sacrament of baptism of repentance for the remission of sins (1:4),
while the coming One will bestow the eschatological gift of the Spirit (cf. Joel 2:28f.; Is.
32:15; 44:3; Ezek. 36:25-27; 37:14; 39:29).
In 1:10, it seems clear that before Jesus can bestow the Spirit, He must receive the
Spirit. The descent of the Spirit on Jesus ("and the Spirit descending upon Him like a
dove") suggests the arrival of the Messianic age.
In 1:12, the Spirit that has just descended upon Jesus, now "drove Him into the
wilderness." Jesus enters into the wilderness experience of temptation in obedience to
God and in fulfillment of His Servant-vocation.
In 3:29, the Holy Spirit is referred to with the phrase, "he who blasphemes against
the Holy Spirit." The person who utters such a blasphemy "never has forgiveness, but is
subject to eternal condemnation" (3:29). The sin against the Holy Spirit is set in contrast
to "all sins...whatever blasphemies people may utter" (3:28), for these sins and
blasphemies "will be forgiven." The context must be the clue which will help us decide
upon the meaning of "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit." The scribes blaspheme against
the Holy Spirit in that they attribute Jesus' Spirit-effect exorcisms to Satan (3:22). Their
blurred vision made them incapable of true discernment. In 3:30, Mark explains why
Jesus makes this severe pronouncement: "because they said, 'He has an unclean spirit'"
(see 3:22).
As a part of Jesus' conflict story with His opponents (12:35-37), He mentions how
the Holy Spirit has inspired Scriptures in claiming that David spoke by the Holy Spirit
(12:36), the words that refer to Jesus.
As encouragement and help in the face of hostility and court proceedings, the
disciples are promised the gift of the Holy Spirit: "But whatever is given you in that
hour, speak that; for it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit" (13:11). In that special
hour of need, God, through the Holy Spirit, will give them the word to speak.
Aside from these explicit references in Mark, there is a cluster of words that are
linked with the gift of the Holy Spirit: power, authority, prophet, healing, laying on of
hands, Messiah/Christ, Kingdom, etc. In keeping with the secrecy of Jesus' real identity,
Mark holds to a minimum, direct references to the Holy Spirit in the same way that he
avoids emphasis upon Jesus' Messiahship. To have emphasized either truth, could have

5/4/2015
 Story p. 6

been easily misinterpreted. Mark prefers to have his readers grapple with the mystery of
the Servant who suffered, was humiliated, crucified, who gave His life a ransom for
many, and was raised from the dead. He urges the Church to look beyond popular
misconceptions about the Messiah and the Holy Spirit, to see in this hidden figure, the
Son of God.

OUTLINE OF MARK

Introduction
1:1-13

A. Summary statement 1:1

B. Fulfillment of OT prophecy 1:2,3
C. John the Baptist's ministry 1:4-8
D. Jesus' baptism 1:9-11
E. Jesus' temptation 1:12-13

I. Jesus' Galilean (and wider) ministry 1:1:14-9:50

A. Beginnings: initial success and conflict: 1:14-3:6
B. Later stages: a growing popularity and opposition 3:7-6:13
C. Ministry inside and outside of Galilee 6:14-8:26
D. Ministry on the way to Judea 8:26-9:50

II. Jesus' Judean ministry 10:1-16:9

A. In the Trans-Jordan 10:1-52
B. In Jerusalem 11:1-13:37
C. The Passion 14:1-15:47
D. The Resurrection 16:1-9

5/4/2015
 Introduction to Luke
Author: Luke Date: A.D. 75 Key Words: Prayer, Thanksgiving, Joy, Holy Spirit, Kingdom,
Repentance
AUTHOR. Both style and language offer sufficient proof that the third gospel and Acts were written
by the same person. The prologue (Lk. 1:1-4) is a literary device, used by Greek writers, and serves
as a prologue for Acts as well. The expression, "The former account" (Acts 1:1) most probably refers
to the third gospel. The fact that both books are dedicated to Theophilus, also strongly argues for
common authorship. Church tradition attributes these two works to Luke, the physician, the traveling
companion of Paul (Col. 4:14; Philem. 24; II Tim. 4:11), and the author of the "we"-sections of Acts
(16:10-18; 20:5-21:17;
27:1-28:16). The gospel of Luke is thus, the first-half of a "two-part volume" of "all that Jesus began
both to do and teach" (Acts 1: 1).
DATE. Luke appears to have been written after the fall of Jerusalem (A.D. 70). There are a number
of predictions within the gospel that seem to reflect this era (19:41-44; 21:24; 23:28ff.). One of the
most revealing passages is 21:20, where for the Markan "abomination of desolation" (Mk. 13:14),
Luke substitutes the expression, "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that
its desolation is near." One of Luke's distinctive ideas, i.e. the delay of the Parousia (arrival and
presence) of Christ also argues for a later date. Although Luke's gospel is firmly rooted in the
fulfillment of Jewish hope, the gospel as a whole is the gospel of Gentile Christianity, and reflects a
period of missionary expansion to the Gentile world.
BACKGROUND. Luke writes his gospel primarily for a Gentile audience. His Greek is excellent
and demonstrates a masterful control over language. For the sake of his Gentile readers, Luke omits
Semitic words, and usually translates Hebrew or Aramaic words without explanation. Luke's gospel
presents Jesus in His manifest concern for all peoples, a concern that is apparent in the infancy
narrative, "A light to bring revelation to the Gentiles, and the glory of Your people, Israel." (2:32), In
a particular way, Luke's Jesus extends Himself in compassion to those who need Him most--Gentiles,
women, tax-collectors, publicly acknowledged sinners, Samaritans, and criminals, etc. The gospel
concludes with the commission and promise of the risen Jesus that" repentance and remission of sins
should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." (24:47). Many of the
passages that are distinctly Lukan, represent a ministry to the outcasts, e.g. Zacchaeus (19: 110).
Luke presents us with a universal perspective as he writes the record of events that are central to the
entire history of the human race. The genealogy of Jesus is carried back. not to Abraham, the father
of the Jewish race, but to Adam who is the father of us all. Adam was the first and original Son of
God (3:24-38).
An outreach to Gentiles becomes even more apparent in Luke's second volume, Acts. The ministry of
the Holy Spirit, beginning in Jerusalem (chs. 1-7), leads to the more extensive ministry in Judea (chs.
8-15), and Samaria (ch. 8), and especially to the far-flung borders of the Mediterranean Sea,
including Paul's final journey to Rome, the center of the Gentile world (chs. 9-28). The Spirit of God
occupies a prominent place in both of Luke's volumes. Acts begins where the gospel concludes, i.e.
with the promise of the coming of the Spirit (see Lk. 24:49; Acts 1:8). For Luke, the Spirit of God is
the means by which the new world-wide community is formed. The Holy Spirit, the driving force in
the birth-narratives (chs. 1-2), and initial ministry of Jesus (chs. 3-4), is the One who inaugurates the
Church (Acts 1-2). In both Luke and Acts, the Spirit enables Jesus and His followers to proclaim the
Kingdom of God to all classes of people.
Luke portrays the whole history unrolling in three time periods--the period of the OT the period of
Jesus (relatively shortt and the period of the Church. All the prophets prophesied until John the
Baptist--which means that John belongs to the prophetic past. During the period of time, the Spirit is
active and very powerful but the Spirit is associated with Jesus only. And when the Spirit is
mentioned, the Spirit is a promise for the future (12: 12).
Another theme related to the Spirit is the theme of joy. It is like a thread that goes through the entire
Gospel. We read that Jesus Himself rejoiced in the Holy Spirit (10:21 )--the word there means an
intense and exuberant
In the prologue (1: 1-4), Luke establishes his purpose in the composition of his gospel. He wants
Theophilus to be assured of the certainty of the things in which he was instructed (v. 4). Luke
substantiates the certainty/accuracy of his work with four reasons: 1. His concern with early origins
with priority given to eyewitnesses (v. 2),
2. His aim to be comprehensive, i.e."all things" (v. 3), 3. chronological, i.e. "an orderly account" (v.
3), 4. accurate, i.e. "the certainty" (v. 4).
Luke's purpose is realized through a salvation history, "a narrative of those things which are most
surely believed among us" (v. 1). In his narrative of "holy history" Luke also explains why the end of
the present age has not yet come. The ministry of Jesus (Luke) which gives way to the ministry of the
Church (Acts) must reach "the end of the earth" (Acts 1:8), which implies the delay of the Parousia
(arrival and presence of Jesus), as well as the extension of the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Thus, the
purpose of God, fulfilled in Jesus' history is continued in the Church's life and witness. Through the
rejection and humiliation of Jesus by His own people, Jesus becomes the Savior of the world. In
Acts, Jesus' death is likewise regarded as an expression of the divine purpose of reaching out to the
whole of humanity (2:23). Jesus is the suffering Servant of the Lord, Messiah, and Lord, but above
all, He is a "light to the Gentiles." Even Luke's genealogy reveals that God's saving deed is for all
people, seeing that Jesus' pedigree is traced back to Adam.
A secondary purpose of Luke's gospel is apologetic in that he wishes to affirm the position of
Christianity vis-a-vis Judaism and the Roman State. The Christian gospel is not seditious, and thus,
Pilate, representing Rome, declares repeatedly that Jesus is innocent (23:4, 14, 22). And yet, "Herod
and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the peoples of Israel" (Acts. 4:27) are together responsible
for Jesus' death (see Acts 3:13,26; 4:27,30 and Isa. 52:13-53:12). More than the other Gospels, Luke
emphasizes that Pilate is unwilling to sentence Jesus to death, "Why, What evil has he done? I have
found in him no crime deserving of death; I will therefore chastise him and release him (23:22;
23:13-16). God has made the Church the true heir of Judaism. The coming of Jesus is the fulfillment
of Jewish hope, now opened up to the whole world (2:2538).
CONTENTS. Following the prologue (1: 1-4), Luke gives in succession, the birth and infancy
narratives of John the Baptist and Jesus. The language of this section (1 :5-2:52) reflects the best of
OT piety, expressed through several great hymns. Preparation for Jesus' public ministry is the subject
of 3:1-4:13. Luke introduces the ministry of John the Baptist to the people (3: 1-20) and to Jesus (vss.
21-22), and follows with a interpretive genealogy (vss. 23-38). Following the Baptism, Jesus is
tempted in the wilderness (4:1-13).
The Galilean ministry (4: 14-9:50) is introduced by the powerful sermon of Jesus in Nazareth (4:16-
30), which sounds forth the universal thrust of Jesus' ministry (v. 27), beyond the confines of Israel.
His ministry which follows Markan order, narrates various healings, controversy stories, and
teachings concerning the kingdom of God.The disciples are called and appointed (5:16:16),and sent
out in mission (9:1-6).We also find two Passion pronouncements (9:22, 44-45), which prepare the
readers for the subsequent narrative.
The summary statement of 9:51 marks the beginning of a new section (9:51-19:45), "Now it came to
pass, when the time had come for Him to be received up, that He steadfastly set His face to go to
Jerusalem." The material of this section is distinctly Lukan reflecting Jesus' teaching on prayer,
miracles, wealth, forgiveness, compassion, table-fellowship with tax-gatherers and sinners. We find
some twelve temporal or geographical indicators (9:51; 13:22; 13:33; 17:11; 18:31; 18:35; 19:1;
19:11; 19:28; 19:37; 19:41; 19:45) Luke's distinctive concern is expressed uniquely through several
parables: the good Samaritan, the friend at midnight, the lost sheep, the lost coin, the prodigal son,
the rich man and Lazarus, the Pharisee and the tax-collector. The reader is prepared for Jesus'
rejection and death at the hands of Jerusalem's religious authorities (18:31-34). Ironically, the people
of Jerusalem receive their king (19:28-40), although this kingdom will not appear immediately
(19:11).
The Jerusalem ministry (19:45-21:38) includes narrative (19:45-48), controversy stories (20:1-21 :4),
and a final eschatological discourse (21:5-38) The Passion, which issues in the glorification of Jesus
is the theme of the last three chapters. The Passover meal (22: 1-38), is followed by Jesus' passion,
death, and burial (22:30-23:56). Ch. 24 includes various resurrection appearances and a brief account
of the ascension. The climax is impressive-"And He led them out as far as Bethany, and He lifted up
His hands and blessed them. Now it came to pass, while He blessed them, that He was parted from
them, and carried up into heaven. And they worshiped Him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy,
and were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God." (24:50-53).
CONTEMPORARY AND PERSONAL APPLICATION. From a devotional perspective, there are
several distinctives in Luke's gospel which call for special comment:

1. Look upon Jesus, the True Man and you will discover who you were meant to be. In his
genealogy, Luke traces Jesus' origin to Adam, the son of God (3:38), and thus portrays Jesus as the
fullness or perfection of humanity. Luke offers his readers the goal to which they are to aspire. This
does not mean that the Christian life is a simple effort of the will to imitate the Savior. Rather, the
dynamic of the Spirit is the means by which the Christian's life is brought to fullness. Both Jewish
and Gentile history are brought to completion by Christ, the inexhaustible source from which people
of all ages draw from the Spirit of the Risen Jesus.

2. Learn to appreciate the full humanity of Jesus. Jesus, who is fully divine is also fully human. As a
man, Luke presents the full gamut of human emotion: sorrow, joy, warmth, gentleness, etc.--even as
He retains His glory.

3. Let your concern for the world reflect the all-inclusive love of Jesus. Luke offers his readers a
picture of Jesus that is similar to the words written on the Statue of Liberty, greeting travelers and
immigrants to the United States:

Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free... Send these, the homeless,
tempest-tost to me. The concern of Jesus for the lost, poor, homeless, socially and religiously
dispossessed, hungry--is the proper concern both for the individual Christian and the Church. For
Luke, the Church does not exist for itself but for the world around it with its heartbreak, despair, and
lost condition. A Church only concerned with its respectability does not represent the Jesus we find
in Luke, who breaks through all barriers and crosses over the line to reach those who are aware of
their need.
4. Experience the power of the Risen Jesus. Luke, in his two volumes underscores the power and
authority of the Risen Jesus--a power and authority which must infuse both the individual Christian
and the Church. The first thing that Peter does on the day of Pentecost is to prove that the
manifestation of spiritual power proceeded directly from the Risen Jesus (Acts 2:33). Before proper
witness can be borne to the Risen Jesus, the Church must be empowered by the Holy Spirit (24:49).
The good news that we find in the gospel of Luke is not only about a person of the past, but the
companion volume of Acts shows how His ministry of power is continued through the Spirit-filled
Church. The Risen Lord is present in dynamic power in and through the personal Holy Spirit. Such
power needs to be appropriated. 5. Learn to experience the dynamic power of prayer. In the gospel
we repeatedly find the union of the Holy Spirit, Kingdom, and prayer. Luke highlights the prayer of
Jesus, both by example and explicit teaching. The operation of the Holy Spirit in the extension of the
Kingdom of God is directly related to the practice of prayer. It was so with Jesus and is so with the
individual Christian and the Church.
CHRISTOLOGY IN LUKE. Luke's witness to Jesus Christ is quite diversified:
1. Jesus is the prophet, a frequent title, occurring in 4:24; 7: 16, 39; 9: 19;
24: 19. In His sermon at Nazareth, Jesus implies that He is no less a prophet than Elijah who was sent
to the Gentile woman of Zarephath (4:26).

2. Jesus is the Son of God In addition to the meaning of divine nature and origin, the term,"Son of
God" is linked with the term "Son of Adam" (3:38). Luke's emphasis upon a universal salvation finds
early support in the genealogy, wherein Jesus' ancestry is placed within the family tree of the entire
human race.

3. Jesus is Messiah. Not only does Luke affirm Jesus's Messianic identity but he is careful to define
and redefine the nature of Jesus' Messiahship. Jesus is preeminently the Servant who steadfastly sets
His face to go to Jerusalem "to be received up" (9:31,51). Jesus is the One who was reckoned with
transgressors (Isa. 53:12; Lk. 22:37), Son of David (20:41-44), Son of Man (5:24), and the suffering
Servant (4:17-19).

4. Jesus is the exalted Lord. Luke uses the term "Lord" eighteen times in his gospel (50 times in
Acts). The term finds its theological basis in the resurrection of Jesus, wherein God has made Him
both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36), but is also used of Jesus prior to the resurrection. Most of the uses
of the term are found in passages distinctly Lukan (7: 13, 19; 10: 1,39,41; 11 :39; 12:42, etc.).
5. Jesus is the friend of the outcasts and the lowly Consistently He is gracious to society's rejected
ones, i.e. publicly acknowledged sinners and Samaritans. Jesus' attitute towards those of a lesser
rank, e.g. is positive. His attitude toward women is likewise affirming and sensitive. Luke includes
both narrative and parable which underscore Jesus' positive ministry among those who come from a
lower station in life. he stands ready to forgive and to share the sacred rite of table-fellowship with
the weak and ostracized (see 5:27-32; 19:1-10). God accepts those whom people reject: prodigal son
15:11-32), good Samaritan (10:25-37); the story of the sinful woman (7:36-50); and the story of
Zacchaeus. Jesus is sharply criticized for his inclusive message and his deliberate choice of the riff-
raff of· the population to be his friends. This emphasis is very similar to the Pauline understanding of
grace--God is interested in the ungodly and he takes the initiative in seeking them out, and is willing
to accept them on the basis of faith, and faith alone. The good news of Jesus is that God loves
sinners, loves them just as they are--and he goes out to seek them even before they have begun to
turn to him. This is a message that the Church has found to be hard to believe and hard to declare. It
is much easier to believe that God likes good and respectable people--and produce a new form of
legalism. Jesus is humane, gentle, kind, and sympathetic to the special needs of this group.
THE HOLY SPIRIT ACCORDING TO lUKE. There are seventeen explicit references to the Holy
Spirit in Luke, which suggest a variety of functions:

1. The Holy Spirit is the source of prophetic/ecstatic inspiration. The sudden reappearance of the
Spirit of prophecy that is present in the birth narratives ofchs. 1-2 is striking (1:15, 41, 67; 2:25, 26,
27). Luke wants his readers to see in this prophetic activity, the inauguration of the new age, of the
Spirit.

2. The Holy Spirit enables Jesus to fulfill His ministry--the Spiritanointed Messiah. In chs. 3-4, there
are five explicit references to the Spirit, used with progressive force. The Spirit, which comes upon
Jesus in bodily form like a dove (3:22), leads Him into the wilderness to be tempted (4:1), and
following His victory over temptation He returns to Galilee in the power of the same Spirit (4:14).
Moreover, as He reads in the synagogue, the memorable Messianic words in the Servant passage, i.e.
"The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He has anointed Me..." (4:18; Isa. 61:1, 2), He claims
that they are fulfilled in Him (4:21). Evidence for His charismatic ministry is not only evident in the
remainder of ch. 4, but in the whole of His ministry of power and compassion.

3. The Holy Spirit, through petitionary prayer, effects the Messianic ministry. At critical junctures in
that ministry, Jesus prays, before, during, or after the crucial event (3:21; 6:12; 9:18, 28; 10:21). The
same Holy Spirt that was effective through Jesus' prayers will empower the disciples' prayers (18:
18), and link the Messianic ministry of Jesus to their mighty ministry through the Church (see 24:48,
49).

4. The Holy Spirit spreads joy, both to Jesus and the new community.
There are five Greek words, denoting joy or exultation, which are used twice as often in Luke than
they are in Matthew or Mark. At the time when the disciples return with joy from their mission (10:
17), "In that hour Jesus rejoiced in the Spirit and said..." (10:21). As the disciples are waiting for the
promised Spirit of Jesus' Father (24:49), "they worshiped Him, and returned to Jerusalem with great
joy, and were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God." (24:52-53).
OUTLINE OF lUKE
 I. Prologue 1:1-4
II. The Infancy Narratives 1:5-2:52
A. Annunciation of John the Baptist's birth 1:5-25
B. Annunciation of Jesus' birth 1:26-38
C. Mary's visit with Elizabeth 1:39-56
D. John the Baptist's birth 1:57-80
E. Jesus' birth 2: 1-40
F. The boy Jesus in the Temple 2:41-52
III. Preparation for Public Ministry 3:1-4:13
A. John the Baptist's ministry 3: 1-20
B. Jesus' baptism 3:21-22
C. Jesus' genealogy 3:23-38
D. The temptation 4:1-13
IV. The Galilean Ministry 4:14-9:50
A. At Nazareth and Capernaum 4: 14-44
B.FromthecallofPetertothecallofthetwelve5:1-6:16
C. Sermon on the plain 6: 17-49
D. Narrative and dialogue 7:1-9:50
V. The travel narrative (on the way to Jerusalem) 9:51-19:28
VI. The Jerusalem ministry 19:29-21 :38
A. Events at Jesus' entry 19:29-48
B. Controversy stories 20: 1-21:4
C. Eschatological discourse 21 :5-38
VII. The Passion and Glorification of Jesus 22: 1-24:53
A. The Passover meal 22: 1-38
B. The passion, death and burial of Jesus 22:39-23:56
C. The resurrection and ascension 24: 1-53
 Story, p. 1

Introduction

The Nature of the Gospel(s) and Biblical Theology

As we begin our study into the gospels, we need to be reminded of a verse in the
NT, wherein the evangelist Luke comments on the thoughtful reception of the Gospel by
the newly converted Berean Christians:
Acts 17:11 Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the
Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined
the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
Now Paul had just been at Thessalonica and praises the Thessalonians more than
any other church. But then he goes to Berea and evidently spent much time there--
expounding the Scriptures on a daily basis. The Bereans believe, and do not resist the
new interpretation, but they sit down and make careful and accurate research into the
content, accuracy, historicity, and meaning of their faith. They were interested and
committed and had welcomed Paul and Silas' preaching, but now they wanted to find out
the truth for themselves. The idea of careful investigation resembles the technical sense
of the term apology (ajpologiva) in early Christian literature, like Justin Martyr.
The term is used elsewhere in the NT:
Phil. 1:7 It is right for me to feel thus about you all, because I hold you in my
heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the
defense and confirmation of the gospel.
1 Pet. 3:15 but in your hearts reverence Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to
make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet
do it with gentleness and reverence;
What happened at Berea is similar to the process that is a vital part of our lives,
and needs to be an ingredient in our study together. The Bereans examined the Scriptures
daily to see if these things were so. It is my desire that we learn how to develop and
frame theology for ourselves. Private personal study took place at Berea--not second
hand reading alone.
As we read and reflect upon the gospels, we too need to do our own homework
with the text of Scripture, and building our theology in the Bible's own terms. We need
to try to import ourselves into the historical situation, and free ourselves from our
preconceived notions, pet theories and biases, and let the text of Scripture speak for itself.
Definition. George Ladd has offered us a definition of the term biblical theology
which will assist us in our work this quarter. I imagine that for many of you, the term is a
bit vague and nebulous, which is not clearly distinguished from Christian Doctrine or
Systematic Theology. Ladd says, Biblical theology is that science which deals with the
process of the self-revelation of God, deposited in the Bible in its own historical setting in
its own terms, categories and thought forms.1 On the one hand, biblical theology is a
descriptive discipline that tells the story of God and His concern and activity on behalf of
humanity. On the other hand, biblical theology is intended to lead to the proper human
response of trust, obedience, and worship. While we will try to understand the Jesus
story through the lens of the four evangelists, we will also need to be deeply sensitive to
the way in which the Jesus story affects our lives and commitments, the message that we
1George Eldon Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Co., 1977), p. 25
ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 2

live and speak.

A few of the words call for special comment. The word science means discipline
or course of study that is based on the revelation that God has already made. In a normal
science or science class, e.g., high school biology, physics, or chemistry, we deal with
impersonal objects or chemicals or even animals. With every experiment that we made
in a particular class, we always took the first step; we were active and our subjects were
passive. But now, as we deal with the Bible and spiritual reality, we are dealing with
God's process of self-revelation in which the initiative lies with God. Only as God has
chosen to reveal Himself to people, can we know anything at all. All spiritual life, by its
very nature, is closed up within itself--it's hidden, and such life can only be known
through revelation. I can know you and your spiritual life as you choose to reveal
yourself to me. It that is true with us as humans, then how much more is that true with
God and humanity. Paul said:
1 Corinthians 2:11 For what person knows a man's thoughts except the spirit of
the man which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except
the Spirit of God.
The inward hidden content of God's mind can become your possession and mine only
through a voluntary self-disclosure from God. Further, people must be in possession of
the critical faculty of the spirit, which is also shared by God, before they are enable to
fully understand. God must come to us before we can come to Him.
Process. Another key term is the term process. In biblical theology as we
understand the term revelation, we are dealing with God's activity and the meaning of
that activity. We look at the various ways in which God has communicated with
humanity--over a period of time. God has dealt differently with people at different
periods of history-He has spoken different words and done different deeds. There is a
difference between the way in which God spoke to Abraham, Moses, David, Isaiah, and
on into the NT, with John the Baptist, Jesus, Paul, and the early Church. God spoke
different messages in Noah's day, in the Exodus, the monarchy, the Exile, the life and
death of Jesus, and the fall of Jerusalem.
Unity and diversity. The task of biblical theology is to let the writers of Scripture
speak in their historical setting and context--allowing for the diversity to be heard. For
us, there is often a real tendency in the early years of Christian experience to adopt a flat
view of the Bible--to assume that all of the Bible says the same thing. And we may not
be sensitive to the diversity that is found within the Bible. We need to allow for both a
unity and diversity. As we approach the Gospels we need to allow for the uniqueness
and diversity of the writers. We need to allow the gospel writers to speak for themselves
as they have been inspired by the Holy Spirit. As we are sensitive to the diversity of the
different writers--then we are more able to explore the unity of God's revelation to
humanity.
Martin Luther in 1521 at the Council of Worms affirmed that the Bible alone was
the sole authority over the Church's teaching--over and against the pope and ecclesiastical
tradition. And thus the Reformation churches sprang up based on the sole authority of
Scripture, and the assumption that all of Scripture was saying the same thing. And yet,
during the next year, Martin Luther was struggling with the differences between the
books of James and Hebrews, on the one side, and the epistles of Paul, on the other. In
his preface to his translation in 1522, he expressed something of this diversity and variety

ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 3

of witness, and yet this never really came out, presumably because of the Church's
position on the unity of Scripture. Then, for 200+ years, an artificial blanket of unity was
thrown over the interpretation of Scripture which precluded the variety and diversity of
the Bible. In the late 17th century books began to appear with Biblical Theology as
titles, but really they were books that were compilations of proof texts for theologians
and pastors.
Then, at the end of the Enlightenment into the 18th century-19th there was a
major pendulum swing, in which the Bible was simply regarded as a human book, written
by men, like any other book, and could be properly understood only with the methods of
historical science. As liberalism has continued up to the present, there is a tendency to
say, "Let us go back to the historical Jesus." Many have treated the Synoptic Gospels as
works of literature alone or as historical records of the faith of the primitive church.
Jesus, then loses significance for human salvation, but is regarded as a teacher of the
highest example of a life that is governed by love. While many scholars appreciate the
beauty and power of the Gospel stories, they attribute the individual units of the Gospel
tradition to the creative imagingation of the Early Church.
Over the last fifty years, there has been the emergence of a new type of biblical
theology which affirms both the unity and diversity of the Bible, which has been a
healthy and freeing sort of endeavor.
Creative Tension. Over the last fifty years there has been an ongoing debate
between the objective and subjective approach, descriptive approach vs. an existential
approach to Scripture. Debate has revolved around two questions, "What did the text of
Scripture mean?" "What does the text of Scripture mean?" The conservative camp
landed on the issue of historicity, "What did the text mean?" And the liberals
championed the existential question, "What does the text mean?" Several theologians,
Cullmann, Stauffer, Ladd--confine themselves with the historical question, and simply
establish the historical framework, the meaning of the text.
And yet, others, such as Barth and Bultmann together see the need for a personal
approach that is somewhat subjective. For instance, Barth, in his commentary on
Romans says that Luther and Calvin were men who really could understand Paul because
they were able to interpret and experience in their own time what Paul meant. Barth says
that walls which separated the first century and the 16th century became totally
transparent.
The error of a purely descriptive approach is to take something that is alive, write
it down on paper, and describe in historical and analytical terms-something that is
dynamic in nature. Often, the result is a sterile sort of orthodoxy or a dead kind of
Pharisaism. On the other hand, the other danger is to divorce present day meaning from
any historical roots at all. For instance, the Reformers interpreted Paul by equating the
problem of the Judaizers in Paul's day with the Catholic Church and Church's tradition.
There is a certain coherence and similarity between the two. With this type of translation
and application, it may be that 80% is correct and analogous, while 20% may be
unexplained, and Paul may be distorted, and made to say what he didn't say.
Thus, I suggest that we can be both historically sound with what the text meant
and in current dialogue with what the text of Scripture means today. And there should be
some kind of correspondence between original historical meaning and present-day
exposition and application. Our job is to find the history in the kerygma, the preaching.

ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 4

And then to find the kerygma (preaching) in the history. And then we need to have the
text of Scripture speak to us today, so that the life-giving process goes full-circle and
doesn't stop short.
Jesus said,
Matthew 7:24 Every one then who hears Matthew 7:26 And every one who hears
these words of mine and does them will these words of mine and does not do
be like a wise man who built his house them will be like a foolish man who built
upon the rock; his house upon the sand;

The point of contrast between the two statements does not lie in the hearing, but the
doing. Both the wise man and the foolish man hear--the difference is found in the doing,
the action and application. Understanding comes in the application of the message of
Jesus to life today. Therefore, every student of biblical theology who hears the words of
Jesus and constructs a system of theology, but does not act upon what he or she knows, is
like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. The difference between the two
foundations is found in the doing, the experience, the existential application of the words
of Jesus.
Because Jesus is both the earthly Jesus and the Risen Lord, his words have
importance and bearing on the present. And as we read the gospels, we will need to be
sensitive to the unique and distinct message of Jesus that is articulated and expressed
through the various evangelists.

The term "gospel"

Etymology and OT antecedents. The term gospel is a modern form of the Anglo-
Saxon word god-spell which designated a story from or about a god, and is rendered by
the Latin word evangelium. The Latin term goes back to the LXX and the gospels for the
noun eujaggevlion and the verb eujaggelivzomai. The noun means
good tidings, good news, or glad tidings. Correspondingly, the verb means to preach the
good news, proclaim or tell the good/glad tidings. The KJV version uses the expression,
to publish good tidings. The same root is used in connection with the messenger, the
evangelist, who brings the good news. In Greek culture, after a naval victory, a birth of a
son, a coronation of a king, a messenger was dispatched to affected towns, families, and
cities to announce the good news of some celebrated event. In some Greek inscriptions,
the birthday of Caesar Augustus is celebrated as "for the world the beginning of good
news."
The Greek verb eujaggelivzomai is a rendering of the Hebrew basar
(mebasar) and designates the public announcement of some saving act of God, wherein
He has delivered or saved His people from some type of crisis or defeat. That news is of
special importance to a specific group of people that wait for the good news:
Isaiah 40:9 Get you up to a high mountain, O Zion, herald of good news; lift up
your voice with strength, O Jerusalem, herald of good news, lift it up, fear not; say to
the cities of Judah, "Behold your God!"
Isaiah 52:7 How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings
good news, who proclaims peace, who brings good news of good, who proclaims
salvation, who says to Zion, "Your God reigns."
It is used with reference to the public announcement of a defeat that has been

ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 5

accomplished by God or a deliverance He has effected:

1 Samuel 4:17 He who brought the tidings answered and said, "Israel has fled
before the Philistines, and there has also been a great slaughter among the people; your
two sons also, Hophni and Phin'ehas, are dead, and the ark of God has been
captured."
Psalm 96:2 Sing to the LORD, bless his name; tell of his salvation from day to
day.
From the gospel narratives, it appears to be clear that Jesus deliberately adopted
and applied to Himself the idea of preaching the good news from the second portion of
Isaiah.

Isaiah 40:9 ejp o[ro"

uJyhlo;n ajnavbhqi, oJ
eujaggelizovmeno" Siwn,
u{ywson th'/ ijscuvi
thVn fwnhvn sou, oJ
eujaggelizovmeno"
Ierousalhm, uJywvsate,
mhV fobei'sqe, eijpoVn
tai'" povlesin Iouda
jIdou; oJ qeoV" uJmw'n.
Septuaginta
Isaiah 40:9 Get you up to a high
mountain, O Zion, herald of good news;
lift up your voice with strength, O
Jerusalem, herald of good news, lift it up,
fear not; say to the cities of Judah, Romans 10:15pw'" deV
"Behold your God!" khruvxwsin e*aVn mhV
Isaiah 41:27 a*postalw'sin kaqwV"
I first have declared it to Zion, and I give gevgraptai:w&" w&rai'oi
oi& povde" tw'n
to Jerusalem a herald ofgood news. eu*aggelizomevnwn
Isaiah 52:7 wJ" w{ra ejpiV
(taV) a*gaqav.
tw'n ojrevwn, wJ" povde"
eujaggelizomevnou
ajkohVn eijrhvnh", wJ"
eujaggelizovmeno" Romans 10:15 And how can men preach
ajgaqav, o{ti unless they are sent? As it is written,
ajkousthVn poihvsw thVn "How beautiful are the feet of those who
swthrivan sou levgwn preach good news!"
Siwn Basileuvsei sou oJ
qeov",
Isaiah 52:7 How beautiful upon the Luke 4:18pneu'ma kurivou
mountains are the feet of him who brings e*p * e*meV
good news, who publishes peace, who ou% ei@neken e!crisen
brings good newsof good, who announces me
salvation, who says to Zion, "Your God eu*aggelivsasqai
reigns." ptwcoi'",
Isaiah 61:1 Pneu'ma kurivou a*pevstalken me,
ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 6

ejp j ejmev, ou| ei{neken khruvxai ai*cmalwvtoi"

e[crisevn me, a!fesin kaiV tufloi'"
eujaggelivsasqai a*navbleyin,
ptwcoi'" ajpevstalkevn a*postei'lai
me, ijavsasqai touV" teqrausmevnou" e*n
suntetrimmevnou" th'/ a*fevsei,
kardiva/, khruvxai
aijcmalwvtoi" a[fesin
kaiV tufloi'"
ajnavbleyin, 2 kalevsai
ejniautoVn kurivou
dektoVn kaiV hJmevran
ajntapodovsew", Luke 4:18 "The Spirit of the Lord is upon
parakalevsai pavnta" me, because he has anointed me to
touV" penqou'nta", preach good news to the poor. He has
sent me to proclaim release to the captives
Isaiah 61:1The Spirit of the Lord GOD is and recovering of sight to the blind, to set
upon me, because the LORD has anointed at liberty those who are oppressed,
me to bring good news to the afflicted;
he has sent me to bind up the 19 to proclaim the acceptable year of the
brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the Lord."
captives, and the opening of the prison to
those who are bound;
2 to proclaim the year of the LORD's
favor, and the day of vengeance of our
God; to comfort all who mourn;

Nahum 2:1 jIdouV ejpiV Luke 2:10 kaiV ei\pen

taV o[rh oiJ povde" au*toi'" o& a!ggelo": mhV
eujaggelizomevnou kaiV fobei'sqe, i*douV gaVr
ajpaggevllonto" eu*aggelivzomai u&mi'n
eijrhvnhn, eJovrtaze, caraVn megavlhn h@ti"
Iouda, taV" eJortav" sou, e!stai pantiV tw'/ law'/,
ajpovdo" taV" eujcav"
sou, diovti ouj mh;
prosqhvswsin e[ti tou'
dielqei'n dia; sou' eij" Luke 2:10 And the angel said to them, "Be
palaivwsin not afraid; for behold, I bring you good
Suntetevlestai,
news of a great joy which will come to all
ejxh'rtai.
the people;
Nahum 1:15 Behold, on the mountains
the feet of him who brings good news,
who proclaims peace! Keep your feasts, O
Judah, fulfil your vows, for never again
shall the wicked come against you, he is
utterly cut off.

ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 7

The use of the verb in Isaiah refers to the proclaiming of the day of salvation, whether it
means the return from the Babylonian exile or in a deeper Messianic sense. In Mark's
gospel, the term refers to the announcement of the promised salvation and the Kingdom
of God which has come in His own person (Mk. 1:14-15). In Jesus' sermon at Nazareth,
Jesus clearly applies to Himself the words of Isaiah 61:1, saying that God has
christed/anointed Him to preach good news to the poor. In other portions of the gospels,
Jesus affirms that His preaching to the poor is a clear fulfillment of the Scriptures.2
New Testament Synonyms. Frequently, the eujaggel--word family is used
synonymously with other nouns and verbs. Often the term gospel is used interchangeably
with the term word (lovgo" or rJh'ma). We find the verbs, proclaim, obey, speak,
announce, hear, confirm, have, give, or come--all of which are brought into conjunction
with the word. Correspondingly, many of the NT verbs associated with the public
proclamation of the good news are used synonymously with the verb
eujaggelivzomai: khruvssw, I preach, kataggevllw, I
proclaim.
The understanding of the entire word-family is closely connected with the Semitic
background of a dynamic understanding of words and speaking, so much so, that when
words are uttered they achieve a life and vitality of their own. Words are far more than
collections of syllables:
10 "For as the rain and the snow 12 So shall my word be that goes forth
from my mouth;
come down from heaven, and return not it shall not return to me empty,
thither but water the earth, but it shall accomplish that which I
making it bring forth and purpose,
sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread and prosper in the thing for which I sent
to the eater, it.
Isaiah 55:10-11

In Semitic thought, the word is a mode of action, and thus we find in Paul the affirmation
that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation (Rom. 1:16-17).

The gospel is the proclamation of God's saving activity (fact)

The writers of the NT use the terms gospel, preach the gospel, to refer to the
divine proclamation of the realization of God's plan of salvation, announced to the whole
of humanity. The gospel does not mean simple statements of propositional truth but the
proclamation of a divine and saving event. God had promised this saving event, and
people had hoped for and waited for this event. And now in the words of Jesus, "time is
fulfilled, the Kingdom of God is at hand" (Mk. 1:14-15).
C.H. Dodd has highlighted the term khruvgma, kerygma, which means the
creedal formulation of certain events in the life of Jesus. As he has worked with the
speeches and preaching in the book of Acts he has isolated several key elements which
characterize the preaching or the gospel .
1. The age of fulfillment has arrived in that God has realized the promises of the
OT and brought salvation to His people (Acts 2:16-21,23; 3:18,24; 10:43)
2See Matt. 11:5; Lk. 7:22.
ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 8

2. Salvation has taken place through the ministry, death, and resurrection of
Jesus (2:22-24; 3:13-15; 10:37-39)
3. By virtue of His resurrection, Jesus has been exalted as "Lord and Christ"
(2:36)
4. By virtue of His exaltation, Jesus has bestowed the Holy Spirit in the Church
as the sign of Jesus' power and glory (2:33; 5:32)
5. Salvation will be consummated in the return of Jesus to judge the living and
the dead (3:21; 10:42)
6. The apostles were divinely chosen to be witnesses of the ministry of Jesus--
primarily of His resurrection (2:32; 3:15; 10:40-41)3
In early Christian preaching of the gospel, or the kerygma, there followed an invitation to
repent, believe, receive both the forgiveness of sins, salvation, and the gift of the Holy
Spirit.
A couple of texts encapsulate this message or creedal formulation:
In Acts 10:34-43 we find several terms that are used as synonyms: lovgo"--
word (vss. 36,44), eujaggelivzomai--preaching good news (v. 36), rJh'ma--
word, thing, event, (vss. 37,44--words/things) khruvssw--to preach (v. 42).
In I Cor. 15:1-7 we find another similar kerygma or gospel wherein Paul
enumerates certain key events in the life of Jesus that are linked to both the verb
eujaggelivzomai and the noun eujaggevlion and the content of the
gospel.
1 Cor. 15:1 Gnwrivzw deV uJmi'n, ajdelfoiv, toV
eujaggevlion
o}
eujhggelisavmhn uJmi'n,
o} kaiV
parelavbete,
ejn w|/ kaiV
eJsthvkate,
2
di· ou| kaiV
swv/zesqe,
tivni lovgw/
eujhggelisavmhn uJmi'n
eij katevcete, ejktoV"
eij mhV eijkh'/ ejpisteuvsate.
Now I would remind you, brothers, in which terms
I [gospelled]
the gospel to you,
3Dodd has constructed the khvrugma from the early chapters of the book of Acts. Dodd also clearly
distinguishes the khvrugma from the didachv/, the Church's doctrinal and ethical teaching. Paul
writes,
1 Cor. 1:21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God
through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. ejpeidhV gaVr ejn th'/
sofiva/ tou' qeou' oujk e[gnw oJ kovsmo" diaV th'" sofiva"
toVn qeovn, eujdovkhsen oJ qeoV" diaV th'" mwriva" tou'
khruvgmato" sw'sai touV" pisteuvonta". The distinction between the early
Church's preaching and teaching may be helpful as long as we do not formulate hard and fast distinctions
between the two, e.g., I Cor. 9:27.

ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 9

which you received,

in which you stand,
2 by which you are being saved,
if you hold it fast
--unless you believed in vain.
As Paul continues, he begins to list the various items of the primitive Christian
confession and teaching. Paul notes the reality of Christ's death and the fact that this
death was in accordance with God's promise, according to the Scriptures (I Cor. 15:3).
The mention of his burial underscores the reality of His death. The item of the
resurrection then follows, and then Paul mentions the various witnesses of that
resurrection in the appearances of the Risen Jesus. This corresponds with Dodd's last
item in his delineation of the early kerygma.

The gospel is the divine communication of God's redemptive work.

In the NT the gospel is call the word of God (40 times), the word of the Lord (8
times), or more simply, the word (40 times), while the term gospel occurs seventy three
times. The emphasis does not lie primarily in a verbal statement, but an event wherein
God's saving purpose is at work. The good news is similarly regarded as the power of
God in a dynamic sense:
Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel: it is the power of God for
salvation to every one who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
It is within this dynamic understanding of word and gospel that John speaks of the word
of life which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and touched with
our hands (I Jn. 1:1). It is not a human plan, an outline, and is far more than sterile and
cold confessions, but the operation of a powerful good news that has been let loose in the
world--to effect salvation to all who believe. While there are many different ways of
presenting the gospel, the basic facts and foundations do not change (Gal. 1:6-9; I Cor.
3:5-9). And the basic starting point lies within the divine initiative--God offering His
supreme good to humanity.
The above kerygma in Acts and then in Paul, give us some summary statements
about the content of the good news as expressed through the early Christian preachers.
But how would Jesus' audience have heard the message? In Luke's Gospel we find the
term "good news" linked up with the following:
q Angels use the term "good news" in the annunciation of John the Baptist and
Jesus (Luke 1:19; 2:10)
q John's ministry and Jesus' ministry are summed up with the expression, "to preach
the good news" (Lk. 3:18; Lk. 4:14-21, 43).
q Jesus says that "the poor have the good news preached to them" (Lk. 7:22) and
that from the time of John the Baptist "the good news of the Kingdom of God is
being preached" (Lk. 16:16)
q Close links between the ministry of John the Baptist, Jesus and the message of
Isaiah 40-46, which announced the restoration of the people of God from
captivity—into their homeland—through the mission of the Servant.
In Luke 4:16-21, we find a further window into Jesus' inaugural address in Nazareth,
which is not recorded in Mark (cf. Mk. 6:1-6) or Matthew (cf. Matt. 13:53-58). The text

ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 10

of Luke 4 seems to imply that Jesus went to Capernaum and performed miracles in that
setting before he went to Nazareth (Lk. 4:14-15, 23). Luke draws attention to the
significance of this event. John is imprisoned in 3:20 and Jesus goes to Galilee and
begins to read from the text of Isaiah 61:1-2a—with an insertion from Isa. 58:6, "to send
the oppressed away in liberty," which proclaims freedom from Babylonian captivity. The
text announces the restoration of the people of God:
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me
Because He has anointed me
To preach good news to the poor
He has sent me to proclaim
Freedom for the prisoners
And recovery of sight to the blind,
To release the oppressed,
To proclaim the year of the Lord's favor.
Jesus identifies Himself with the Servant of the Lord, upon whom the Holy Spirit would
rest and anoint. Jesus announces very directly that, "Today this Scripture has been
fulfilled in your hearing" (Lk. 4:21). The verb, "to preach the good news" parallels the
verb of speaking "to proclaim." The content of the good news is directly related to
preaching to the poor, freedom, liberty, recovery of sight, release of the oppressed and the
favor of the Lord. The recipients of these messages are those who are society's "broken,"
the helpless and afflicted, the poor, the captives and the blind. The message of grace and
favor comes to those who are oppressed, afflicted and broken through the circumstances
of life. In his summary sections, Luke characterizes the preaching of good news at the
very heart of Jesus' ministry:
Lk. 4:43: "I must preach the good news of the Kingdom of God to the other
towns also, because that is why I was sent."
Lk. 8:1: "After this, Jesus traveled about from one town and village to another,
proclaiming the good news of the Kingdom of God."
Lk. 9:6: So they set out and went from village to village, preaching the good
news and healing people everywhere."
Lk. 20:1: One day as he was teaching the people in the temple courts and
preaching the good news, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, together
with the elders, came up to him."
Jesus is so aware of the poor, the dispossessed, those who have been broken through the
circumstances of life and to those who feel on the outside. In Lk. 4, Jesus perceives that
His audience will demand such acts of healing, "Physician, heal yourself! Do here in
your hometown what we have heard that you did in Capernaum." In His response, Jesus
appeals to the ministry of both Elijajh and Elisha—to the outsider. Both of these
prophets had performed healings for outsiders, not insiders (the widow of Zarephath in
the region of Sidon and Namaan the Syrian leper). Thus, Jesus authenticates His ministry
to the outsider—to those who are broken and poor and who need to have "good news" of
freedom spoken to them.
Jesus' announcement of the "good news" is met with two responses: 1) positive
response, "All spoke well of him" (Lk. 4:22), 2) negative response of fury, "they were
furious" (Lk. 4:28). The furious response is provoked by Jesus' gracious offer of the
good news to the outsiders. The poor were not part of the insiders, the "in-group." Jesus

ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 11

makes it so clear that the relative worth of the recipients is not the gauge by which an
offer is made. The worth of people is not determined by religious standing, religious
profession, national or racial allegiance. His offer goes directly to society's "broken."
The "good news for the poor" is dynamically linked with the term "Kingdom of God."
This also accords with the message of Isaiah, wherein the prophet ties together the
restoration of the people of God with the Kingdom of God:
Isa. 40:9-10: You who bring good news to Zion,
Go up on a high mountain.
You who bring good news to Jerusalem,
Lift up your voice with a shout
Lift it up, do not be afraid;
Say to the towns of Judah,
Here is your God!
10 See, the Sovereign Lord
Comes with power,
And His arm rules for him,
Isa. 52:7 How beautiful on the mountains
Are the feet of those who bring good news
Who proclaim peace
Who brings good news,
Who proclaim salvation,
Who say to Zion,
"Your God reigns."
This Servant would bring in a Kingdom that would be characterized by good news, with
salvation, peace, security, confidence and help. The message comes to those who are in
genuine need and ex;perience brokenness of one sort or another. This commitment is
also expressed in Jesus' response to the Baptist's query as to whether Jesus is the Coming
One or not. Jesus' response includes the narrative of what is occurring and is climaxed by
the affirmation that the poor have good news proclaimed to them:
The blind receive sight,
The lame walk,
The lepers are being cured,
The deaf hear
The dead are being raised,
The good news is preached to the poor. (Matt. 11:6).
Neither Jesus nor the Evangelists nor early Christian preachers coined the term Gospel de
novo, but adopted the prior understanding of the term from the Graeo-Roman culture and
the Old Testament. Since the use of the term in the Gospels uses the term from the Old
Testament, particularly Isaiah, it is clear that the term Gospel has its intrinsic root in the
restoration and healing for the helpless. The preaching of the "good news" is vitally
linked with the following items:
q The Kingdom of God (Mk. 1:14-15; Matt. 4:23; 9:35; Lk. 4:43; 8:1; 16:16)
and in Isaiah (40:9-10; 52:7)
q Healing (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk. 7:22; 9:6)
q Restoration of the "broken" (Lk. 4:18ff.; Matt. 11:1-6)

ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 12

The Gospels are expanded kerygma

As a genre, the term gospel appears to be a genre all of its own. As you will read
Martin's book you will see the imagined thought of an early librarian trying to categorize
the four gospels. How is it to be classified?
Memoirs/Memories. The term gospel appears to have first applied to a book, as a
title, in the Epistles of Ignatius written when he was on his way to Rome to meet
martyrdom. We find this use in the writings of Justin Martyr (1:66), and he refers to the
reminiscences of the apostles "which are called gospels." While Justin Martyr appears to
compare the gospels with Xenophon's Memorabilia, in that they were written to defend
the memory of a master and leader, Xenophon defended the memory of Socrates against
the charge of irreligion and corrupting Athen's youth. However, the gospels are not
anecdotal like Xenophon's Memorabilia. Further, the concentration on the death of Jesus
is altogether different than the death of Socrates.
Myth. Some scholars of a more liberal sort use the language of myth in terms of
understanding the gospels. In a superficial way they compare the gospels with myths,
like Persephone, who was carried off to Hades, and then returned...dying and rising
again. However, when you look at the gospels, there is clearly a historical and factual
dimension to the Gospels which sets them apart from the myths, e.g., Lk. 2:1--Quirinius
who was governor over Syria; 3:1ff. the civil and religious rulers--Tiberius Caesar,
Pontius Pilate, Herod, Phillip. Whatever may be the superficial similarities, the clear
historical references set the gospels apart from the non-historical myths.
Biographies. The affirmation of historical roots and points of contact might lead
us in the direction of a biography, and there were precedents for the writing of histories in
the first century. We don't know all that happened in the life of Jesus--we have precious
little about the childhood, youth, and experiences of growth and development. The
gospel portraits of Jesus are different from first century biographies and present day
biographies, e.g., how many cigars that Winston Churchill smoked a day, or the frugal
meals of Mahatma Gandhi. We are not told much about personal details or what Jesus
looked like. The Evangelists are mainly concerned to express the significance of Jesus,
His saving activity rather than focus in upon His personality, character or appearance.
They do not devote their major attention to a discussion of Jesus' particular virtues. After
the birth narratives (Matt. and Lk.) we are plunged into the ministry of John the Baptist
and the inauguration of Jesus' ministry.
Interpreted (theological) histories to create faith. A word of caution is needed.
To say that the Gospels are not biographies might falsely create the impression that the
Gospels are not concerned with what happened. It might appear to cast doubt on the
reliability of the gospel traditions that we have.
An analogy might help. On Monday Night Football, Al Michaels, Frank Gifford,
Dan Deerdorf give us a running commentary on the football game before us. And as they
narrate the progress of the football they are interpreting the game as they go. They would
lose their contract if they proceeded to tell us everything that took place (how many cups
of Gatorade were spilled, which lineman fell, the skinned elbow of a guard, or how many
clods of dirt went flying on the last play. They interpret the story of the game between
the Cowboys and the Redskins as they go and do their best to isolate the key events of the
game as they bear upon the progress and movement of the play.

ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 13

Within Israel's history, Judaism was governed by the living memory of an

event--the Exodus, which had called Israel into being. History was relived and
interpreted on an annual basis at Passover. So it was with the early Christian community.
The Christians looked back and remembered the One who had called them individually
and corporately as the Church, and recognized His living and abiding presence with them
in their services. As they witnessed to the whole life of Jesus, they remembered and
interpreted His activity in healing and exorcism, his kindness and gentleness, His
authority, His death at the hands of Gentiles and Jews, His resurrection, and appearances.
In John's Gospel we find a clear statement of purpose that shows the evangelist at work in
the selection, organization, and order of the Gospel signs with a view towards faith:
John 20:30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples,
which are not written in this book;
31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of
God, and that believing you may have life in his name.
If the gospel is vitally linked to the kerygma as is suggested by C. H. Dodd, then
the Gospels are expansions of that basic core. The analogy comes to mind between a
photographic picture and a portrait. A photograph gives a physical representation of the
basic picture of a person. However, a portrait gives an interpretive picture of a person,
and may capture something of the essence or distinctives of the person. For instance, if
an artist sees the subject in terms of an inner strength, the portrait may well capture that
quality of inner strength. This may well be analogous to the way that the Gospel writers
saw their role—they intend to capture the significance of the person of Jesus of Nazareth.
We only need to think of Mark's gospel, half of which is concerned with the Passion of
Jesus. Peter's confession of Jesus is quickly followed by the first of three passion
predictions (chs. 8, 9,10), and in ch. 10 we find ourselves in the last week of Jesus'
ministry.
The four Gospels offer four portraits of Jesus' life and significance. From
Matthew's perspective, Jesus is the promised Prophet, "like Moses" (Deut. 18:15-19) or
as the Spiritual Messiah of Israel. Mark paints the picture of Jesus as the mysterious and
suffering Son of Man, who is in fact, the Son of God (Mk. 1:1). Luke portrays Jesus as
the Friend of Sinners, the one who accepts the marginalized. The Fourth Gospel
expresses the wonder of Jesus as the Divine Word, who embodies and expresses the gift
of life to humankind in the grip of death or as light in the midst of darkness. It is
noteworthy that none of these differences among the Gospels led to church splits as in the
case of some of the heretical "gospels"; the Early Church was quick to reject some of the
gnostic gospels. The Church possessed a certain broadminded acceptance; the leaders of
the Early Church were aware of a common root in history that characterized each of the
four Gospels. It also appears that they accepted the fact that none of them was fully able
to comprise the wealth and depth of the significance of Christ's ministry and saving
activitity.
The diversity of the witness suggests the complex unity within Jesus, who evokes
such varied responses and reflections. The four Evangelists are diverse but they also
express a common core that includes the preliminary work of the Baptist, the Baptism of
Jesus, His public ministry in Galilee, generally in a Jewish context, the selection of
twelve disciples, a popular response by the common people, the thickening plot of the
religious and political leaders, the Passion and Resurrection. Further, there is a certain

ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 14

combination of narrative and sayings of Jesus. The various narratives are all connected
and serve early Christian proclamation and Christian instruction. Thus, in the four
Gospels, there is a common commitment not only to theological reflection and
interpretation but a commitment to historical concerns as well (e.g., Lk. 1:1-4). In the
sermons that Luke provides in Acts, there is a similar concern to root the ongoing
ministry of Jesus through the apostles in a real history (e.g., Acts 17:7; 19:8; 20:25;
28:31). In Acts, Paul teaches "the things concerning the Kingdom of God" (Acts 28:31).
Paul does not express something new as if he is the initiator of a new religious
movement; rather, he continues the apostolic preaching of a real historical person who
impacted a real people in a real time-period. From Luke's prologue to his gospel, it is
evident that he has availed himself of eyewitnesses and the transmitters of the Jesus
tradition. He is fully aware of the historical nature of the kerygma. It would appear self-
evident that Luke would not fabricate material or introduce unhistorical material into the
Gospel narrative, when many of those who were more closely in touch with the Jesus-
event would have been able to counter.

Reasons for the composition of the gospels

Need for an Authenticating Document:

The apostles and eyewitnesses were getting older and dying and the early writers
addressed the need for an authenticating document that would solidify the block of oral
and written Jesus tradition. There needed to be an accrediting statement and account of
Jesus the Savior, what He did and what He taught.
Combat False Teaching:
The Early Church sturggled with error, false teaching and heresy. There were
deviant interpretations of Jesus (perhaps some gnostic strains). Very early in the life of
the Early Church, there were other ideas that were being handed down, other
interpretations and thus, the need for a standard by which truth could be decided.
Catechesis of New Christians:
As the church grew, there was ongoing need for instruction of new converts, a
document that would facilitate the goal of instruction. Much is said about the life of
discipleship, human relationships, how Christians are to follow Jesus in a hostile world,
relationship of Christians to the state, etc.
Evangelism:
Surely, the writers of the Gospels envisioned that their work would be read by
non-Christians who might be convinced of the incredible message of the "good news"
and would be led to trust in this person who had changed human life and human history.
Correction of Errors:
q The first error was a miscalculation on the time scale. The early Church believed that
the Lord would come back very soon, perhaps in a matter of weeks or months--for we
find that in the New Testament, there is a transformation from an excited and
immediate expectation to a disappointed realization. It explains why Christians took
so little interest in the organization of the Church--why organize something when it is
already in the process of passing way. During the latter part of the New Testament
we find more time and energy devoted to the ordered structure of the new
community. Also, the expected shortness of the interval also accounts for the failure

ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 15

of the early Christians to write documents that encompassed the Jesus event.
q The second error was the expectation that with the coming again of the Messiah, the
whole people of Israel would believe, and would become again what they always
were to be. The writers grappled with the problem of how the rulers of Israel, with
their deep knowledge of the Law and prophecies should fail to recognize the One who
came to fulfill them all. In the course of time there was a hardening on both the
Jewish and Christian sides. The Jews came to regard the Christians as renegades who
could no longer be accepted as forming part of the house of Israel. The Christians
were discouraged at the obstinacy of the Jews in refusing to accept the Messiah. The
church was becoming increasingly separated from the synagogue. There were some
positive examples of mutual understanding and respect. In Justin Martyr's Dialogue
with Trypho, we find that even a hundred years later than the period of the Gospels, it
was possible for Jews and Christians to meet on terms of mutual respect and courtesy.
But this was more of the exception than the rule. It has been sad that by the time of
the writing the Gospels that the term "the Jews" came to signify the enemy--and the
term no longer means racial, national or religious Jew, but it has acquired a
theological tinge of the enemies of the Christian faith and church.
And this is a sad event. Because we cannot fully live as Christians without the
help of our Jewish brothers and sisters. Many of them have found faith in Christ, and
we owe a great debt to them for the insights that they have brought.
q A third error was the belief that Jerusalem, the City of David, would become the
religious capital of the world. And there are several OT texts which point us in this
direction:
Isa. 2:2 It shall come to pass in the latter days that the mountain of the house of
the Lord shall be established as the highest of the mountains, and shall be raised
above the hills; and all the nations shall flow to it, 3 and many peoples shall come,
and say: “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God
of Jacob; that he may teach us his ways and that we may walk in his paths.” For
out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
Zechariah equally had seen that "many people and strong nations shall
come to seek the Lord of hosts in Jerusalem and to entreat the favor of the Lord;
ten men shall take hold of the robe of a Jew and say, "Let us go with you, for we
have heard that God is with you." (Zech. 8:22-23). The early Christians looked
with hope to the steady stream of Jewish pilgrims who came to Jerusalem from
every part of the known world. But this belief would go down in a final and
shattering disappointment. But Jerusalem was captured and destroyed with a
horrifying loss of life. The Temple was burned and the requirements of the law
could no longer be fulfilled. The destruction affected both the Jewish and
Christian communities.
Christians continued to regard Jerusalem with affection and interest, and
the habit of Christian pilgrimage seems to still have played an important part in
the Early Church. The fact of a Mother church in Jerusalem seemed to have been
part of Paul's motive with the Jerusalem collection. But in the course of time, the
destruction of Jerusalem made it clear to the Christian community that the future
of Christianity was to lie in the Gentile world.

ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 16

Widening circles of response

When a person of importance appears, such as Lincoln, George Washington, J.F.

Kennedy, or Martin Luther King Jr., we find a number of biographies which begin to be
written. There is not one individual alone who is able to comprehend one person in a
comprehensive way. The different biographers will collect their observations and try to
reflect the person, and often tend to single out a particularly aspect of the whole person.
No one can know another individual completely; each individual is able to single out
various sides or facets of a person. Relationships constantly grow and develop and the
most intimate personal relationships give way to different expressions and sides of the
"other," which can only be discovered through the process of time and the willingness to
give oneself in self-expression.
Stephen Neill says this, “It is not surprising that, when that major force called
Jesus of Nazareth struck human life, the fragments flew off in every direction. No single
mind could encompass the whole, no single hand could draw the definitive portrait of
him. Each took what he was able to grasp and recorded it in this way or in that; but each
writer was sure that what was being recorded was not a matter of personal invention and
creativity.”4
In the first century--after the death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus, we find
fragments and documents that tell the story of Jesus and of various human responses to
the life and witness of Him. We must be genuinely open to see the various portraits of
Jesus that the writers of the New Testament tried to paint. As we begin our study of the
four gospels, we need to be open to the diversity of the various human witnesses to the
person of Jesus of Nazareth, who not only had made an indelible impression upon their
memory, but was Himself the continued spiritual presence in the life of the Church.
What kind of picture do the Gospels give us of the person of Jesus? As we look at the
New Testament we see various levels or periods of response to Jesus. And it may be
helpful for us to see something of the actual order of the writings of the New Testament--
which is much different from the order in which the books are listed:
· The first period is the response of the earliest disciples and others to the person of
Jesus, His words and His works. We don’t have a record of what Jesus Himself
wrote, if He did. We don’t read that at this juncture, people wrote down the record of
the events as they occurred.
· Following the ascension of Jesus and the gift of the Spirit, we catch glimpses of a
period of oral tradition in which the expectation of the Lord’s return was so high, that
it did not seem to be appropriate or relevant to take the time to write anything down.
This would represent roughly the period from A.D. 29-49. During this period of oral
tradition, it may have been possible that there were some documents which may have
been circulating that would contain something like a book of what is sometimes
called Testimonia--or OT proof texts that were regarded as prophetic promises of
something that occurred in the life and witness of Jesus. Maybe some of the sayings
of Jesus were generally collected into various groupings.
· From A.D. 49-69, we encounter the period of the Epistles, in which the majority were
written by the Apostle Paul. Some of the other Epistles of the New Testament fall
under this category as well. At this point we are in more immediate connection with
4 Stephen Neill, Jesus Through Many Eyes, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1973), p. 4.
ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 17

history, and we are given some dates, even to the month. These letters grew out of
the living interaction of Paul with a church. They reflect life and problems, fear, joy,
victory and struggle. We find the core of what the early Christians believed--and we
learn of genuine belief in a context of falling away or apostasy from a commonly held
body of truth and history. The response to Jesus becomes more fixed and ordered and
develops into a body of doctrine and acceptable teachings. And as Stephen Neill
notes, “But the Christians had as yet no sacred book other than the Old Testament.
The last thing that the writers thought of in connection with these often hurriedly
written letters was permanence; they were written for an immediate purpose, and
once that purpose was fulfilled they might be expected to disappear.”5
· Following the period of the Epistles--and perhaps overlapping this period, was the
period of Gospel-writing. It now becomes clearer that the Lord might not return as
quickly as expected. The first generation is dying out and certain writers who are
concerned with an accurate story of Jesus, His words, and His deeds--they take this
content and put it into an organized and coherent whole. Luke, in his prologue to his
gospels speaks of a three-fold process of collection, compilation, and writing. Four
Evangelists set down in order--four Gospels. Later Justin Martyr (A.D. 100-165)
calls them Memorabilia of Jesus Christ. While the four Gospels concentrate
themselves with the Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus, they give a
chronological and organized record of Jesus’ life, His activity, His miracles, and His
teachings, and the conflicts of Jesus with the religious hierarchy.
· The final period is roughly from A.D. 80-100, and overlaps with the previous period,
in that the Gospel of John was no doubt written during this period. We find other
books, which reflect a period wherein there is a greater stress on orthodoxy. The
early Church appears to consolidate itself and deal with some of the very real threats
to faith.
An approach that is often used in the recent years has been that of taking some of
the writings together and looking at their distinctives together as a block. We have the
Pauline epistles which form a group and we have the Johannine writings, the Gospel,
three Epistles, and the Apocalypse. And the Synoptic Gospels can be looked at together,
with Luke being viewed in a similar way to the book of Acts. The New Testament, as a
whole is a record of a complex and inter-related process as the early Church was seeking
to be faithful to the message of Jesus and to speak to the needs of the growing
communities, as they interacted with their Jewish and Gentile communities and cultures.
In our study together, we will need to look at history and theology together.
History deals with events, with people, their experiences, lifestyle, accomplishments, and
key facts about the people. Theology deals with ideas. While the two disciplines are not
the same, they are clearly related. The history of Jesus in the gospels deals with the rich
complexity, detail, and unpredictability of Jesus’ history. Theology comes along as
attempt to see a pattern and norm, to take the chaotic events of Jesus’ life and ministry
and suggest some kind of order.
As we approach a study of the gospels, we need to be aware of these two
disciplines--history and theology, and suggest that what we have in the four gospels are
theological histories or stories. The Gospels are not merely history and not merely
theology but are theological stories.
5 Ibid, p. 6.
ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 18

On the historical side, the writers of the gospels are concerned with history and
the historicity of the Jesus story. The early Church was aware of its origins in a clear and
identifiable historical happening. They were convinced that God had acted “once for all”
in one man who had lived at a particular time and place in Israel. Early Christian faith
did not become detached from the events that related to one particular Jewish man named
Jesus. The Gnostic gospels, which came much later, offered a Jesus who was much
different from the Jesus of the NT Gospels. Gnosticism offered some sort of mythical
redeemer figure who appeared somewhere from space upon the earth, and who offered to
humanity some sort of mystical experience and religious ideas, and union with the
eternal. By way of contrast, early Christian faith offered a human and historical figure.
This man Jesus lived as a human figure and was crucified by order of another historical
figure, Pontius Pilate. Further, Jesus is a Jewish name that is linked up with the history of
the Jewish people, recorded in the Old Testament. Jesus’ story is not isolated but it
stands within the story of the prophetic tradition. The Jewish people were perhaps the
first to write history and did so about four centuries before the Greeks. And today, as we
are believers, we belong to a real human history that began with Abraham and continued
up to today. The God that we love and serve is the God who was the God of other
historical human figures, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, etc. The historical
reliability of the Gospels is supported by any number of facts such as the willingness of
the writers to record the accusations against Jesus, “This man receives sinners and eats
with them.” and the way that the disciples are portrayed in less than a flattering way.
Peter, who is the leading disciple of Jesus is called, “Satan.” As Christians and as
theologians, we are very dependent upon the records and reports of others and we are
allowed to see Jesus through their eyes. And their eyes are also the eyes of faith. There
are some such as Bultmann who say that it matters very little whether we know anything
about Jesus or not, what matters is that in Jesus Christ that God encountered humankind,
and the “what” or the exact nature of the encounter is irrelevant. But this is not what the
writers of the NT affirm and claim. Luke claims to set forth an orderly account, “so that
you may know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed.” (Lk.
1:4).
The writers of the Gospels were also people of faith. And they write from the
perspective of faith. They are not detached historians giving us a blow by blow account
of every thing they remembered in exactly the proper sequence. They are more
concerned with the meaning and significance of the Jesus-event for the readers. John the
Evangelist, writes in the first epistle, “That which was from the beginning, which we
have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched
with our hands, concerning the word of life...that which we have seen and heard, we
proclaim also to you, so that you may have fellowship with us.” (I Jn. 1:3). The
important thing for the evangelist was to know Christ. And those such as us who were
not there in the first century are not in an inferior position to the eyewitnesses. John
writes, “Blessed are those who have believed, without seeing.”
Stephen Neill writes, “From my window in Nairobi, I can see the shadow of a tree
delicately etched upon the ground by the brilliant sunshine of tropical Africa. I cannot
see the tree, since there is a blank wall in front of me. But I know my tree. It is always
there when the sun shines, which of course on the equator is most of the time. I can trace
the movement of the seasons by the way the shadow falls. I know just when it flowers,

ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 19

since I can see also the shadows of the sun-birds as they dart from twig to twig and
delight in the delicate nectar with which my tree provides them. If a visitor were to
remark, “You do not see the tree, and therefore you are really seeing nothing,” I would be
inclined to reply, “My shade is much more powerful than your direct eyesight.”6 We do
not know Jesus by direct observation, but we know Him through the eyewitness and
eyesight of others, such as we have in the Gospels. And we also know Him through our
own experience with Him and the ongoing witness of the Holy Spirit as the Paraclete
gives us the eyes to see and perceive.

6Ibid, p. 13.
ntbintr.doc
4/3/2009
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 1

Jesus and the Issue of Suffering and Tragedy

Introduction
I am thankful for my son Chris, his life and the preservation of his life. He was a
master's student at Virginia Tech, finishing up his coursework for the '07 graduation.
Chris was in Virginia Beach over the weekend, prior to the massacre in Blacksburg,
Virginia. This caused him to arrive at VT at 11:00 a.m., following the horrific shooting
event. He was in the same German class, which experienced the shooting at 9:30 a.m.
Ninety minutes made a likely difference between death and life for Chris. While some
Christians contend that God spared Chris' life for some great purpose, my mind goes out
to the family members of the college students who died, some of whom were Christians
with Christian families. If we buy into the notion that God is in control of all human
events, then the real question, "Why did God not spare other students in the German class
and why did God spare Chris?" I cannot use this language. What I express to God is a
profound gratitude that Chris is alive. In response to various tragedies, Christians often
say, "God is in control." To say this means that God is either directly involved in the
massacre, or that he is indirectly involved by allowing such a massacre to occur. If he
knows everything and is specifically knowledgeable about the upcoming massacre and
does nothing about a tragedy for all families involved, then God is "at best" complicit in
this tragedy. I find it very difficult to believe or worship a God who is so arbitrary in his
dealings with people and their tragedies. If this is so, then God "plays favorites."
Concerning the 9/11 tragedy, we find suffering by all that were related to the
victims at the Pentagon, the twin towers, and the downed plane in Pennsylvania. While
the Tsunami Quake is related to the world of nature, the people of 9/11 suffered through
the diabolical activity of people, involved in the suicide attacks. Thus, the U.S. and allies
waged a war against the Taliban in Afghanistan; a new arena of terrorism entered the
global community with dramatic proportion.
These are the facts, but the facts say nothing about the tens of thousands of people
and their children whose lives were irrevocably changed. As humans, we ask the real
question, "Why?" Such questions are frequently raised in the Bible, by the poets of the
OT and by Jesus' audience in the NT. It is the stock problem of philosophy and
religion—the issue of suffering, tragedy and evil that has continued to plague humanity.
And how does the painful reality of human suffering square with the biblical affirmation
of a God who is good?
Most notably, the book of Job raises the question of suffering, which is addressed
from all angles. Job loses his children, his prosperity, his health and his wife becomes his
accuser. His "friends" are relentless in their attempt to interpret his tragedy and can only
conclude that it must be due to the fact that Job is a great sinner to experience such
suffering. But Job strongly protests, "It's just not true." The book raises the eternal
question as to whether suffering is a direct punishment for personal or corporate sin. And
yet, the answer never comes to the inquiring mind.
When God finally responds at the book's conclusion, He provides no clear-cut
answers to Job's agonizing cries, but instead provides Job with a nature lesson. God
confronts Job with the foundation of the earth, its measurements, its expanse, and the
distribution of light" (Job. 38:4-5, 18, 24). At the conclusion, Job responds to the
incredible theophany, "My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you.

Jesus and the Issue of Suffering

09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 2

Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes" (Job. 42:5-6). God makes it so
plain to Job that he "doesn't have a clue" as to the mystery and vastness of creation.
Through the rhetorical question, the implication is, "You cannot possibly know why
suffering and tragedy occur since you have no understanding of the cosmos." However,
the fundamental questions concerning a direct link between sin and suffering are not
answered. We do learn that Job's experience reflects the fact that God himself contends
with spiritual forces and cosmic powers.1
I will seek to provide some perspectives from the gospels concerning suffering
and tragedy, aware of the fact that I cannot give a "neat" and conclusive answer to the
troubling questions that often plague us in our common humanity

Simplistic Responses to Suffering and Tragedy

Assign blame: How do we respond to tragedies such as 9/11? Certain
fundamentalist Christians are quite quick to respond with the glib assessment that God
was directly involved with the hammer of his judgment for the evils in American society
(homosexuality, abortion, etc.). On the other side, Islamic fundamentalists argue that
God's hand of victory is apparent, hammering out victory for Muslims for the slaughter of
Islamic innocents, for supporting the nation of Israel, and the way in which the U.S. has
"propped up" compromising Arab states.
Implications of the classical position on "providence": Some theologians look at
the issue of God's "sovereignty" and "foreknowledge" as if God has written out an
unalterable blueprint for events such as these. This classical position leads to the
inevitable conclusion that God is the ultimate author of such evils; at least God is
complicit in tragic events. If God foreknew exactly what Usama bin Laden would do with
his suicide pilots and created them all anyway, with a complete knowledge of their future,
then it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that God thought the world would be better
with these terrorists than without them. If God is ultimate good and always does what is
best, and if he knew exactly what would transpire on 9/11 when he created these agents
of death, destruction and tragedy, then one can only conclude that God believed that their
creation was preferable to not allowing their creation. The issue of theodicy is very real.
Does God also ordain certain tragic events to occur? Similarly, if God foreknew the
creation of a hurricane and then allowed it to happen, how then, can we worship a picture
of a split personality within the deity? How do people worship a deity who knows the
details of a human tragedy and orders the tragedy to take place or allows it to occur? And
then, can an interpreter say that God is ultimate good in the face of an ordaining power?
Once someone accepts the premise that God is all good and all powerful, and then adds
his detailed foreknowledge, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that God was vitally
involved in this horrific event that would spell incredible pain, suffering and tragedy for
thousands concerned.
Thus, in a classical view, God writes the play, and his people speak the "lines"
and follow the action and choreography of the play in precise order. People are reduced
to human "players" on the cosmic play with a pre-written script, no opportunity for
improvisation, accommodation or changes from the plan. Thus, the terrorist pilots, who
flew into the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and the Pennsylvania farmland, are but God's
instruments, who follow God's predetermined plan to bring about judgment upon the U.S.
With such a mindset, God is directly involved in the tragic events, whether through
1Job 38:8, 10, 11; 41:1; 40:19; 41:18-21, 27. (Behemoth, Leviathan, Rahab, sea).
Jesus and the Issue of Suffering
09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 3

divine permission or divine ordination—ultimately they mean the same thing, since God
only permits what he ordains.2
Such a mechanistic view is untenable in light of biblical history; God wills only
good for people; the promises within the Bible speak of his concerns for justice, love,
peace, goodness, joy, beauty, and life for the whole of humanity. These are the items that
are high on his agenda. God is the enemy of everything that fractures harmony in the
human sphere, between nations, power and economic groups, and within the human
families. He hates violence, poverty, social and racial injustice, apartheid, slavery,
genocide, weather disasters, terrorism and war. If God is concerned about anything, it is
his supreme act and message of reconciliation that seeks to bring about restoration in the
fallen world, reconciliation with God, reconciliation with nations, reconciliation between
socioeconomic groups, racial groups and reconciliation among families (II Cor. 5:19).
Those who defend God's direct involvement are faced with a picture of horrible God who
is complicit in great tragedy; at the same time, they seem to be able to defend God's
character and innocence. Thus, a systematic theologian, such as Wayne Grudem
interprets such tragedies in the following manner, with bold print:
We have come to the point where we confess that we do not understand how
it is that God can ordain that we carry out evil deeds and yet hold us
accountable for them and not be blamed himself.3
For me, such reasoning is unthinkable and unconscionable. How is possible to
affirm the three propositions in one breath? How is it humanly possible to believe in
such a deity? At times, reformed theology defies human logic—how can one understand
God's ways with such circular reasoning that implodes upon itself? Biblical characters
live with a posture of hope; these tragic events are painful and unforeseen setbacks for
God. He nonetheless is prepared to provide hope, compassion and infinite wisdom and
resources in the setback; he can only feel, ache, and weep with the hundreds of thousands
of people who were directly and indirectly affected by horrific events, even as he had
experienced the same pain at the time of the Holocaust or genocide in Africa. He
experiences ongoing "setbacks" with terrorism in Israel and Jewish retaliation for suicide
bombers. The Bible affirms that God honors the reality that his human family lives in a
fallen world, a world that he created as inherently good, but a world that humans
distorted by their choices and by their cooperation with a powerful enemy—in a fallen
world. This world, in which the human family lives, is in a broken condition. And God
has and will continue to experience "set-backs" with his human family until his final
purpose is worked out. Set-backs will occur due to human unresponsiveness to the love
of God or the malicious activity of Satan and the demon forces. Ultimately, God will win
and his love will reign supreme and there will be a day of justice and untold joy. The
certainty of biblical faith is predicated upon the crucified and risen Jesus. According to
biblical revelation, God is the only hope that evil cannot ultimately triumph. The Bible
affirms the Blessed Hope of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The Question Posed to Jesus

Two tragic events: During his ministry, there are two explicit texts where the
2 Lewis Smedes, "Where Was God and What Was He Up to?" Fuller Focus, Spring, 2002: 8. In this paper,
I have adopted Lewis' Smedes designation of such tragedies as "setbacks" for God.
3 Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, (Grand Rapids: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994), 330.

Jesus and the Issue of Suffering

09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 4

question of suffering and sin is directed to Jesus (Luke 13:1-5; John 9:3). In the first text,
certain individuals remind Jesus of a tragic event in their recent history, a massacre of
Galileans when the Roman Procurator Pilate offered sacrifices mixed with Jewish blood
in the Jerusalem Temple. Jesus responds by reminding his audience of another
tragedy—the tower of Siloam that fell on eighteen persons crushing them all to death. In
neither the massacre nor the Siloam tragedy, says Jesus, were the victims responsible.
Jesus refuses to point to a direct cause-effect relationship between their personal sin and
their tragedy. They were sinners, to be sure, but their condition was no different than
others.4 All human beings have one common need—the need to repent and receive the
gracious offer of the kingdom (Luke 13:3, 5). The summons to repentance assumes an
importance from two angles—from the certain but unpredictable time of Jesus' coming
and from the uncertainty of life itself on earth. Jesus will return though the time of his
coming is not known. As for one's life span, it may continue for years or it may end
abruptly and unexpectedly.
God's mercy allows a reprieve: At this point in Luke's account, Jesus tells the
Parable of the Barren Fig Tree (13:6-8). The parable affirms the mercy of God for his
people, who are responsive to their "champion," the gardener (Jesus) who intercedes for
them, and grants a "stay of execution." The future is not unalterable and fixed. Indeed,
without that delay of judgment or a final chance, humanity is irrevocably doomed. At the
same time, the parable also warns of a limit to God's forbearance. His word must be
heeded; his challenge needs to be met; his invitation needs to be accepted; and his search
for fruit must be gratified. If not, his irrevocable word will sentence the unresponsive, "If
not . . . you will/may chop it down." The divine verdict of condemnation is not arbitrary
or unfeeling; it comes as a direct result of self-condemning behavior, lack of fruit, un-
repentance and shortage of trust. Jesus is at work, trying to avert tragedy and destruction
and assumes the role of the gardener who pleads for special treatment of the ground so
that the fig tree (people of God) might produce the appropriate fruit by the next year.
In the following context, Jesus portrays—in ministry—the patient gardener in the
face of an indignant synagogue official, by healing a misshapen woman on the Sabbath
(Lk. 13:10-17). His compassion is expressed through his relief of the long-standing
suffering of one woman. Then he affirms that his kingdom will grow like a mustard seed
which, grows into a tree, a "bird sanctuary," similar to the contrast between the minute
yeast and the huge mass of dough (Lk. 13:18-20).
Urgency in the stories: The motif of the eschatological urgency of the gospel
continues throughout this chapter until at the end, the door of the festal hall is shut and
the word is heard, "too late" (13:22-30). The closing section (13:31-35) contains Jesus'
lament over Jerusalem that describes how the people of God, in the face of divine
forbearance and compassion, have hindered the central purpose of Christ's ministry. The
lament is a tender but "piercing" cry of sorrow. It is a gut-wrenching cry from Jesus,
which is also shared by God. The tenderness is conveyed in the imagery of a hen with her
brood, who wishes to gather her fleeing chicks under the protection of her wings, but
these chicks "have a mind of their own" and do not come to the source of protection and
4 If the motive for the question had been an inquiry into Jesus' sympathy for Zealotism, the expected
response did not fit the inquiry. Jesus did not allow Himself to be drawn into such discussions, but
transferred the meaning of these events to the religious sphere. He does not deal with a retribution theory,
but points to the eschatological urgency of the present: "Repent or perish" as a commentary on both
tragedies (13:3, 5).
Jesus and the Issue of Suffering
09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 5

nourishment. There is a clear contrast in the verbs, "I wished" (e0qe/lhsa) to gather you,"
which is countered by the tragic, "but you did not wish to respond" (e0qelh/sate). His
warning of the divine tragic consequences is conditioned upon or due to the human
unresponsiveness, "you were not willing." The imagery here of a rejected maternal
protection lays the blame squarely at Jerusalem's failure to receive both the long chain of
prophets and now, the Beloved Son of God. The failure is not due to casual neglect but
gross violence. The judgment of the people of God is sure, "Your house is left to you,
desolate." The words "You shall not see me, until the time comes when you say, 'Blessed
is He who comes in the name of the Lord'" (v. 39), surely must be understood with the
preceding passage of eschatological judgment. The suffering and tragedy that Jesus sees
coming is a "set back" for him as well as for God, and yet he honors human freedom and
the fallen condition of the world, that makes such a "setback" a reality. People are free
moral agents.
Not causality but purpose of suffering: The story about the gift of sight given to a
man born blind is introduced by the disciples' question that implies a link between
suffering/tragedy and sin, "His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his
parents, that he was born blind?” (John 9:2). The disciples operate on the presupposition
that where pain, suffering, and tragedy exist, that there must also be sin.5 They leave
open the question about the culprit but not the causality of sin itself. They assume two
candidates, the man himself or his parents.6 The man born blind also suffers in that he is
also poor and correspondingly, must beg to eke out an existence, and be dependent upon
the generosity of others. The affirmation about a supposed link between suffering and sin,
made by the disciples, is also shared by the Pharisees, "you were born in utter sin" (9:34)
and no doubt was also believed by many of the people who would come to the Temple
for worship. Not only did the blind man struggle with blindness and poverty but no doubt
self-hatred, wondering, assuming the sin-factor was to be found in himself.
Jesus refuses to see a link between this man's sin or his parent's sin and his
suffering. Jesus' answer does not probe the origin of sin, nor does he indicate that the
works of God are to become manifest to everyone who is born blind.7 The reader can
recall the event at the Pool of Bethesda where Jesus healed one paralytic, amidst any
number of other needy persons. Jesus focuses on one person and thus, provides no answer
as to why he did not meet the needs of the others at the pool. There is no indication that
the blind one asked for healing and unlike Bartimaeus, there is no suggestion that he
previously knew anything about Jesus. In v. 11, he merely refers to "a man called Jesus."8
No assigning of blame: Jesus' answer to his disciples reveals the goal that God
pursues in the midst of suffering and tragedy. To be sure, suffering is linked with a
personal enemy and the fallen state of the human race, which he came to save, but he
refuses to assign this personal tragedy to the consequence of the blind man's personal or
familial sin. He answers his disciples with the strong affirmation that the man's situation
is not one to assign blame and root out the cause. That is to say, people are not to
5 Note the way that the subjunctive, "that he might be born" (gennēthē) expresses result (BDF #391, 5).
6 The idea of sin before birth was generally remote in Judaism. The other idea of children paying for the
sins of parents is found in Jeremiah and Ezekiel.
7 "but" (a0lla/) is used with "in order that" (i#na) elliptically, "on the contrary this happened in order that . . ."

(BDF #448, 7).

8 Cullen I K Story, The Fourth Gospel: Purpose and Pattern (Shippensburg, PA: Ragged Edge 1990) for

further comments on Jn. 9.

Jesus and the Issue of Suffering
09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 6

speculate over suffering and tragedy but to look to the divine purpose at work in the
broken condition, "in order that the works of God may be manifest in him."
Liberation from theoretical explanations: Jesus' answer liberates his people from
obsession with theory and with endless analysis of why bad things happen. Rather, Jesus
is alert to the ways in which God may move amidst the broken conditions in life that are
faced every day.
Purpose in life: Until now, the man has been living a purpose-less existence; he
lives as a burden to others. But Jesus says that this man born blind is to become a sign of
God's majesty and power. His life is to possess the highest meaning that any human can
have; the works of God are to be revealed in him. He will be a permanent signpost,
pointing to the truth, "I am the Light of the World." 9 Jesus affirms here the significance
of this one who struggles with meaning and purpose in his life. In a broader sense, this
does not mean that healthy people are the only ones with meaning and purpose. "In the
end, this world and humanity do not derive their significance from themselves, but from
what God makes manifest in them."10 This man's physical condition was a "set back" for
God, which was restored on a temporary basis—until the other setback would occur—the
man's death. He would die, just as surely as the raised Lazarus would die again.
Corporate mission: The plural pronouns "we/us" are significant; "It is necessary
for us to work the works of God."11 Jesus draws the disciples to himself in the joint task
of mission—he and his people stand under the divine compulsion. Schnackenburg notes,
"The disciples are perhaps included in the saying about working because they are one day
to become witnesses and announcers of his work (John 15:27), who will perform works
like his (John 14:12) and share his fate (John15:20). In this way they too are under the
imperative of the divine dispensation ("it is necessary" dei=).12
In these three situations, Jesus refuses to assign blame or to explain the mystery of
human tragedy and suffering. Instead he portrays a God of compassion who does not will
for the suffering or destruction of people. He is vitally engaged in life-giving acts and
through his person, words, and works, he wages war against the enemy and the fallen
condition of a broken world and broken people. He pictures himself as a mother hen, who
is passionate for his "chicks," and draws others into his redemptive purpose for broken
people. He pleads as an intercessor for people to be granted a "second chance" and thus,
be restored. He honors human freedom and possible changes of heart and does not assign
an inexorable fate to individuals. He allows for the possibility for people to make wrong
choices and to thereby release fearful consequences.

Jesus' Incarnation (Suffering and Tragedy)

Christianity is the only religion that offers a picture of a suffering God, which
stands against the view that God is impassible, i.e., beyond human feeling. To be sure,
God is perfect. While some divine attributes appear to separate God from humanity by an
infinite chasm, God suffers with each sick and troubled person, culture and nation, "In all
their afflictions, He was afflicted" (Isa 53). There are those who have looked at the horrid
instances of suffering and horrific tragedy and say, "I cannot believe in a God who allows
such horror in the world." Rather than assigning of blame, people must understand that
9 Story, 214-215.
10 Walter Luthi, St. John's Gospel, (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1960), 118.
11 The use of the infinitive "to work" (e0rga/zesqai) recalls a similar use in John 5:17.

12 Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Gospel According to St. John, (New York: Crossroad, 1980), 241.

Jesus and the Issue of Suffering

09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 7

God sees each personal and national horror with the greatest clarity and that he is a God
who is affected by what he sees. He suffers from all of the personal and corporate
suffering and tragedy.
With the coming of Jesus, God suffers by the suffering, tragedy and human
rejection of his Son; He is the "wounded" God. In his entry into human history, Jesus
does not enter as a triumphal Savior. His very birth evokes a massacre of Bethlehem's
infants due to the fears of a paranoid king (Matt 2:15-18). One can only imagine the
horror felt by all of the families affected by the massacre. And when he begins his
ministry, we find two major responses to his person: 1) mass popularity due to his
miracles, healings, exorcisms, and teaching, 2) a rising opposition, notably from the
religious authorities, coupled with all kinds of accusations and insults. He is called
demon-possessed, a friend of tax-collectors and sinners, insane, a blasphemer, suicidal, to
name just a few epithets. And he is maltreated, denied by one of his twelve, and betrayed
by one of the twelve as well. It is very clear that he does not come to reinforce the
interests of wealth, power and position. In his ministry, he overturns ideas about God and
the extent to which God goes to reach humanity. This God-man suffers alienation,
misunderstanding, loneliness, frustration, constant accusation and rejection, a homeless
existence, betrayal, desertion by his own, stripping, shame, flogging and the horror of an
actual crucifixion.
The messianic nature of his Servant-role is described as the one who is gentle,
quiet, and unassuming; his silence charge (Matt 12:16, 17) is directly related to his role as
the servant (Matt 12:18-21; Isa 42:1-4). During his crucifixion, Jesus feels Himself to be
completely abandoned by God and cries out for explanation, "Why?" During his ministry
he is abandoned by others, his brothers, his hometown acquaintances and friends, the
people of God, the religious leaders, his own disciples, more pointedly by Judas and then
Peter. In the Upper Room Discourse, Jesus prophesies the desertion of the twelve and yet
affirms the divine presence with him even in the abandonment by others:
"The hour is coming, indeed it has come, when you will be scattered, every man
to his home, and will leave me alone; yet I am not alone, for the Father is with
me" (John 16:32)
The disciples are scattered as he had predicted, but his new experience is that of
abandonment by God. Jesus experiences the forsakenness by God and rejection by
people. This person, who grows up with the stigma of being illegitimate, who hangs out
with society's "low-lifes" dies the shameful and God-forsaken death on a cross (Deut
21:23).
In the cross, we find the tragedy of all tragedies—the quintessence of the love of
God that reaches out to sinful humanity and the quintessence of human rebellion. What
greater expression could there be of the vulnerable and risky love of God than the gift of
his Son, spit upon, scourged, and crucified in his nakedness? As such, he is weak and
vulnerable. At the same time, what greater evil could people perpetrate than to put to
death the Son of God? All he means is to offer the precious gift of life in himself. On the
cross, God himself and his Son experience a tragedy that is not deserved. The cross is the
supreme denial of the false link between personal sin and suffering. On the cross, God
makes the supreme risk, offering to people, the precious gift of his Son and the supreme
expression of his love. And he expresses his power through weakness, vulnerability and
self-offering. He makes it crystal clear that he desires to rule by love not control of the

Jesus and the Issue of Suffering

09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 8

human person. From the biblical texts, Calvary is the major event; generations and races
look backwards to this event and its import for the whole of human history, human
significance, as well as future hope. Coupled with the resurrection, history will never be
the same. These two historical events are of supra-historical significance for all past and
future generations. Further, the cross also serves to unite two different spheres—the
world above and the world below.

Jesus' Compassion in the Face of Human Suffering

While the OT expresses the compassion of God, the Gospels offer the compassion
of Jesus as an incarnation of the God of all compassion. Jesus demonstrates an
extraordinary and delicate sensitivity to the issues that cause pain, suffering and tragedy.
At times, he reads the human heart, "He did not need human testimony about the human
person, for He knew what was in the human heart" (John 2:25). Jesus knows what hurts
people, their hates and loves, disappointments, heartaches, joys and sorrows and the
things that cause intimacy and alienation, the fears and the delights of people. In his
person, words, and stories, and through his actions he expresses the portrait of a
compassionate God. He is especially sensitive to those who have been broken through the
world's system of competition and power, honor and shame, one-upmanship, social
climbing and power-plays, and the human need to compare oneself with others, self-
hatred and religious judgment. Jesus gives a "face" to compassion as he interacts with the
weak, the helpless and the objects of contempt. Instead of a cold shoulder or an
indifferent look, he offers himself as compassion itself.
The noun, "compassion" (spla/gxnon) and the verb, "I feel compassion" (splagxni/zomai),
express deep feeling and the seat of heart-felt mercy in later Jewish and Christian
writings. The noun originated as a term to express any number of internal physical
organs, constituting the viscera: heart, liver, lungs, kidneys, loins as seat of procreation
and the seat of impulsive passion (anger, lust, anxious desire, feeling, love,
courage)13—thus, the expression, "the bowels of compassion." In American idiom, it
might be expressed as a "gut reaction" or "gut wrenching." The verb, "I feel
compassion," is based on the noun and expresses the stirring of pity (Prov 12:10).
Although the word-family is infrequent in the LXX, the words do occur in the
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, and express the feeling of God, the expectation of
the compassionate Messiah, and the people of God:
Testament Zebulun 8:2: Because also in the last days God will send his
compassion on the earth, and wherever he finds bowels of mercy, he dwells in
him. For in the degree in which a man has compassion upon his neighbors, in the
same degree has the Lord upon him.
Testament Naphtali 4:5: And the Lord shall scatter them upon the face of all the
earth, until the compassion of the Lord shall come, a man working righteousness
and working mercy unto all them that are afar off, and to them that are near.
9:7-8: And after these things you shall remember the Lord and repent, and he
shall have mercy upon you, for he is merciful and compassionate, and he sets not
down in account evil against the sons of men.
13 H. Köster, "spla/gxnon," Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol.VI, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B
Eerdmans Publishing, 1971) 548. The alpha-privative expression a1splagxnov means "cowardly," "without
strength or savour" (cf. "no intestinal fortitude").
Jesus and the Issue of Suffering
09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 9

And after these things there shall arise unto the Lord himself, the light of
righteousness [And healing and compassion shall be in His wings]. (LXX version
of Mal 3:20)
In these texts, God is identified as the one who is compassionate, whose Messiah is
"Compassion," who will come and express mercy and compassion in a manner, which
corresponds to his divine nature. Clearly the word-family expresses the sensitive and
"feeling" involvement of God in the lives of His people, expressed in a supreme way
through the Messiah.
In the Gospels, the verb characterizes the divine nature, feeling and activity—of a
God who is passionately connected with his people. The verb is used in three parables
and expresses God's feeling and attitude through human figures. In the Parable of the
Unmerciful Servant (Matt 18:23-35), the slave's master felt compassion for the servant
who had "rung up" an astronomical debt (v. 27); compassion here serves as the driving
force behind the master's decision to release the servant from the impossible debt. In the
Parable of the "Searching Father" (Luke 15:11-32), the father sees the son over the
horizon, feels compassion for him, and runs to meet him (v. 20). The dramatic feeling and
action of the father for the apostate son expresses Jesus' passion for the irreligious (vss. 1-
2), his accepting involvement in their lives, the feeling of God and the celebration of the
angels in the saving event. In the well-known parable of Lk. 10:25-37, the hated half-
breed Samaritan feels compassion for the wounded traveler (v. 33). His compassion leads
him to render benevolent service to the half-dead victim. Feeling, which leads to saving
help, reflects Jesus' own passion, the passion of God and God's expectation that the
people of God should be passionately involved with the "broken" and needy.
The verb is also used by the evangelists in narrative paragraphs to express the
passionate involvement of Jesus in situations of human need:
34 "he felt compassion for them, because they were like sheep without a
shepherd" (Mark 6:34).
14 "he saw a great crowd; and he felt compassion for them and cured their sick"
(Matt. 14:14).
2 "I feel compassion for the crowd, because they have been with me now for three
days and have nothing to eat" ( Mark 8:2; Matt 15:32).
41 "Moved with compassion, Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him, and
said to him, 'I do choose. Be made clean!'" (Mark 1:41).
22 "It has often cast him into the fire and into the water, to destroy him; but if you
are able to do anything, extend compassion on us and help us" (Mark 9:22).
34 Moved with compassion, Jesus touched their eyes. Immediately they regained
their sight and followed him" (Matt 20:34).
13 "When the Lord saw her, he felt compassion for her and said to her, 'Do not
weep" (Luke 7:13).
In succession, the texts relate Jesus' passionate involvement with the plight of an aimless
and wandering crowd, a crowd's hunger, and a socially and religiously ostracized leper, a
father with a demon-possessed son, two blind men and a widow with a dead son.14 Jesus
is passionately involved with human need and the various faces of human pain. Such
feeling by Jesus is then translated into saving help. Clearly the stories characterize Jesus'
emotional response and practical help to those who are in need. The translations of the
14Often the texts note a form of personal address: "young man" Luke 7:14; "son" Mark 2:5 par.; "daughter"
Mark 5:34; "Talitha Koum" ("little girl, I say to you, 'get up'").
Jesus and the Issue of Suffering
09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 10

Greek verb generally contain the expression, "I have compassion"; the translation, "I feel
compassion," or "I am moved with compassion," might more adequately express the
verb. Compassion is an emotion that people "feel" in the deepest level of their being; it is
not something that is possessed as an object. Correspondingly, the verb and noun express
God's passionate concern, "feeling" and saving help to those who are in desperate straits.
He is sensitive to a brokenhearted woman who weeps incessantly and gratefully at his
feet (Luke 7). He feels for the adulterous woman who is the subject of scorn and is fearful
for her life (John 8:1-11). He takes the time to listen to a Samaritan woman and her
history of failed marital relationships (John 4). He is deeply sensitive to weeping women
on his own sorrowful road to the cross.
The miracles of healing and provision are intended to alleviate human suffering
for the moment, but they are only hints in the heart of Jesus for a broader humanity that is
wounded and alienated. His feeling keeps pace with the depths of human feeling and
passion just as God's actions keep pace with human activity. On the cross, Jesus
experiences the far reaches of loneliness and thus, is able to steal loneliness of its death-
dealing power. The greatest lover in human history knows the full extent of human
agony, knows the human condition, and embraces the totality of the human struggle. In
the same vein, God keeps in step with the activity and feelings of people and continues to
interact with them in the midst of their suffering and tragedy.

Jesus' View on Satan's Role in Suffering and Tragedy

From the beginning of the Bible in Genesis to the end in the book of Revelation,
the biblical texts affirm that the presence of suffering and tragedy in the world belongs to
the fallen condition of the world and the presence of a personal enemy and enemy forces.
The narrative of the fall in Gen 3 portrays a paradigm of sin and sin's consequences,
which would be echoed by Israel's preachers: disobedience to God's commandments
brings the certainty of curse and death (Deut 30: 15-19). There are fearful consequences
for the fall. This truth would also be expressed by Israel's wisdom tradition: "There is a
way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death" (Prov 14:12; 16:25).
The fundamental idea of the narratives is that God created the world as perfect but
that a breakdown occurred, which brought in its wake, alienation, power-struggles,
disease, suffering and tragedy. The bliss that was enjoyed in the Garden of Eden passed
away and could not be retrieved. The human race would live amidst hardship, pain, and
suffering. Sin, which is unleashed, will only escalate in its breadth and depth. In the
judgment scene of Gen 3, the text warns of the bitter consequences of the fall that people
would experience in subsequent generations. The intent of the narrative is not that of a
removed and distant God who exacts penalties from afar; he is there in the garden with
them. He intends to express in narrative form, the bitter consequences that would be
reaped by future generations. Only the grace of God would keep humanity from its in-
built tendency to self-destruction.

Satan's Power and Role

Colossal war: Behind the world and its fallen condition is a personal enemy, who
is variously called: the Devil, Satan, Beelzebul, the Tempter, ruler of demons,15 prince of
this world16 or enemy. Jesus reflects the viewpoint that the world has been seized by a
15Matt 9:34.
16John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11.
Jesus and the Issue of Suffering
09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 11

hostile Satan, and thus, would necessitate his aggressive struggle with the forces of
darkness. Satan offers Jesus all "authority over all the kingdoms of this world," an offer,
which presumably is Satan's to offer. Jesus does not dispute the reality of this offer (cf.
Luke 4:5-6). The Gospels include numerous narratives, which depict a colossal war being
waged between God and Satan, between life and death, between freedom and bondage,
between health and disease and between liberation and demon-possession.
In his own personal life and subsequent ministry, Jesus' conflict with Satan and
evil spirits is no casual, incidental or secondary purpose, or activity. Jesus confronts
Satan as the leader of a unified and powerful army of spiritual powers and demons. His
house and kingdom are not divided by internal dissension. Following Jesus' initial
conflict with Satan and demons (beasts) in the temptation narrative (Mark 1:12-13), one
of Jesus' first public appearances in the Capernaum synagogue issues in a dramatic
encounter with a possessed man. Jesus' very presence evokes a violent and aggressive
response in the synagogue. Throughout his ministry, through narrative, teaching and
responsiveness to people, Jesus assumes an aggressive posture with respect to Satan and
demon powers and their role in demon-possession, wrong human attitudes and choices,
disease, and death. He is intent upon setting people free from their disease and the
possession by demons.
In parable form, Jesus states that he is the Stronger One who has invaded the
house of the Strong Man, bound him and thus, is able to plunder the Strong One's
property (cf. Matt 12:22-30). The clearest statement of his conflict and victory over the
Strong Man is found in a paragraph where the source of Jesus' power of exorcism is
challenged. His exorcisms express the reality of the present kingdom:
28 But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of
God has come to you" (Matt 12:28).
His entire ministry is directed to overpowering the Strong Man, who relentlessly guards
his property (Luke 11:21). The evangelists note that at the moment of the crucifixion, the
forces of darkness and the forces of life are positioned in a cataclysmic confrontation.
Death, disease and possession are clear and observable symbols of the disorder, which
has erupted in the world—all traceable to human sin and a personal enemy. Jesus never
treated illness or demonization as anything but the indirect or direct work of the enemy.
The healing of bodies, the exorcisms of possessed individuals, the forgiveness of sins,
and the raising from the dead—are symbols of the divine life that has invaded the broken
world. Although Jesus dealt a fatal blow to Satan on the cross,17 this does not mean that
Satan is still not in control of the world. It rather indicates the paradox of the "already-
but-not-yet" tension of the New Testament. He does not tell the sick or demon possessed
that they are to accept such conditions as fitting into a grand cosmic blueprint of God's
sovereignty. He wages war against the enemy by freeing the casualties of war. The
healing of disease and the exorcism of possessed persons are signs of God's redemptive
grace and God's victory over the person and forces of evil. This victory has been won in a
climactic way in principle through Jesus Christ's victory over sin and death on the cross.
That victory still awaits its full realization and consummation.
Jesus' holistic concerns: The healing that he effects is holistic in nature and
includes the different aspects of the human person and is expressed under the broad
umbrella term, "the kingdom of God" (Gospels), "salvation" (Paul), or "eternal life"
(John). In the various Gospel stories, Jesus' conflict with Satan and evil spirits can be
17Eph 1:22; Heb 1:13; Col 2:14-15; Eph 1:22; Heb 1:13.
Jesus and the Issue of Suffering
09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 12

looked at from a cosmological and a personal perspective. From a cosmological

perspective, Jesus is the Stronger One who has invaded the Strong Man's house and
bound him, and thus, is able to plunder his "furniture/possessions," i.e., set free those who
are in bondage to the enemy. From a personal perspective, Jesus frees individuals and
grants new life and health to those whose wills are controlled by a hostile, alien and
destructive power.
Satan appears as a distinct personality, who seeks to entice Jesus and his followers
away from his messianic vocation. He tempts people to compromise their integrity by
following an easier path than a divinely willed plan. Through the temptation narrative, it
is clear that Satan entices people away from a relationship of daily dependence upon God
and seeks to cause presumption by the people of God and compromise their worship. He
seeks to hinder the proclamation and harvest of the kingdom, which has come in the
person of Jesus;18 he is capable of shutting human hearts to the message of the kingdom
and is intent upon wreaking distortion and confusion even when there are a responsive
people. Through possession, Satan is able to control the emotions, mental state and
behavior of people and infuse them with a supernatural strength and immunity from
physical pain. "The centre of personality, the volitional and active ego, is impaired by
alien powers, which seek to ruin the man and sometimes drive him to self destruction
(Mark 5:5)."19 Satan is successful in his temptation to secure both the betrayal (Judas)
and denial (Peter) of Jesus, but even so, his ability is limited to the redemptive purpose
that is at work in the cross and in the restoration of a fallen leader. At the time of his
arrest Jesus says, "But this is your hour and the hour of the power of darkness is yours as
well" (Lk. 22:53). Even the closing scene of Jesus' earthly life is narrated against a
cosmic background, involving a supernatural darkness, rending of the Temple's thick
veil, an earthquake, opening of tombs and the raising up of saints who enter the city of
Jerusalem (Matt 27:51). The confrontation between Jesus and the Devil in the temptation
narrative is exponentially magnified at the time of the crucifixion, involving a cosmic
struggle between Jesus and the powers of evil and death.
Demon-possession and trauma: At times, possession by unclean spirits results in
various physical maladies. To some extent, one of Satan's spirits is responsible for
binding up a woman in a crippled condition for eighteen years;20 nonetheless, she remains
a daughter of Abraham, who is subsequently healed and is able to stand in an erect
posture.21 Satan is the origin of murder, hatred and lying and seeks to perpetuate murder
and lying through people, notably through "religious" people.22 He is even able to cast in
his vote with a disciple's wrong thinking (Mark 8:33). Satan is able to "enter" people and
put malicious plans into their hearts. Jesus' encounter with the Gadarene demoniac(s)
reveals that the demons (consequently Satan) know that they have a fearful and assured
end, "Have you come to destroy us before the time?" (Matt 8:29). Nonetheless, in the
present age, Satan controls a unified kingdom, which still stands. Satan's power and
influence are powerful yet limited and can be minimized by direct aggression through
18 In 1 Thess 2:18, he successfully obstructs Christian mission and travel; in 1 Cor 7:5, he uses sexual
continence to bring about fracture in the marriage; in Acts 5:3, he prompts withholding of finances and its
deceit. Although Satan is an enemy of the light and of God (Acts 26:18), he is also able to disguise himself
as an angel of light (2 Cor 11:14).
19 Foerster, 19.
20 Luke 13:1, 16.
21 Luke 13:13, 16.
22 John 8:40, 41, 44, 45, 46.

Jesus and the Issue of Suffering

09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 13

exorcism or by the word of God. On at least one occasion Satan is granted permission to
put a disciple into a sieve and shake him; yet, his power is limited to Jesus' permission
and can be countered by the strengthening power of Jesus' intercession. He is confident
that his people can either resist Satan or be restored and in a stronger condition, after they
have fallen. He believes and hopes that his "loyal traitor" and "loyal deserters" can make
better choices in the future. However, their future choices are not "programmed."
Relief from suffering: When Jesus wages war upon demon-possession, he relieves
untold suffering. An unfortunate man in Capernaum is physically present in the
synagogue, but nevertheless, belongs to another sphere, "in an unclean spirit" (Mark
1:23) and is not in control of his own life.23 The Gerasene demoniac24 is in a desperate
condition; Mark provides three verses (5:2-5), which highlight the grievous condition25 of
the man: he lives a solitary existence in the sphere of the unclean (tombs), possesses a
superhuman strength, shouts, cuts himself with stones and is incapable of being restrained
through chains. In Mark 9:17, details abound concerning the pitiful state of the epileptic
son: he is robbed of speech and experiences violent seizures, being thrown to the ground,
foaming at the mouth, gnashing of teeth, bodily-rigidity and self-destructive behavior
(thrown into the fire or water to kill him).26 A Syro-Phoenician woman comes to Jesus
on behalf of her demon-possessed daughter, who is in a needy condition (Mark 7:24-30).
Although no specific details are provided, presumably the daughter is in a condition
serious enough that she cannot make the trip with her mother; there are no details in the
text as to the extent to which she or her mother were subject to ridicule and shame.
Reality of an enemy: Thus, the Gospels reflect a war, but a war in which "God
does not always get his way."27 While Jesus defeated Satan in principle, the future age
will be marked by a manifest victory. Nonetheless, in this present age, Jesus and His
future believers would contend with satanic opposition in carrying out the will of God.
For example, Paul was hindered by Satan on several occasions in coming to see the
Thessalonians (I Thess. 2:18). The Church enters into the pillaging of the Strong Man's
kingdom, based upon the binding of the Stronger One (Matt 12:29).
Jesus' Call to Discipleship and the Role of Suffering
Invitations and commands: When Jesus summons people to follow him, he makes
no promises of happiness, prosperity, or comfort. At the same time, he does not ask
potential recruits if they are chaste, sober, respectable, intelligent, spiritually minded or
born leaders. He charms no one into discipleship with guarantees of success and power.
Instead he issues simple commands, "follow me" (Mark 1:16-20). He does promise the
fisherman that their vocation would change from that of fishing for fish to becoming
fishers of people. At other times, he states, "If anyone will come after me, let him take up
23 The sphere is similar to Elymas, the magician (Acts 13:8-12) and a woman with a divining spirit (Acts
16:16-18).
24 In Matt 8:28—there are two demoniacs.
25 The use of the perfect infinitives Mk. 5:4, "pulled apart" and "shattered" intimate that further human

effort to bind him will be in vain.

26 The story of the Gadarene demoniac is congruent with Mark's grouping of several miracle stories, which

emphasize the extremity of need (distress at sea—4:35-41; Gadarene demoniac—5:1-20; Jairus'

daughter—5:21-24, 35-43; woman with a hemorrhage—5:25-34), the human impossibility of self-help, the
role of trust and the wholeness of life that Jesus bestows upon each "impossible" situation. There is a clear
comprehensive breadth to the works of Jesus in that they focus, in succession, on the world of nature (wind
at sea), the spiritual world (demoniac), human sickness and frailty (woman with the hemorrhage) and the
world of death (Jairus' daughter).
27 Boyd, p. 39.

Jesus and the Issue of Suffering

09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 14

his cross daily. And whoever does not take up his cross and come after me, cannot be my
disciple" (Mark 8:34). For a would-be follower, Jesus dampens his enthusiasm with his
statement about not having a place to lay His head (Matt 8:20). Jesus is
uncompromisingly honest in his invitation and the implications of what such a decision
might mean in terms of comfort and prosperity. The fourth evangelist alone narrates the
bittersweet expression of Jesus' concern for his mother standing near the cross. The old
and honorable Simeon had prophesied to Mary about her infant child, "And a sword will
pierce through your own soul also" (Luke 1:35)—a sober prophecy that is now fulfilled
in the death of her son as a political criminal, and "cursed by God" from the Jewish
perspective (Deut 21:23). Readers of the narrative can scarcely fathom the depth of pain
that Mary experienced. For the fourth evangelist, writing years later, he is able to mark
the movement of Jesus to the cross as the climactic "hour" of glorification, when Jesus
ascends his throne. But for Mary, his mother, at this point in time, the cross looks like
anything other than a throne. Her life of discipleship after the cross would no doubt be
infused with the agonized memory of the events of "Good Friday." Her discipleship
would carry the "wounds" of the memory of her son. Other disciples, such as Peter were
to face the prospect of martyrdom (John 21:19). John the Evangelist, lives out his life in
exile on the Island of Pathos.
Commitment and promises: Jesus offers no prosperity gospel for his followers; he
issues the summons to follow him along the path of committed discipleship. He promises
and confers eternal life, inner security, solid hope, meaning and purpose, deep-seated joy,
real peace, intimate relationship, the security of being the "beloved and known of God,"
wholeness and integration. At the same time, his followers are invited to experience the
fellowship of his suffering, which may involve misunderstanding, humiliation, rejection
and loneliness. And in the context of this realism, he also assures his own of ultimate
victory. Jesus draws his disciples into the very warfare against Satan, e.g., in their short-
term missions trips (Mark 6:7-13; Luke 10:17). Suffering and discipleship are not
accidents in the Christian life but become the very means by which his own life is worked
out in personal and community life.
The Perplexing Choice of Judas
Questions: The example of Judas may bring together several themes related to
suffering and tragedy and the role of Jesus in such suffering. In the story of Judas, the
gospel narratives provide a paradox: Jesus' selection of Judas, "apparent foreknowledge,"
free choice, human betrayal and complicity, "son of perdition" (John 17:12). Why did
Jesus select Judas? Did he know from the beginning that Judas would betray Him? If so,
why did Jesus entrust Judas with opportunities for internship with short-term missions
trips, involving preaching, healing and exorcism? Why was he entrusted with the
community purse? Why did Jesus not reveal his betrayal to the other disciples in the
Upper Room on that fateful night? A classical Calvinist approach would argue that Jesus
foreknew the whole of the divine plan from the beginning, that Judas was selected to
"play the part" of the betrayer in the divine plan and was chosen from the beginning for
perdition.
We know nothing about Judas except of his involvement in the fiscal affairs of the
community purse (John 12) and his plot with the religious authorities to arrest Jesus,
which would then lead to Jesus' trial and subsequent death. There is the reference to
Jesus' choice of Judas in John 6:70, “Did I not choose you, the twelve? Yet one of you is

Jesus and the Issue of Suffering

09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 15

a devil.” The question is very real, "At what point did Jesus know that Judas would be
the one who would betray Him?" In John 6:64, Jesus responds, "But there are some of
you that do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not
believe, and who it was that would betray him." The expression, "from the first" (e0c
a0rxh=v) may well indicate "early on" at the moment of his selection or in the process of
Judas' discipleship. Certainly, he knew something of the sordid nature of Judas' life in
John 6, during the time of the Feeding of the 5000; presumably, this was something that
God shared with Jesus. And no doubt, Judas was one of the twelve, who was sent out on
the short-term preaching mission (Mark 6:7-13). The joy of the 70 on their return from
their short-term-missions trip represents the joy of the 12—all twelve of them (Luke
10:17, including Jesus). If one "buys into" the historical Jesus' omniscience, then this
would mean that Jesus knew of Judas' future action prior to his choice as a disciple. Thus,
when he first saw Judas, he knew that this was the predetermined man, who would fulfill
the divine plan of betraying the Son of God, and thus, Judas was invited to become part
of the apostolic twelve.
However, this position is untenable in light of real incarnation when Jesus became
flesh and blood, a human being with weakness and finitude. Thus, as a human being,
Jesus asks real questions of things that he does not know, "Who touched my garments?"
(Mark 5:30).28 Jesus asks the question because he does not know. And it is Luke, who
faithfully tells us that Jesus "grew" (2:52), "He continued to cut his way toward wisdom"
(proe/kopten e0n th=| sofi/a|/). When he asks his disciples questions about his identity, he is not
sure of what their response will be. And no doubt, at some point, during his ministry with
the twelve, he becomes aware of Judas' upcoming betrayal in the same way that he knows
of Peter's impending three-fold denial. But these instances of his prophetic insight do not
necessitate the premise that Jesus was following a pre-determined script of a play that he
knew well in advance, with memorized lines of every scene. Even the expression that
Jesus uses for Judas, "son of perdition," is a Semitism, which means, "one who is
characterized by perdition/destruction," and does not mean one who is predestined from
the outset for perdition as if to follow the divine blueprint. The text only indicates that by
the time Jesus made this declaration concerning Judas, that Judas had already made a
dastardly and free choice that set in motion the tragedy of tragedies. Along the path, Jesus
began to observe devious behavior on the part of Judas in absconding funds from the
disciples' treasury pouch (John 12:6). In a similar vein, Jesus' offer of a morsel to Judas, a
gesture of friendship in John 13, was surely intended to dissuade Judas from his dastardly
plot; the offer was genuine, although it was not received as such. As for Jesus' silence
concerning Judas' plot, he allows the disciples to discover the painful truth for
themselves, after the resurrection. But Jesus honors the freedom of Judas to make his
wrong choices. Similarly, as a man, Jesus chooses a course of action and encounters
individual needs and situations as they come, and in each one, he seeks to determine and
do the will of the Father.

Implications
The Bible affirms that in this broken world, God himself experiences loss and
deeply grieves over the various losses; "He is afflicted with those who are afflicted" (Isa
28In Luke's account, Jesus thinks that it is a man who has "touched Him" (tis ho apsamenos mou)—a
masculine, not feminine participle).
Jesus and the Issue of Suffering
09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 16

53). Even though God knows his future resolution of the present condition of a world at
war, he nonetheless has given the precious gift of free choice to humanity. And his
activity keeps pace with the activity of people and nations. Just as God's grace kept pace
in the primeval history (Gen 3-11), so he continues to "keep pace" with human activity
for good or for evil. Although he does not predetermine such horrors as 9/11 or
subsequent wars, he possesses unlimited intelligence and resources and is able to redeem
good from evil. It is important that his people reckon with the reality of a God who
suffers loss, when divine purposes for human life are thwarted (Luke 7:30) in the same
way that He experienced genuine regret for making Saul king over Israel (1 Sam 15:11,
35). He had hoped for a different set of choices for Saul and was bitterly disappointed at
Saul's fragmentation. In the midst of suffering and tragedy, the Bible affirms the divine
love that is at the core of the universe, a love that risks failure and rejection; thus, God is
repeatedly disappointed. When suffering and tragedy occur, they are events that did not
turn out as God would have hoped for his people. "Hence, when a person like Saul fails,
God already has a person like David waiting in the wings. Scripture reveals a God who is
utterly confident of his ability to achieve his overall purposes despite (and sometimes by
means of) the sinful rebellion of his creatures. So confident is he, in fact that he is willing
to risk some loss with free agents in order to open the possibility of fellowship with them
throughout eternity. He is willing to suffer frustration, disappointment and grief in order
to share the joy of his triune being with others."29 The following perspectives may
express the Gospel witness:
First, suffering and tragedies are realities of the present age in which people live
in a broken world filled with other broken people. It may be that the suffering is
catastrophic such as 9/11 or it may be the loss of a job. Suffering and tragedy can come in
the so many forms—death of a child or a spouse, or a divorce that devastates one's life. It
may come through a death as a casualty of war. Suffering may come in the form of an
inner loneliness or quiet despair in that one feels condemned to an unmarried and lonely
state. Suffering may come in the form of personal defeat in being able to conquer a
particular vice. Suffering and tragedy possess so many faces. Suffering may come when
one is following Jesus in the proclamation of the Gospel in a hostile culture or nation.
However, the NT does not assume an inexorable cause-effect relationship
between suffering and sin, that where there is suffering and tragedy, there must obviously
be sin. God does not set the script for suffering and tragedy. He is a God who is intent on
life and wholeness and who promotes goodness and well being and has good things in
store for his people. His inmost essence is that of love—not power; God wills life—not
death. And he still remains the enemy of hate, injustice, poverty, violence, racism and
corruption. In achieving his ultimate purpose for his people, God experiences painful
"set-backs" when people make wrong choices and fail to respond to the divine love-
initiative. Jesus himself encountered numerous "set-backs." For example, when Jesus
sends his disciples out on their short-term missions-trip, he prepares them for set-backs
they will experience when homes and villages refuse to hear the message of the Kingdom
of God. And what greater "set-back" could God experience than to see people put to
death the Son of his Love.
Second, Jesus understands that people will be conformed to the dying of Jesus.
God is able to work with people in their "set-backs," suffering, and tragedy to pursue a
redemptive purpose. Sometimes it takes suffering and tragedy to bring about the very
29Boyd, 104-105.
Jesus and the Issue of Suffering
09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 17

qualities that God purposes. A person who has been broken through the circumstances of
life is able to be one who mediates life to another because of the common experience of
brokenness. For instance, a recovering alcoholic is able to understand and help one who
struggles with this fearful addiction. Is God the author of the addiction? Certainly not!
However, the very experience of brokenness may become the very means by which a
person is able more fully to enter into the suffering of Jesus and the brokenness of others.
People who have been devastated through financial loss may become more gentle and
patient with others who have experienced similar losses. If loss had not come their way,
they might be more wrapped up in their own achievement and successes and incapable of
hearing the pain of another. These are some provisional answers. In other instances, the
"Why?" question may never be answered. Jesus himself provides no comprehensive
answers as to why suffering and tragedy occur. But he does accept the reality of "set-
backs," suffering and tragedy and orients his disciples to accept the circumstances of life
as they come. God can use these "set-backs" and assures his people that suffering and
tragedy are not ultimately pointless.
The Bible thus affirms that there is a link between the fall and suffering, but also,
that the sick are no more sinners than are the healthy. And Jesus' message is, "Beware of
a narrow moralism and realize that you are all sinners, along with those who are sick."
And also, be aware of the presence of a real and powerful enemy who seeks the ruin of
people in countless ways." The painful reality of suffering and human tragedy cannot be
discounted, denied, or neatly explained. Jesus refuses to assign blame for situations of
suffering and tragedy, other than to say that these realities belong to our fallen condition
and the reality of a personal enemy. This enemy and his minions no doubt affect much of
what is called "natural tragedy," in which no human moral decisions are made, e.g., a
deadly earthquake or tidal wave. This comes to the agonized questions that are raised
when healing does not come, "If people of faith, who believe in healing, who believe in
the power of the Holy Spirit, have prayed for me and I haven't been healed—then this
must mean that I am not worthy of God's healing?" Such questions can only lead to guilt
and self-hatred.
Rather, Jesus encourages humility as a sign of discipleship (Matt 18:1-5). There
are divine mysteries that cannot be penetrated with human vision and lack of perspective.
Jesus himself did not provide such answers that draw an inexorable link between
suffering and sin.
Third, his disciples should respond with the all-important feeling and behavior of
compassion, and work towards the relief of those who suffer and experience tragedy and
loss. As his disciples move towards the relief of those who are broken through life's
circumstances, they will find the person of Jesus, albeit in an unselfconscious manner, to
"one of the least of these" (hungry, thirsty, stranger, sick, in prison).30 Jesus exclaims
that the compassion of God and his compassion should characterize the lives of the
people of God. Jesus' compassion leaves us no luxury of idealism or pious sentiments.
The compassion of Jesus is a verb; in each instance that the Gospels use the word
compassion, they proceed to narrate his activity for those in need, feeding the hungry,
healing the sick, delivering those who are demon possessed. In the Parable of the Good
Samaritan, he commends the hated Samaritan, because he acted out of compassion. At
the same time, the religious people flunked the test; they possessed theological
understanding but did nothing in the face of human need and suffering.
30Matt 25:31-46.
Jesus and the Issue of Suffering
09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 18

Such help may be expressed through the unspectacular works of feeding and
sheltering, visiting the sick, taking the time to listen to the heart-cry of another, making
an important phone call or writing a letter that will bring life. In the JB, the text of Luke
6:36 is rendered, "Be compassionate as your Father is compassionate."31 While his
people may celebrate the times when God grants healing or effects exorcism, they may
also be cognizant of the reality that healing and exorcism are provisional; these people
will die and others will experience the suffering of their loss in the human dimension.
Fourth, the disciples of Jesus need to be aware of the reality of a personal enemy
and confront the work of the enemy when it is apparent. This means that the people of
God need to develop the kind of discernment, which is able to sense the malicious
activity of Satan in the circumstances of life as well as through the thoughts and activities
of people, even religious persons. Since Jesus encountered direct or indirect assaults
through the enemy, the people of God should expect no less. This does not mean that
Satan is to be exorcised from each difficult or tragic situation or problem person. But the
evidence from the Gospels is that a personal and powerful enemy is intent upon wreaking
havoc upon people. In Jesus' story about the weeds (Matt 13:24-30), we hear the note of
surprise from servants who discover that the field that was sown with good wheat is also
full of bastard wheat (tares/darnel). For some reason, the "householder"32 knows that the
presence of such noxious weeds is the work of an enemy. He is privy to information that
the slaves do not possess. The readers are not told whether he knows it at the point of
question or was aware at the moment of destructive sowing. The slaves feel a personal
attachment to the householder and his ownership of the field that is now filled with both
good wheat and weeds. They are somewhat naive. It is inconceivable to them that
someone would do such a destructive thing, least of all to their master!
Although the slaves accept the master's answer about the enemy, they nonetheless
want to do something that will help him. They ask, "Do you want us to go and gather
them up?" The servants are willing to do what is necessary to purify the crop for their
master.33 The servants want permission to go out into the fields and separate the bastard
wheat from the genuine wheat. The answer to their request is an emphatic "No," coupled
with an explanation for why such premature separation is inappropriate. It is not their job
to separate, for if they try to prematurely make the separation, they will end up,
destroying the good wheat as well. The angels, not the disciples will effect a separation.
However, they need to come to grips with the reality of a personal enemy who has
brought havoc to the field. In a similar way, the people of God need to develop the sort of
critical discernment with respect to the work of the enemy in the 21st Century. When his
people feel the tragedy of 9/11 or learn through the news of the devastation of the AIDS
virus, particularly in Africa, or learn of an earthquake that has killed hundreds of people
in China, they may say along with the householder, "An enemy has done this." Human
beings in concert with satanic forces have done this. Suffering and tragedy are not the
"kind of seed" that a good householder sows in the "field" of his good creation. Jesus
suggests a satanology that views the satanic force(s) as directly or indirectly responsible
31 The saying in Matthew, "Be perfect . . . as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt 5:48) is to be

understood in the context of an indiscriminate love that goes out to others—the same setting in Luke 6.
32 The term, "man" is used in v. 24 to refer to the same authority figure. Jesus was already called the

"householder" and the disciples were called, "slaves" in Matt. 10:24.

33 Jeremias notes Sprenger's work concerning the normalcy of such a weeding process. Joachim Jeremias,

The Parables of Jesus, (New York: Scribner's Sons, 1972), 225.

Jesus and the Issue of Suffering
09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 19

for both "natural" and personal disaster. Such a view "takes seriously the fact that Jesus
always considered 'natural' infirmities and diseases as directly or indirectly the work of
Satan's kingdom. It also squares well with the fact that Jesus treated a life-threatening
storm the way he treated demons: he 'rebuked' it."34
The heart of the Gospel message is not a systematic theology or an easy "fix" to
the enigma of suffering. It is an affirmation of God whose very nature is that of love, who
proved his essential nature through the supreme act of love, the gift of his Son—through
his person, his words and his works—in quintessential expression on the Cross. It is a call
to a relationship with a suffering person, who wills life and who calls upon his people to
identify with him in his suffering and yes, in his ultimate victory. He is a God who
experiences "set-backs," but has also set in motion a redemptive plan and purpose that
will one day be fully consummated when:
"The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid,
and the calf and the lion and the fatling together, and a little child shall lead
them.7 The cow and the bear shall feed; their young shall lie down together; and
the lion shall eat straw like the ox.8 The sucking child shall play over the hole of
the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder’s den.9 They shall
not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the
knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea" (Isa 11:6-9).

"he will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither
shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain any more, for the former things have
passed away" (Rev 21:4)

William Catoe's story

I share this story with the reader to grapple with the mystery of evil and human
pain that has so deeply entered William Catoe's life. He allowed me to interview him; the
results of the interview are quoted below. It is important for us to think deeply about the
questions, "Why has there been such relentless suffering and tragedy in the life of one
person? Could not these tragedies be spread over more than one individual alone?"
Also, it is important to see the various points where even the tragedies awoke something
profoundly deep in William's life.
To begin with Dr. Story, I have to briefly take you back to my childhood.
It was then that the health concerns that I am having today first started taking
shape. My father severely abused me. I was shot, stabbed, pistol-whipped, and
beaten with such things as fence posts, shotgun barrels, electric irons, and bicycle
frames. I was hospitalized on at least three different occasions when I was child
with blood clots resulting from the trauma. I say this only to let you know that I
have had continued problems to this very day with clotting and other vascular
disorders, particularly in my left leg. Also, all twelve of my ribs on my left side
were broken at one time which injury has since caused me to suffer long-term
from certain respiratory and cardiovascular problems.
However, in God’s good grace, I was eventually delivered from the abuses
of my father. I went into the Navy and then educated myself on the GI Bill. I
34Gregory Boyd, Satan and the Problem of Evil, (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2001), p. 318. Note
the verb "be silent/be muzzled" (phimaō) in both instances, to the demoniac and the storm (Mark 1:25;
Mark 4:39).
Jesus and the Issue of Suffering
09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 20

married, raised two children, and became a very successful trial attorney. I also
coached my son’s baseball and football teams and my daughter’s softball teams. I
was active in community affairs and even founded a home for abused women and
children. I eventually entered into the political arena and because I was the first
ever Republican candidate for local office in the state in which I practiced, my
candidacy received a tremendous amount of national Republican attention. I had
my picture on the front page of the newspaper with the first President Bush and
other national figures such as Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich, Lamar Alexander, and
Strom Thurmond came to support me. I eventually lost the election but made such
a prominent showing that the Republican Party was able to gain a few seats a
couple of years later.
In the meantime, I had entrusted the daily operation of my law practice to
my secretary, who also happened to be my mother. I had vowed to her that I
would take care of her because of all that we had been through together. I trusted
her explicitly; however, my trust in her was misplaced. She, unbeknownst to me
for a long time, embezzled some money from my trust and guardianship accounts.
When I finally found out about it, I had to terminate her employment. At the time,
it was the most difficult thing that I ever had to do. I immediately informed the
Court about what she had done and I was advised just to simply take care of it. I
did. I repaid the missing money from my own personal funds. A year or so later,
one of my political opponents, who happened to be a long-time district attorney,
came to my office and asked me to sign an affidavit for my mother’s arrest. I
refused to do so. Six to eight months later, I myself was arrested and immediately
placed in solitary confinement!
I was also denied a reasonable bail. The first twelve days of my
incarceration I spent naked on a cold concrete floor because I was supposedly a
suicide risk. It was during this time that I truly surrendered to God. I continued in
solitary confinement for the next six months.
Rather than fight the charges which seemed to have been politically-
motivated, I pleaded nolo contendre in exchange for a promise that I would be out
within a few days. Regardless of what I had been promised, I then spent forty-two
months in prison for something that I did not do. In fact, the Bar refused to disbar
me because, according to their investigation, I had done nothing criminally
wrong. I was, however, professionally negligent in not properly supervising my
mother. My license was thus suspended during the time I was incarcerated.
During the time that I was in prison, my wife divorced me and I lost everything
that I had. I still to this day do not know where my mother is.
While imprisoned, I encountered a situation that would change my life
forever. I was being transferred from one cell to another when I was caught up in
a riot. I was pelted with urine and feces. I was quickly placed in a small holding
cell for approximately three hours during which time the officers tried to quash
the riot. In their efforts, they flooded the cell blocks with tear gas and pepper
spray. Unfortunately, the air trunk in which all of the gas escaped the building
flowed into the small cell in which I had been hurriedly placed and forgotten. I
contracted hepatitis and suffered substantial damage to my lungs. Both conditions
remained untreated while I was in prison. Again, I tell you this so that you might

Jesus and the Issue of Suffering

09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 21

understand the breadth of my health problems today.

The most amazing thing that I can tell you about me is that God loves me.
I know that. I also trust that he has had his reasons for allowing me to experience
the things that I have experienced. I also believe with all my heart that I have
something to offer others and that perhaps God can use me in some small way to
minister to the hurting and disenfranchised among us all. But because I have been
divorced and been in prison, many traditional, if not most, doors to the ministry
will be closed to me. In fact, I am not even sure whether Regent would want to
call me one of its own.
Nevertheless, I know that God can open any door at any time that he so
chooses. He has not only restored me in some many miraculous ways, he has also
given me an intimacy of relationship with him that means simply everything to
me. I only want to share with others the love that he has instilled in me. I feel as
much as I am humanly able to feel that this is God’s call on my life.
Thus, in the natural, my life expectancy is probably not as long as most
especially considering the new problems that I have having with my heart and my
lungs and with the onset of asthma and severe allergies; however, I do believe that
my life is in God’s hands. I just simply do not know where to go from here insofar
as the ministry is concerned. I am floundering in that regard. I have nowhere to
turn as my pastor has not had any seminary training and is a little guarded
although encouraging about what I am doing in seminary.

Jesus and the Issue of Suffering

09/10/12
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 1

The Jesus Event, OT Prophecies and the Interpreting Spirit

J. Lyle Story1

School of Divinity
1000 Regent University Drive
Virginia Beach, VA 23464
lylesto@regent.edu

Abstract
In this article, I argue for the close link between the Jesus-event, OT prophecies
and the role of the interpreting Spirit in understanding the nature and types of prophecy
that we find in the Bible. I suggest that the beginning point for the preachers and writers
of the NT is their experience of the person of Jesus, which then leads them to “mine the
quarry” of some OT predictions. The interpreting Spirit enables them to sense the
various points of fulfillment that we find in the four gospels. Thus, we find statements
such as Jn. 14:25-26, wherein Jesus states that the Spirit will both “teach” and “remind”
the faith-community of the things that Jesus said. Various types of prophecy in the
gospels are explored: predictive, representative and typological, as I argue for Jesus’
fulfillment of the OT without the trap of a wooden literalism, which takes the reader
away from the intended links between the OT and NT.

1J. Lyle Story (Ph.D., Fuller Theological Seminary) is Professor of New Testament, Interpretation and
Biblical Languages, School of Divinity, Virginia Beach VA, USA. He is the author of the Greek to Me
Memory System.
Jesus and the Old Testament
01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 2

Introduction

In 1907, an evangelist by the name of Rachel Sizelove received the baptism of the
Holy Spirit and for six years was ministering in Springfield, Missouri with a nucleus of
believers when she made the following prophecy, 'There appeared before me a beautiful,
bubbling, sparkling fountain in the heart of the city of Springfield. It sprang up
gradually, but irresistibly, and began to flow toward the East and toward the West,
toward the North and the South, until the whole land was deluged with living water.'2
This prophecy was made one year before the 'brethren met together at Hot Springs
Arkansas,' which later formed the General Council of the Assemblies of God; it also took
another five years for the selection of Springfield as the headquarters. For the AG
denomination in its early development, this served as a key prophecy for the church that
was fulfilled in the years to come as the headquarters for the denomination, which was
engaged in the missionary task of sending out the living water to all points of the
compass, as had been indicated in the prophecy. Much later, Rachel Sizelove said this,
'But when I think of the vision the Lord brought before me of the waters flowing out from
Springfield I have to say surely the General Council at Springfield, Missouri, is of God.'3
When the building was constructed in Springfield and a fountain was constructed, this
prophecy was remembered. This is an example of predictive prophecy, the meaning of
which was not immediately apparent but began to take shape and concrete form in the
initial years of the AG denomination.
A central feature of the gospels records is Jesus' commitment and the evangelists
to express the ways in which Jesus fulfills the OT expectation of the Messiah, sometimes
in the form of predictive prophecy. Occasionally, Jesus makes indirect reference to the
way in which he fulfills the OT predictions; more frequently, the evangelists (notably
Matthew) draw direct attention to the ways in which Jesus fulfills OT expectation. The
evangelist express Jesus' fulfillment of the OT, which not only applies to the event of
Jesus' coming but extends to some concrete details:

2 Rachel A. Sizelove, 'A Sparkling Fountain For the Whole Earth,' Word and Work, Vol. LVI, # 6, June,

1934, pp. 1, 11, 12. C. E. Jones, 'Sizelove, Rachel Artamissie,' Stanley M. Burgess, Gary McGee, eds., '
Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House,
1989), p. 788.
3 Sizelove, p. 11.

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 3

§ Jesus' birth from a virgin (Mt. 1.23; Isa. 7.14)

§ Birth in Bethlehem of Judea (Mt. 2.9; Mic. 5.2)
§ Flight to Egypt and exodus from Egypt (Mt. 2.14; Hos. 11.1)
§ Slaughter of Bethlehem's innocent children (Mt. 2.18; Jer. 31.15)
§ His healing ministry (Mt. 8.16-17; Isa. 53.4)
§ The Messianic mystery
His works (Mt. 12.15-21; Isa. 42.1-4)
His teaching (Mt. 13.10-16; Isa. 6.9-10)
§ Triumphal entry on a donkey (Mt. 21.15; Zech. 9.9)
Of the forty-one explicit quotations from the OT in the book of Matthew, thirty-seven of
them are introduced by some form of a fulfillment formula, with variations of the
wording, 'in order that it might be fulfilled' (e.g., Mt. 21.4).
The NT writers regard the fulfillment of prophecy to be an essential element in
the content and proclamation of the Gospel message (1 Cor. 15. 3; Acts 2.24-28). The
writers did not write from themselves or record their own views or experiences, 'For the
prophecy did not come in an earlier period by the will of man, but holy men of God
spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit' (2 Pet. 1.21). There are some specific
references in the Gospels where Jesus Himself draws such explicit links; the most explicit
statement is found in the Sermon on the Mount, 'Do not think that I came to abolish the
Law or the Prophets, I did not come to abolish but to fulfill' (Mt. 5.17). In Mt. 11.10,
Jesus affirms that the Baptist is the messenger whom God promised to send before the
Messiah (Mal. 3:1). In the Parable of the Wicked Tenants, Jesus explicitly refers to the
rejected stone, which becomes the head of the corner (Mk 12.10-11; Ps. 118.22-23). In
His inaugural address at the Nazareth synagogue, Jesus reads from Isaiah 61.1-2 and
affirms, 'Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing' (Lk. 4.21). In his veiled
message to the Baptist in prison (Mt. 11.1-6; Lk. 7.18-23), Jesus answers their question
about whether He was the Coming One or not, he quotes from Isaiah 35.5-6; Isaiah
29.18; Isaiah 61. Jesus believes that a premature proclamation of His healing ministry
and His Messianic Mission would hinder his own witness and thus he prescribes a period
of 'Messianic silence' (cf. Mk 1.44; 3.11-12; 5.43; 7.36; 8.26, 30). Not until the public
anointing by the Bethany woman (Mk 14.3-11) and Jesus' open confession before the

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 4

Jewish Sanhedrin (Mk 14.61-62) did the 'Messianic silence' come to an end.
As far as the Gospel writers are concerned they write at a later period when there
is no longer any need for concealment of Jesus as the Messiah who fulfills OT
expectation. Therefore, they freely use expressions such as: 'Thus it was fulfilled', 'as it
was said', 'as the Scripture says'. The Messianic silence is now made public and open in a
transparent manner. The Early Church in its reflection and preaching enlarges its own
understanding and is enriched as people discover how various portions of the OT find
fulfillment in Jesus' life and ministry:
§ Christ is the prophet like Moses whom God chose to raise up unto Israel (Acts
2.22-23; Deut. 18.15-19),
§ The Church offers praise to God for Jesus the anointed King of Ps. 2.1-2
(Acts. 4.25-26),
§ Jesus is identified as the 'Servant of God' pais theou (Acts 4.27; Isa. 61.1), 'the
righteous one' (Acts 7.52; Acts 22.14; Isa. 53.11),
§ Christ is to be Judge of the living and dead to whom 'all the prophets bear
witness' (Acts 10.42-43),
§ Christ has poured out the Spirit (Acts 2.16-21; Joel 2.23-32).
The affirmation of the Early Church that Jesus is the promised Messiah is all the
more remarkable in that the promised glories of the Messianic age, so prominent in the
OT, were not yet fulfilled in the Church's time period. The prophets announced that the
'glory of the Lord would cover the earth as the water covers the sea' (Hab. 2.14) but the
world continued on its present course. The OT poet announced that the Lord's anointed
would smash the nations and the ends of the earth with a rod of iron and dash them in
pieces like a potter's vessel (Ps. 2.9), but imperial Rome still exercised its military might.
Isaiah had promised, 'Whereas you have been forsaken and hated, with no one passing
through, I will make you majestic forever, a joy from age to age' (Isa. 60.15). Similarly,
Isaiah said, 'Behold, I will extend prosperity to her like a river and the wealth of the
Gentiles like an overflowing stream' (Isa. 66.12). But how can such majesty and
prosperity be found in the carpenter's son? Isaiah also prophesied that the violent aspects
of nature itself would be transformed into peaceful relations, 'The wolf shall dwell with
the lamb and the leopard shall lie down with the kid and the calf and the lion and the

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 5

fatling together, and a little child shall lead them' (Isa. 11.6-8). All of these promises go
unfulfilled; yet this is no real problem for the Early Church, for it consciously witnesses
to Jesus as the fulfillment of OT prophetic hope. For Jesus and for the writers of the New
Testament, including the gospel writers, Jesus fulfilled the OT hope in his person, his
words and his works; but yet, the fulfillment is not exhaustive. It appears that the Jews
were banking upon their Jewish hope, expressed through the apocalyptic writers of a new
heaven and new earth. However, their outlook was anthropocentric, as they looked for
Israel's happiness, joy, bliss and resolution.4 By way of contrast, Jesus' outlook and the
writers of the NT is theocentric; they affirm God's way in the midst of human history and
look forward to the consummation of that purpose that has been fulfilled in Jesus. Their
perspective includes a fulfillment within history and a final consummation outside of
human history. The manifestation of divine glory occurs in Jesus (Jn 1.14) but the final
manifestation of the glory of God is still to come. Thus Paul speaks of the Holy Spirit as
the 'down-payment of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession'
(Eph. 1.14). If it is possible to be simplistic, the Jews were looking for a consummation
in earthly terms that would transform their current status. The early Christians witnessed
to a real fulfillment of God's eternal Kingdom person in the person of Jesus—but a
purpose that would include God's eschatological goal. Their outlook included both
history and eschatology.
A word of caution is needed in terms of our 'Christian' attitude towards the Jews
for their rejection of Jesus. Let us pretend for a moment that there was neither a New
Testament nor the person of Jesus and that we were left with the Old Testament alone for
the expectation of the Messianic person and the glory of the Messianic age. If we were to
look solely at the OT expectation, we would not come up with the person of Jesus whom
we find in the Gospels. With the OT alone, we would be unable to envision the Messiah
who is a carpenter, turned itinerant preacher, a man who gathered a small nucleus around
himself, a healer and exorcist—who experienced rejection by his own people and the
shameful death of a crucifixion. According to Deut. 21.22, the individual is put to death
before he is hung on a tree. He is put on the tree apparently to show that he is dead and
accursed by God (Deut. 21.23). Take for example, the idea of a resurrection on the third

4 cf. apocalyptic works of 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch that reflect this triumphalism at various points.
Jesus and the Old Testament
01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 6

day. The OT never explicitly says that the Messiah would die and be raised up on the
third day with a transformed existence.
The very fact that the OT is obscure is indeed a powerful witness to the truth of
the NT; from a logical point of view, we would expect more one-to-one correspondence
between the expected Messiah of the OT and the fulfillment in Jesus. Liberal critics have
argued that the Early Church read all kinds of events back into the Gospel records in
order to give the appearance of fulfilled Scripture. They contend that the Early Church
believed that every prediction about the Messiah would be fulfilled, and thereby the
Church invented narratives that would explicitly serve their purpose.
To counter this argument, one may say that if the early Christian community was
intent on inventing links between the OT and Jesus, no doubt the community would have
started with the OT picture of a conquering Messiah, a portrait of Jesus far different from
that which we have in the Gospel records.
What we find is that the Gospel writers possess three sources that interact with
each other in a dynamic way: 1) the experience of the person and ministry of Jesus, 2) the
Old Testament, 3) the Holy Spirit. The experience of the early Christians with Jesus
coupled with the interpreting person of the Holy Spirit gave them the clue to
understanding and interpreting the Old Testament. For example, look at the matter of the
resurrection on the third day; the OT provides a couple of texts that are used in the NT:
'For thou dost not give me up to Sheol,
Or let thy godly one see the pit.
Thou dost show me the path of life
In thy presence there is fullness of joy,
In thy right hand are pleasures for evermore' (Ps. 16.10-11a)
'And the Lord appointed a great fish to swallow up Jonah;
And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights' (Jon. 1.17).
'For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish,
So will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth'
(Mt. 12.39-40).
No Jew, living in the first century, aware or unaware of the person of Jesus, would
conclude from these texts that there is an expectation of a Messianic person that would be

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 7

raised from the dead three days after the crucifixion. Peter, in his Pentecost sermon looks
at the Jesus event of the resurrection and in conjunction with the inspiring work of the
Holy Spirit sees a link that is to be drawn from the Old Testament in Acts 2.25-28). His
experience of the Risen Lord, coupled with the powerful activity of the Holy Spirit
enables him to see the link with the OT:
'For David says concerning him,
'I saw the Lord always before me,
for He is at my right hand that I may not be shaken,
therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced;
moreover my flesh will dwell in hope.
For thou wilt not abandon my soul to Hades,
Nor let thy Holy One see corruption.
Thou hast made known to me the ways of life,
Thou wilt make me full of gladness with thy presence' (Acts 2.25-28).
In a similar way, there is a reference to the thirty shillings for the betrayal, which is cited
in Mt. 27.9-10, 'And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him on whom a
price had been set by some of the sons of Israel, and they gave them for the potter's field,
as the Lord directed me.' The text is from Zech. 11.12-13 (not from Jeremiah) and
originally related to the treatment of the OT prophet by the prophet's contemporaries.
There is no conceivable way that an OT person could read the text and see in them a
prophecy of Judas' upcoming betrayal of Jesus for thirty shillings of silver. However, the
preachers and writers of the Early Church are guided by the actual Jesus event, here by
the betrayal, and in concert with the Holy Spirit, reinterpret the OT event in the light of
the Jesus story. In the time of the OT prophets, the purpose of God was spoken of in
veiled language, but it was not until the coming of the Son that this secret was fully
revealed (ephanerothe—Rom. 16.25-26). The true interpretation of the future could not
be known fully in the period of anticipation; God's purpose is known when salvation
history is unfolded.5
When we reflect upon Jesus and the Evangelist in their attitude and use of the Old
Testament, they operate on the presupposition of the basic unity of the Old Testament in

5 cf. 1 Cor. 2.7-8; Eph. 3.5.

Jesus and the Old Testament
01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 8

that God speaks to His people whether the books are the prophets (major & minor),
psalms, poetry, wisdom material, blessings and cursings, genealogy or historical
narrative. The whole of the OT with all of its diversity is the Word of God, expressing
the unified purpose of God, also anticipating the Messiah and Messianic age. Thus, the
NT writers draw clear links between the OT and its fulfillment. For example, Paul deals
with the responsibility of proper financial compensation for the missionary in 1 Cor. 9.9-
10:
'For it is written in the law of Moses, 'You shall not muzzle an ox when it is
treading out the grain.' Is it for oxen that God is concerned? Does he not speak to
us entirely for our sake, because the plowman should plow in hope of a share in
the crop?'
By an a fortiori argument,6 Paul asks his readers, 'Given the fact that the Old Testament
contains no explicit commandment concerning the need to pay the preachers or
missionaries, can the text of Deut. 25.4 be construed to mean that the people of God have
no responsibility for insuring their financial provision?' Paul's rhetorical answer is clear,
'Of course not—they do have a responsibility. Here are people who treat their oxen
decently and humanely because their oxen work for the well being of their owners'. In a
similar way, the people of God are to assume responsibility for those who work for their
spiritual welfare. Paul works his way to the basic and underlying principle that
transcends the letter of the scriptural injunction of feeding the working cattle. We tend to
object to a type of arbitrary exegesis, wherein one moves from the argument of feeding
oxen to sense a fulfillment in a prescribed payment of a preacher. However, Paul is able
to do this because of his commitment to the oneness of Scripture and the divine author
that stands behind His Word.
The notion of fulfillment in the life of Jesus is built upon the implied necessity
and divine will in that there is a vital and necessary connection between the OT and His
own person and work. In this regard, Jesus frequently uses the impersonal verb 'it is
necessary' (dei), which is often translated by the form 'must'. The 'must' is in reality a
'divine must/necessity' and is necessarily bound up with the intrinsic dynamic of the

6 Another example of the a fortiori argument (minor to the major) is found in Mt. 6.30, 'But if God so
clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much
more clothe you, O men of little faith?'
Jesus and the Old Testament
01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 9

divine Word:
§ It is necessary for the Son of Man to suffer many things . . . (Mt. 16.21),
§ It is necessary for Elijah to come first (Mk 17.10; Mk 9.11),
§ It is necessary for wars to come as part of the part of the predicted time of
affliction—labor pains (Mt. 24.6; Mk 13.7; Lk. 21.9),
§ It is necessary for the Gospel to be proclaimed prior to the Parousia (Mk
13.10).
Whatever God speaks must necessarily come to pass. This idea is vitally related to the
Hebrew understanding of the divine word, which is a vital dynamic in human history, that
assumes a life and vitality on its own once it is uttered: 'Is not my word like a fire and
like a hammer that breaks rocks into pieces' (Jer. 23.28-29); 'so shall my word be that
goes forth out of my mouth; it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that
which I please and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it?' (Isa. 55.11). The
prophetic and divine Word is the means by which the promised event is actualized. In 1
Pet. 1.25, the same idea is expressed, 'The Word of the Lord abides forever' (menei eis
ton aiona), which is a clear reference to Isa. 40.8, 'The grass withers, the flower fades;
but the Word of our God will stand for ever'. Jesus Christ is the one who initiates the
divine revelation. His life is governed by the divine revelation and will and serves as a
living reality through the ages. This is not the 'necessity/must' of Greek 'fate', but the
purpose of God who desires to establish personal relationships with individuals. The
divine purpose is an eternal one; God's promises and warnings will reach their
appropriate resolution and will be dependent upon the human response of people who are
either ready to receive the divine promise or will reject the promise and thereby become
objects of divine wrath.
The role of the interpreting Holy Spirit is made explicit in the Fourth Gospel in
the Paraclete passages. The Holy Spirit witnesses as it serves as the faithful interpreter of
the Jesus Story. The Paraclete does many things—to remind, teach, bear witness, will
lead into all truth, etc. (Jn 14.26; 15.26; 16.8-14). The interpreting Spirit will bring out
the fresh significance of the once-for-all deposit of the gospel message, here mediated
through the Apostle John. This means that John regards his own composition of the
gospel as a personal product of the interpreting Spirit.

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 10

Predictive Prophecy
Divine promises or divine threats, proclaimed through the prophets, are fulfilled
in the course of human history and are expressed as predictive prophecies. Through the
will of God, certain events are prophesied in the near or distant future. Thus, for
example, the statement about the virgin conception in Mt. 1.23 ('young woman' almah in
Hebrew, 'young woman [whether married or unmarried], 'virgin' parthenos in the LXX),
is regarded as a promise that is fulfilled in the virginal conception of Jesus. Surely,
Matthew does not mean that the prophecy that was originally given to Ahaz as a
judgmental sign was not initially concerned with the fate of Syria and Ephraim.
However, when God makes a promise, His revelation is sure and He reveals that His
purpose is not exclusively historical. 'There is more that is yet to come; don't be locked
into a narrow view of God's purposes'. Because of the Jesus event, the Evangelist sees
the purpose of God that ultimately points to the age of the Messiah. He reaches for the
real purpose of God behind the historical prediction. By way of further illustration, Mark
makes a summary statement that Jesus frequently spoke in parables (Mk 4.34), while
Matthew adds the statement that Jesus was fulfilling the message of Ps. 78.2, 'I will open
my mouth in parables; I will utter things from the foundation of the world' (Mt. 13.34-
35). Originally, the saying in the Psalm was an utterance of Asaph, a worship leader in
ancient Israel, summoning the people of God to worship, 'Give ear O my people to my
teaching; incline your ears to the words of my mouth. 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' (Ps. 78.1-2). However, as Matthew renders the Psalm, he interprets
it as a prophecy of what Jesus is to do, 'indeed He said nothing to them without a parable.
This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet . . .' (Mt. 13.34-35).
Since Jesus and the Evangelist begin with the presupposition that God is the real
author of the whole of the OT, it follows that prophecies of judgment and blessings can
be interpreted in both a historical and a messianic sense since God's purpose is unified.
Therefore, what God says about a future historical event may also be related to His
ultimate purpose of pointing to the Messiah and the accompanying messianic age. For
example, Daniel's prophecy about the 'abomination of desolation' (Dan. 9.27; 11.31;

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 11

12.11) finds a fulfillment in the fearful picture of Antiochus Epiphanes IV of I Macc.

1.54; 6.7, an image which Jesus uses in the apocalyptic discourse (Mt. 24.15 par.), a
theme, which is expressed in a different form in 2 Thess. with the Man of Sin who
positions himself as an object of worship (2 Thess. 2.4).7 Paul also uses predictive
prophecy in his thinking. In Gal. 3.16, Paul reaffirms God's promise to Abraham that in
his seed all the nations of the earth would be blessed (Gen. 13, 15; 17.71). True, this was
a promise to Abraham that found a fulfillment in the birth of his miracle-son Isaac.
However, for Paul, the truly important reality was the promise of the Messiah's coming.
The entire point of his argument points out that faith is trust in the fact that God
consolidated his covenant with his solemn promise, 'Now the promises were made to
Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, "And to seeds", referring to one, "And to
your seed", which is Christ'. Paul uses here an impossible grammatical construction since
'seed' in Hebrew and Greek as well as in English covers both a singular and plural form.
Jesus and the evangelists affirm the major premise that the various witnesses from
the OT spoke in the name of God and for God, and not in their own name. If this be the
case, then the minor certainly holds true, that whatever God says, concerns not only a
given historical situation, e.g., a judgmental word to a wicked King Ahaz, but points
beyond to God's eschatological purpose with the coming of the Messiah and the
messianic age. Thus, the entire OT applies not only to the given time period when
oracles were given, but they also point ahead to the Messiah. From this standpoint, the
NT writers say that all the prophets have spoken of Christ or proclaimed the message of
the messianic age (Acts 3.24; 10.43; 13.27).

Representative Prophecy
Building upon the Hebrew notion of corporate personality or solidarity, the
Gospel writers interpret the Jesus event in the light of His ability to represent the whole
of the people of God in the OT. Several of the OT persons, names or personalities
anticipate the coming of the incarnate Son of God. There are a number of expressions
wherein we see Jesus identify Himself with three persons or groups:
A. Jesus identifies himself with 'the Lord' of the OT. Jesus regards Himself as the

7 In a still different form in Rev. 13.

Jesus and the Old Testament
01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 12

Lord. In Mk 12.35-37, Jesus quotes Ps. 110.1 as referring to Himself, 'The Lord said to
my lord, 'sit at my right hand.'' Jesus then asks, 'David himself calls him Lord: so how is
he his son?' Jesus alludes here to his significance through careful and thoughtful
reflection, suggesting that the Messiah is David's Lord, and as his lord, He is preeminent
and exists prior to David. Jesus challenges some misconceptions and raises the
implications of the statements. In the Hebrew text, there is a distinction between adon
(Lord) and YHWH, i.e., 'The Lord (YHWH) said to my lord' (adon), 'sit at my right hand
. . .' The LXX regularly uses the Greek term kyrios (Lord) to translate both terms, thus
the LXX reads in Ps. 110.1, 'The Lord (adon) said to my lord (kyrios). Thus, in the Greek
speaking world of the Jewish Dispersion, the community used the term kyrios to refer to
the 'divine lord'. The people of the Hebrew Bible would not make such an equation, but
as the Gospel moved into the broader world community, OT passages that spoke of the
divine name (YHWH) were applied to Jesus. For example, Paul writes to the Roman
Christians:
Whoever calls on the name of the Lord (kyrios) will be saved (Rom. 10.13)
Whoever calls on the name of the Lord (YHWH) will be saved (Joel 2.32; 3.5
Heb).8
The transposition of these texts into the LXX and then into the NT reflects the fact that
the writers of the NT regarded the LXX as inspired just as much as the Aramaic-speaking
Jews regarded the Hebrew Bible as the Word of God. When the writers of the NT
worked with the OT, they regarded the use of kyrios as providentially arranged, which
they used to provide instruction concerning the nature and mission of Jesus.
B. Jesus uses the 'I' of the Psalms and Prophets to refer to Himself. There are
numerous instances in the Gospels where Jesus uses the OT language of the first person
singular to refer to Himself. Thus, in His inaugural address at Nazareth, He begins with
the language of Isaiah, 'The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He has anointed me to
preach good news to the poor' (Isa. 61.1-2; Lk. 4.17-20). He then makes the statement,
'Today, this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.' Originally, the statement was made by
the OT prophet about himself that he was anointed by the Spirit to speak to his people,
but is now transferred in a greater way to the Messiah and the blessings that accompany
8Similarly I Cor. 2.16—Isa. 40.13 (Rom. 11.34 referred to as God); Phil. 2.10-11—Isa. 45.23 (in Rom.
14.11 referred to God); I Cor. 1.31; 2 Cor. 10.17—Jer. 9.22-24.
Jesus and the Old Testament
01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 13

the Messianic age. In Jesus' cryptic answer to the Baptist as to whether He was the
Coming One or not, Jesus refers to His activity, but in the language of the Servant Songs
of Isaiah an allusion is made to other texts as well (Isa. 29.18; 35.5-6; 42.1, 61. 1-3). In a
similar way, there is an important individual psalm of complaint (Ps. 22), wherein an OT
poet complains of God's absence. The original referent was the individual poet in the
midst of terrific suffering; however, in the crucifixion narrative, the words are transposed
over to Christ's cry of being forsaken on the cross—the psalm is also expressed in some
of the more specific details of the crucifixion scene. Jesus, the disciples and the early
evangelists seem to interpret the personal pronoun 'I' as the direct pronouncement of God
or His Messianic Servant. Thus, Jesus applies the personal pronoun, 'I' of the OT, to
Himself as the direct pronouncement of God. The original speaker's/writer's words are
spoken/written in accordance with the will of God. The same God who speaks through
the OT people of God is now speaking through Jesus. In the words of the Fourth
Evangelist, Jesus is identical with the Word of God that revealed itself through the OT
prophets. Jesus says this in the JN, 'For I have not spoken on my own authority; the
Father who sent me has himself given me the commandment what to say and what to
speak' (Jn 12.49).9 The Evangelists follow Jesus' precedent in treating many of the
personal words of the OT writers as typical of the coming Messiah.
C. Jesus applies to Himself the 'righteous one(s)' of the OT. Jesus and the
Evangelist also transfer the meaning of the 'righteous one(s)' of the OT figures and ideas.
Thus, for example, Jesus uses the self-designation 'son of Man' (Dan. 7) that includes
both an individual and corporate sense of the righteous people of God:
'One like a Son of Man who comes to the Ancient of Days who is presented the
dominion and authority over the kingdom' (Dan. 7.13-14).
'Until he came to the Ancient of Days and . . . the saints of Most High . . .
received the kingdom' (Dan. 7.22).
Jesus not only is identified with the Righteous One, but also with the humble, poor and
meek ones (ebyonim). The term refers to the low estate of the righteous one(s) who
experiences the hatred of people outside the covenant community of faith. Through the
course of His ministry to the anawim (Ps. 9.13) or anayim of the Suffering Servant, Jesus

9 See also Jn 7.16-18.

Jesus and the Old Testament
01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 14

embodies His commitment to the poor, the marginalized members of society

(socio-economic, racial, religious, gender). Several OT complaint songs are used
explicitly or implicitly in the Passion narrative:
§ Jesus is betrayed by His close friends (Mk 14.18; Ps. 41.99; 55.12-14,
§ Jesus expresses sorrow (Mk 14.34; Ps. 43.5),
§ His clothes are divided among His enemies (Mk 15.24; Ps. 22.18),
§ He is publicly mocked (Mk 15.29-31; Ps. 22.7-8),
§ His hands and feet are pierced (Crucifixion; Ps. 22.16),
§ He thirsts (Jn 19.28; Ps. 69.21; Ps. 22.15),
§ He expresses His sense of abandonment by God (Mk 15.34; Ps. 22.1),
§ He commits His soul to God at the moment of His death (Lk. 23.46; Ps. 31.5).

Typological Prophecy

Typological prophecy deals with persons, institutions and events, which are
spoken of in the OT and later serve as types of Christ, His kingdom, His ministry or His
church. The term 'typology' is based on the Greek word tupos, which means 'impression,'
'mark,' 'image,' and is figuratively used to mean 'example' or 'model'. The central idea is
that the meaning of certain events, people or institutions was not exhausted by their
immediate fulfillment. Their providential role signifies that a greater fulfillment lies in
the Age to Come. For example, Israel's experience of deliverance through the Exodus
was a real historical event that occurred within history wherein God delivered a people
from their Egyptian oppressors and appointed a people for Himself. The typological
approach looks at the event and sees that the Exodus points beyond itself to the greater
redemption through Christ, of which Paul refers:
'I want you to know, brethren that our fathers were all under the same cloud, and
all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in
the sea . . . '(1 Cor. 10.1).
In 1 Cor. 10.6, Paul says that all these things happened as 'types' (tupoi) for the warning
and benefit of later generations. Typological prophecy is open to reinterpretation of OT
foreshadowings and thereby functions within the broader providential purpose; what is

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 15

partial or shadowy under the Old Covenant is made real in the NT. Allegory assigns
'deeper meanings' to biblical stories, persons and institutions; correspondingly, history is
relatively unimportant. By way of contrast, typology affirms the reality of history, but
looks at a broader perspective, expressing an intrinsic openness to the future. This
approach is based upon the distinction between two ages: the present age in which people
live and the age to come, which is final, perfect and conclusive. While predictive
prophecy deals with the future in a direct manner, typological prophecy looks at the
future in an indirect manner.
Typology is evident in Jesus' appointment of the twelve, modeled after the twelve
tribes of Israel, no doubt symbolizing the newly constituted people of God. Jesus
Himself promises that His disciples who have followed Him 'will also sit on the twelve
thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel' (Mt. 19.28; Lk. 22.28-30).
From several texts dealing with the Temple we find a contrast between the literal
Temple and the spiritual Temple of which Jesus speaks. Jesus compares Himself with
the Temple, 'something greater than the Temple is here' (Jn 2.19-21). Jesus' act of
cursing the fig-tree, Temple (Mk 11.15-17) leads to the equation: like fig-tree, like
Temple, like old people of God—all are subject to the divine curse. With special
emphasis, Jesus pronounces the Temple's destruction (Mk 13.2, 'not one stone will be left
upon another'). At the trial scene, one of the accusations brought against Jesus in His
trial is Jesus' threat, 'I shall destroy this Temple made with hands and in three days I shall
build another without hands' (Mk 14.58). The combination of these texts leads to the
typological thrust that Jesus has replaced Jerusalem's beautiful Temple made up of those
who believe in Him. The new community, who constitute the real Temple, is juxtaposed
and contrasted with the false community's pride in their physical Temple, evident in
Jeremiah's day and Isaiah's day:
'These [covenant keepers] I will bring to my holy mountain
And make them joyful in my house of prayer.
Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on my altar;
For my house shall be called a house of prayer
For all peoples' (Isa. 56.7).
'Do not trust in these deceptive words: "This is the Temple of the Lord, the

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 16

Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord''' (Jer. 7.4).

Has this house, which is called by my name, become a den of robbers in your
'eyes?' (Jer. 7.11).
Typology emphasizes the unity of Scripture and the history that embraces the
people of both Old and New Testaments. Newer events are looked at from the
perspective of the divine plan that is at work in the ages and may assist the interpreter in
understanding the significance of newer events as they are compared and contrasted with
the OT. Newer communities of faith are thereby enabled to discover the continued
activity of God in human history over a much broader sweep of time.10
In 2 Pet. 1.18-20, the Apostle mentions the voice that he and the other two
disciples heard on the Mount of Transfiguration, 'And we have the word of prophecy
made more sure to us,' 'and we have gained fresh confirmation of the prophetic word'
(Moffat). Peter does not say that the prophetic word is above the divine voice, but that
the divine event of the Transfiguration confirms the prophetic word. Thus, through the
divine declaration on the mount of Transfiguration, the divine Sonship of Jesus was
revealed in a transparent manner. On the mount, it was made clear to Jesus' disciples that
the prophetic passage, which spoke of the Messiah as the Son of God, referred to Jesus.
Jesus as the Fulfillment of the OT
Think not that I have come to abolish the Law and the Prophets.
I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them (Mt. 5.17)
What are we to make of the various responses that Jesus makes to questions about
the Law and the religious 'traditions' in the light of His positive statement of His
commitment to the Law and the Prophets? There are occasions where He reveals an
apparent abrogation of the OT Law when He touches a leper and thereby incurs ritual
defilement (Lev. 13-15) and yet, He also reveals a commitment to that same Law when
He tells the leper to show himself to the priest for a testimony (Mk 1.44; Lev. 14.2-32).
From the text concerning the ritual washing of hands, cups, bowls, etc., it is clear that
Jesus regards these as mere human traditions (Mk 7.2-3; Mt. 15.6, 8-9); the traditions of
the elders called a 'fence' around the Law was an addition to the Mosaic injunctions for
the Pharisees sought to apply Mosaic Law to ever new situations. In this passage, Jesus

10 This counters the rigid distinctions between Israel and the Church drawn by dispensationalism.
Jesus and the Old Testament
01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 17

exposes and accuses the Pharisees for hypocrisy; then He substantiates His accusation
through their practice of Corban, wherein they violated the Mosaic commandment of
honor of one's parents (cf. Mk 7.9-13). Jesus says that His critics have assumed the
posture of treating the 'tradition of the elders' as more important than the Mosaic Law
since they neglect the Law 'in order to keep' their tradition. From the Gospel records, it is
clear that Jesus generally was obedient to the Law of Moses. He is circumcised as a Jew
and attends the prescribed major feasts in Jerusalem (from the FG), pays the temple-tax
(Mt. 17.24-27), wears the prescribed tassel on a Rabbi's robe (Mt. 9.20; Numb. 15.38-41).
Did Jesus obey the Law because He believed in its eternal purpose? He does say that 'till
heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is
accomplished' (Mt. 5.18). Did Jesus obey the Law of the Old Covenant simply because it
lay on this side of the cross and resurrection at which point, the New Covenant would
come into existence, thereby displacing the Old Covenant? What laws are to be obeyed
and what is the intent of the Law?
It is clear that Jesus' over-riding principle is the dual love commandment, love for
God (Deut. 6.5—Jewish Shema) and love for the neighbor (Lev. 19.18; Mt. 22.34-40; Mk
12.28-34; Lk. 10.25-28; Jn 13.31-35). In Jn 13.31-35, love is the hallmark, the badge of
committed discipleship. In Mt. 22.40, Jesus argues that all the Law and the prophets
depend upon this dual commandment. The verb, 'I depend/hang' (kremannumi) is here
used in a figurative way, 'all the law and the prophets hang (depend) on these two
commandments . . . as a door hangs on its hinges, so the whole OT hangs on these two
commandments'.11 These statements should be coupled with the 'Golden Rule', 'So
whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; for this is the Law and the
prophets' (Mt. 7.12).
Jesus does not seem to indicate that love is to be contrasted with Mosaic Law or
the prophets. What He does affirm through His actions and words is that love is the
means, application and intent of the Law. In contrast to the scribes who insisted on
meticulous observance of the most minute tithing of spices (Mt. 23.23-24), Jesus insists
upon the intent and meaning of the Law as expressive of love for God and love for others.
When He defends His 'unclean' table-fellowship with tax-collectors and sinners (Mt.

11 BAGD, p. 451.
Jesus and the Old Testament
01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 18

9.13), He does so on the basis of the divine purpose, expressed by Hosea, 'I desire mercy
and not sacrifice' (Hos. 6.6). Jesus does not mean that the sacrifice is done away with by
mercy, but that His critics have failed to understand God's mercy in the Law, if their rigid
adherence to tradition and Law prohibited them and sought to prohibit Himself from
associating with the unclean 'outcasts.' Jesus highlights His compassion for sinners and
God's commitment to them as well.
In a similar way, Jesus is critiqued in Mt. 12.7 for His disciples' activity of
plucking ears of grain on the Sabbath. In response, Jesus uses the same text from Hos.
6.6 to say that God's purpose of mercy is inherent in the Sabbath commandment. Thus,
His disciples are 'guiltless' and are not working at cross-purposes with God. In the same
paragraph, Jesus argues on the basis of the OT example of David the leader with His men
who did that which was not lawful—they ate the bread of the presence (I Sam. 21.1-6) as
they were fleeing from an angry King Saul. Note the following comparison:

Jesus David
Jesus with disciples—leader with group David and those who were with
(Mk 2.23) him—leader with group (Mk 2.24)

Pluck ears of grain on Sabbath (Mk 2.23) Ate bread of presence (Mk 2.26)

What it is not lawful (2.24) 'which it is not lawful for any but the
priests and also gave it to those who were
with him? (Mk 2.26)

What does this comparison mean? In each instance, there is a certain relationship
between the group and its leader. And because of this relationship, what holds true for
the leader holds true for the group. Evidently there are certain unusual conditions which
dictate a change from a normal and customary approach to life. Here, it is the physical
need of hunger, which initiates action. In David's case of unusual need, normal
restrictions did not apply. With the coming of Jesus as the bridegroom (Mk 2.19) and the
hunger of the disciples, the normal Sabbath regulations do not apply. Jesus as the Son of

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 19

Man has authority over the Sabbath and its regulations. He is the one who sees to the
intent of the merciful purpose and intent of the Law. Correspondingly His understanding
and authority 'spills over to His disciples' just as David's authority spilled over to his men
who ate the bread of the presence. Thus, Jesus argues that the true Sabbath is obeyed
when its merciful purpose is recognized and practiced in one's behavior. This is why
Jesus regards that the healing of a hunch-backed woman on the Sabbath is a true
fulfillment of the merciful purpose of God in giving the Sabbath (Lk. 13.16). Jesus
actualizes what is inherent in the Law and does not counter-act the Mosaic Law. Jesus
keeps the Law with respect to its true intent and purpose.
Jesus is not merely a link in a chain of prophecies but is the final and conclusive
outcome of all the OT antecedents (prediction, representation, type). The period in which
the Evangelists write is the final period of God's dealing with humankind--'the last days'.
God will not repeat the incarnation of His prophesied Messiah as though there is a
cyclical view of human history (pagan, agricultural). Peter speaks on the Day of
Pentecost, 'But this is that what was spoken by the prophet Joel: And in the last days it
shall be, God declares that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh . . .' (Acts. 2.16-17;
Joel 3.1-5). In his prologue, the writer of Hebrews says so clearly that God has now
spoken definitively through the Son (Heb. 1.1-3) in 'these last days'. The fulfillment of
the OT prophetic hope gives a special significance to the time in which we live; the
Christian community today lives in the last days.
Further, the Jesus-event was a public event, noted particularly by Paul in his
speech to King Agrippa, 'For the king knows about these things, and to him I speak
freely; for I am persuaded that none of these things has escaped his notice, for this was
not done in a corner. King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets?' (Acts 26: 26-27). The
life, death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus are not private events, but embrace the
history of humankind with a divine claim. God foretold the event so that its actualization
is proclaimed as the divine message to humanity. The decisive event, indeed the turning
point of the ages has occurred, which will be climaxed by the Parousia. If the present
opportunity is defied, then individuals, generations and nations will have no other
prospect than judgment by the Son of God.

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 20

The Trap of Literalism

In communicating His message to humankind, God chooses human beings to be

His spokespersons and writers and thereby uses the language, culture, history, thought-
pattern and literary style of His prophets. Thus, prophecy may well be cast in the form of
Hebrew poetry and should be interpreted within the genre of Hebrew poetry with
attention given to Hebrew parallelism. In Zech. 9.9, the prophet expresses the central
idea of the coming king:
'Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion!
Shout aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem!
Lo, your king comes to you;
Triumphant and victorious is he;
Humble and riding on a donkey
On a colt, the foal of a donkey.'
The substance of the prophetic word is fulfilled in the events of Palm Sunday noted by
the various Evangelist. However, it may be overly literal to maintain that a prophecy has
been unfulfilled because all of the specific details have not been fulfilled. For example,
Jesus refers to the destruction of the Temple, 'They shall not leave in you one stone upon
another' (Lk. 19.44). The truth of the matter is that some stones of the wall of the Temple
are still found today in their original setting, even after the destruction of the Temple in
70 A.D. Another example can be found in Peter's speech of the fulfillment of Joel's
prophecy, which includes 'wonders in the heaven above and signs on the earth beneath,
blood, and fire and columns of smoke; the sun shall be turned into darkness and the moon
into blood' (Acts 2.19-20). The essential content of the prophecies are fulfilled but are
not meant to be interpreted literalistically, pressing for fulfillment of the most minute
details. True interpretation of prophecy is both historical and eschatological and the
present readers must throw themselves into the circumstances, history, language, thought-
forms of the world surrounding the prophets. While the prophetic words have an
historical aspect, there is also a radical openness towards the future, full of dynamic
potential beyond the specific limitations of the given historical situations. The prophets
themselves may be unaware of the fact of future meaning, interpretation and re-

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 21

interpretation. Even with the language of apocalypse, there can be found no fixed
apocalyptic symbolism in the OT or the NT. Approaching the Scripture with a
mechanistic approach of fixed symbols is simplistic: prophetic interpretation would then
become a kind of mental calculus, with no needed dependence upon the person and work
of the Holy Spirit in the process of inspiration and interpretation.

Implications

In a real way, the OT remains somewhat obscure to those who read and study the
text apart from the life, experience and witness of Jesus and the Evangelist, since it is
only a part of God's redemptive purpose. The Evangelists do not begin with a developed
Christology or eschatology from the OT and then apply that system to the life of Jesus.
The reverse is true; the Evangelists began with their experience with Jesus and His
understanding of Messsiahship and the Messianic age. They did not begin with a
theological theory from the OT but with their encounter with the Risen Jesus. Paul's re-
orientation of his life was not a modification of his previous theological understanding.
He encounters the Risen Jesus on the Damascus Road in the face of his theological
aggression that he was right in his determination to rid Judaism of this infectious
Christian plague and heresy. Similarly, the confession that Peter makes at Caesarea
Philippi is a theology of encounter that is subsequently interpreted in and through the
course of Peter's life and ministry. The source of this confession is not human but divine
(Mt. 16.17); Peter does not begin in an atomistic way with the OT, looking for proof-
texts, determining their applicability to Jesus and then making the equation, Jesus is the
Messiah of the OT. If Paul or Peter had begun with Rabbinic training and education and
the OT, then they would have had a 'ready-made' picture of the Messiah through the
Judaism of the OT and inter-testament period—a triumphant Messiah, which is not the
person that Paul or Peter preach. This is why Paul says that when the Jews read the OT,
they are unable to understand it correctly, 'But even unto this day, when Moses is read,
the veil is upon their heart' (2 Cor. 3.15). From Paul's perspective as a Jewish trained
Rabbi, he makes an incredible statement, 'For whatsoever things were previously
written—were in fact written for our learning, that through patience and through comfort

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 22

of the Scriptures, we might have hope' (Rom. 15.4; see also I Cor. 9.9-10; Rom. 4.23-24).
Paul says that the OT was written for the ultimate goal in view of the Christian
community. Paul is saying that the OT did not come into existence primarily for the
members of the Old Covenant, but for the members of the New Covenant. Although the
OT does not give a perfect foreknowledge of the future, it does enable its readers to look
beyond to the Messiah and the Messianic age. No longer is the OT an exclusively Jewish
book that Jewish Christians could have used prior to their conversion to Christ. It
becomes the Bible of the Christians as a new Bible. The OT points to the future. For
example, in 2 Cor. 6.2-3, Paul quotes from Isa. 49.8, 'At an acceptable time I hearkened
unto you, and in a day of salvation I helped you.' We have examples of the Hebrew
perfect tense (completed action), which are to be regarded here as prophetic perfects ('I
hearkened,' 'I helped'). While Isaiah thought of the saving event of the return of the
exiles, Paul says that the text refers to the Messianic age that would be marked by
reconciliation of humanity with God (2 Cor. 5.16-21). The divine purpose in Isaiah's day
is part of the broader saving and reconciling activity of God that is embodied in the
person and work of Jesus.
Christian faith is based upon historical events and persons and there is also an
inseparable connection between historical events, historical persons and eschatology.
Since God acts through persons and events, they represent new steps forward towards the
final end. God challenges people here in this life to be properly related to God's ultimate
purpose that has been made known through His people who speak forth or embody the
Word of God. The vital connection of history and eschatology explains the typological
nature of prophecy. The present is directly or indirectly related to the future. Even with
predictive prophecy, there is a dual fulfillment, one within history and another as part of
an eschatological process. A fulfilling event contains within itself the 'germ' of another
prophetic type as human history and nature itself strains forwards towards the
eschatological consummation. For example, the threatened fates of Nineveh, Babylon,
Sodom and Gomorrah are fulfilled within history, but these cities also become 'typical' of
what will become of those nations that defy the God of human history.
It is also important for the people of God to understand that prophecy (predictive,
representative, typological) is not intended to satisfy mental curiosity about the end time

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 23

events, but is meant to influence human behavior. God reveals His future plans with a
desire to influence the human heart; He warns of the judgments that are in store for
hostile persons and He promises untold blessings to those who respond in trust with
obedience. God may even suspend or delay His threats due to the human heart. Thus,
Jonah preaches a stern repentance and warning of impending judgment to the people of
Nineveh. Surprisingly enough, even with a recalcitrant prophet, the people of Nineveh
'repented of their sins and turned from their ways.' The result? God 'repented of the evil
which he said He would do unto them; and he did not do it' (Jon. 3.10). In a similar way,
Micah prophesied the destruction of Jerusalem, 'Zion shall be ploughed as a field and
Jerusalem shall become heaps' (Jer. 26.18-19). However, the catastrophe did not take
place—then, for Hezekiah repented and pled for Yahweh's favor. We read that 'Yahweh
repented of the evil which He had pronounced against them.'12 Destruction eventually
overtook these cities which had been threatened with destruction. The delays were
accorded (e.g., Lk. 13.6-9—the Parable of the Barren Fig-Tree) and a temporary
postponement was allowed. This indicates that God gives needed grace, but only
conditional upon a human response (Jer. 18.5-11). God's will is expressed as God's
purpose and intent and does not express His pre-ordering of events. He works with
people and is responsive in terms of what they do or fail to do. He 'waits upon people'
and alters His response that is conditional upon human words or deeds. Humans can
influence the will of God, but His intent certainly hastens towards His appointed end and
is conditioned upon human responsiveness. The historical and eschatological
foundations of His word are necessary for us as the people of God; they serve as evidence
that the greater things that God has promised and foreshadowed will come to pass when
He brings history to its consummation.

Bibliography
Arndt, William F., F. Wilbur Gingrich, William Danker (A Greek-English Lexicon of the
New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press, 4th edn., 1957).

12 See also Ex. 32.4; 2 Sam. 24.16.

Jesus and the Old Testament
01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 24

Sizemore, Rachel, Jones, C. E., Rachel Artamissie, Stanley M. Burgess, Gary McGee,
eds. ('A Sparkling Fountain for the Whole Earth', Word and Work, LVI, #6, Dictionary of
Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House,
1989).

Jesus and the Old Testament

01/11/10
© J. Lyle Story
 Cullen I K Story, J. Lyle Story, p. 1

The Healing of the Man Born Blind (Jn. 9)

Judgment by the Light

Introduction
In John 9, we encounter the healing of a man who is born blind. As we do so we
need to remind ourselves of John's purpose (Signs  Faith  Life). The miracle is not
an end in itself or an event designed to elicit a superficial response of wonder. It
possesses significance as it points beyond itself.
This healing is different from the other two healings in John; this healing is not
immediate. The royal officer's son was immediately healed (Jn. 4), as was the paralytic
(Jn. 5). But the healing of the blind man is in stages. Jesus makes moist clay from his
own saliva, lays the mud pack on the eyes of the blind one, and then sends him to a
particular pool to wash. The symbolic name of the pool, i.e., "sent" (perfect passive
participle), suggests that the healing has meaning beyond the gift of sight to one who had
never seen.
John places this sign purposefully in a larger context, which takes us back to 8:12,
"I am the light of the world." The words, "While I am in the world, I am the light of the
world" prepare the way for the ensuing drama. The light-motif embraces the conclusion
of the chapter in 9:39, expressed in His words about "those who see" and "those who do
not see." The light-darkness motif is prominent in the Prologue (1:4-5, 8-9) and
complements the section in 3:19-21, with the contrasting responses of people coming to
the light or hiding from the light. The light creates the crisis of faith:
19 "And this is the judgment (krivsi")
that the light has come into the world,
Negative response to the krivsi"
and men loved darkness rather than light,
because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one who does evil hates the light,
and does not come to the light,
lest his deeds should be exposed.
Positive response to the krivsi"
21 But he who does what is true comes to the light,
that it may be clearly seen
that his deeds have been wrought in God" (Jn. 3:19-21).
The various dialogues that follow the healing event (gift of sight) serve as a trial
scene rich in tragic and comical irony. As the one-time blind beggar stands before his
accusers, they want him to deny the one thing that he now knows. He says, "If he is a
sinner, I don't know. But one thing I know. Once I was blind, but now I see." The
Evangelist traces the steps of faith and the bold witness of the man who is healed by
Jesus. Somehow the blind man gropes his way to the designated pool and washes there
and receives sight. These "steps" become indicative of something far deeper and more
significant in his life, i.e. a growing understanding of who Jesus is. As the growth
occurs, in the face of harassment or derogatory and sarcastic questions, this man places
his trust in Jesus in steps and stages. This can be seen in the introductory chart. This
clearly relates to the purpose of John's gospel, "that you may grow in faith (that Jesus is

jn9notes.doc
11/29/97
 Story & Story, p. 2

the Christ)." In the FG we find the theme of growth in faith with Nicodemus (John 3,
7:50; 19:39-40), the woman of Samaria (Jn. 4)), and the royal officer (Jn. 4). Growth of
faith of the disciples is likewise seen in Jn. 6, climaxed by Peter's confession.
There are seven scenes in this chapter with no more than two characters or
character groups on the stage at the same time. There is also a simultaneous upward and
downward movement. The man born blind sees with increasing clarity while those who
claim sight and are physically whole, progressively plunge into darkness by their
resistance to Jesus.

Scene I: Jesus and the Blind Man (9:1-7).

1. The question of sin-suffering (9:2). The narrative introduces this question,
which implies a link between sin and suffering. The disciples operate on the
presupposition that where pain and suffering exist there must also be sin.1 They leave
open the question about the culprit but not the causality of sin itself. They assume two
candidates, the man himself or his parents.2 The man born blind is also poor, exhibiting
his blindness to others in the Temple precincts (8:59) so as to elicit charity. The
affirmation about a supposed link between suffering and sin, made by the disciples, is
also shared by the Pharisees (9:34) and no doubt was also believed by many of the people
who would come to the Temple for worship.
2. The purpose of God (9:3). Jesus' answer about the supposed link between sin
and the man's sin does not touch on the origin of sin, nor does Jesus indicate that the
works of God are to become manifest to everyone who is born blind.3 On the contrary,
Jesus focuses on one person. There is no indication that the blind one asked for healing
and unlike Bartimaeus, there is no suggestion that he previously knew anything about
Jesus. In v. 11, he merely refers to "a man called Jesus."
Jesus' answer reveals the goal that God is pursuing. He answers that the man's
situation is not one to assign blame as to why something has happened, but the situation
affords an opportunity in which He and His disciples are to see a Divine purpose at work,
"in order that the works of God may be manifest in him." His answer liberates us from
obsession with theory and with endless analysis of why things are as they are. His word
asks us to be sensitive to the ways in which God may move amidst the bankrupt
conditions in life that we face every day. Until now, the man has been living a purpose-
less existence; he lives as a burden to others. But Jesus says that this man born blind is to
become a sign of God's majesty and power. His life is to possess the highest meaning
that any human can have; the works of God are to be revealed in him. Jesus affirms here
the significance of this one who struggles with meaning and purpose in his life. In a
broader sense, this does not mean that healthy people are the only ones with meaning and
purpose. "In the end, this world and humanity do not derive their significance from
themselves, but from what God makes manifest in them."4
The plural pronouns "we/us" are significant; "It is necessary for us to work the
works of God."5 Jesus draws the disciples to Himself in the work of mission.
1 Note the way that the subjunctive, gennhqh/' expresses result (BDF #391, 5).
2 The idea of sin before birth was generally remote in Judaism. The other idea of children paying for the
sins of parents is found in Jeremiah and Ezekiel.
3 ajllav is used with i{na elliptically, "on the contrary this happened in order that . . ." (BDF

#448, 7).
4 Walter Luthi, St. John's Gospel, (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1960), p. 118.
5 The use of ejrgavzesqai recalls a similar use in 5:17.
 Story & Story, p. 3

We—You—and I together stand under Divine compulsion. Schnackenburg notes, "The

disciples are perhaps included in the saying about working because they are one day to
become witnesses and announcers of his work (15:27), who will perform works like his
(14:12) and share his fate (15:20). In this way they too are under the imperative of the
Divine must (dei')."6
3. The pool of Siloam, "Sent" (9:7). The pool formerly mentioned (ch. 5) connects
with the feast of booths and the ceremony of pouring water. The name is derived from
the Hebrew verb, "to send" (jl^v*).7 The pool was thus named because overflow water
from a fountain was conveyed there by a rock-hewed aqueduct from the fountain. Isaiah
referred to the waters of Siloam/Shiloh, which go softly as a symbol of the Divine waters.
These waters are contrasted with the River Euphrates, which symbolized the earthly
power of Assyria: "Inasmuch as those people have rejected the gently flowing waters of
Shiloh . . . Now, therefore, behold the Lord is about to bring on them the strong and
abundant waters of the Euphrates." It is also possible that the identification of Siloam
with the Messiah/Christ, and His rejection by the Jews may have been influenced by the
Messianic interpretation of Gen. 49:10, "The scepter shall not depart from Judah until
Shiloh comes." In view of the allegorical nature of much of the FG, it is probable that the
Evangelist means that the man is sent to Christ Himself, the one who is sent of God
(6:29).
This man's healing is a gift, not simply the restoration of sight or healing of
imperfect sight but the gift of sight. This man had never seen; he was born blind. And it
is also significant that Jesus takes all the initiative. The blind man's only part is
obedience to Jesus' word, "he went and washed and came back seeing."

Scene II: The blind man and his neighbors (9:8-12). Irony.
Implicit to the dialogue is the assumption that this man was a familiar sight, seen
by many people. In these verses are found several questions from the man's neighbors,
which concern:8
1. His identity. "Is not this the man who used to sit and beg?" The answers are,
"It is he. No, but he is like him." Ironically, both answers are true. It is he, and he is like
him, but now he sees.
2. The method of his cure: How? This question is asked four times in the chapter.
The man innocently refers to Jesus, "The man called Jesus made clay and anointed my
eyes and said to me. . ." (9:11). These words are a description of Jesus in purely human
terms. The blind man has much to learn before he can make his confession. It is the least
he can say, but also much more than the healed man can now understand.
3. The whereabouts of Jesus: "Where is he?" The answer is very short, "I do not
know." The answer is also ironical, in that the debate in chs. 7-8 focused upon the
origins of Jesus. The writer and the reader both share the knowledge of Jesus' true origin,
"when the Messiah comes no one knows where is from" (7:27). The man, at this point, is
6 Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Gospel According to St. John, (New York: Crossroad, 1980), p. 241.
7 BDF #465 (1) note, "The parenthesis usually originates in a need which suddenly crops up to enlarge
upon a concept or thought where it appears in the sentence; or it may be due to the difficulty of adapting an
after thought which suddenly comes to mind to the structure of the sentence as it was begun."
8 "qewrei'n refers to the same pre-past (pluperfect) time that is expressed in the dependent clause by

prosaivth" h^n; since past time is not expressed by the participle at all, it had to be indicated by
the imperfect in the o$ti clause." (BDF #330)
 Story & Story, p. 4

distanced from Jesus and must progress till the point that he reaches full faith in Jesus.

Scene III: The blind man and the Pharisees (9:13-17).

After the preliminary discussion among the neighbors, the man is brought to the
Pharisees. The readers are not told why. As the questions from the Pharisees begin,
there is a spirit of meanness that characterizes the atmosphere. We would naturally
expect rejoicing among the people who were allowed to witness the miracle, but our
expectations are met with a puzzling meanness. Jesus' activity produces insecurity,
discomfort, vexation and accusation.
1. The Sabbath schism (9:14, 16). There is a close parallel with Jn. 9 and Jn. 5.
The healing of the paralytic and the healing of the man born blind both take place on the
Sabbath, thereby engendering hostility. Other questions would be much more
appropriate: "How were your eyes opened?" "What does it now feel like to see?" "What
impressions do you have now as you see the world for the first time in your life?
Obviously, you do not need to beg anymore, so now, what will you do?" "Are you going
to follow the one who has healed you?" There is no positive response of anything
resembling celebration. Instead, the issue is raised as to the kind of person who could
break the Sabbath law. The dilemma that is faced is this: A man who was good enough to
perform the miracle would not have performed it on the Sabbath. This is the first time
the Evangelist mentions the Sabbath, and he does so to prepare for the discussion among
the Pharisees (v. 16). Their embarrassment is heightened by the fact the blind man was
given the gift of sight by a man that they had just accused of being demon-possessed
(8:48).
The effect of the sign9 is a schism, scivsma (7:43). The evangelist carefully
notes the division among the Pharisees because he regards the Jewish religion as
weakened by the schism caused by an increase of converts to Christianity. There are
some six references to his sight (9:7, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15), all of which, lay the foundation
for the ensuing conflict. The man who was blind now sees.
2. "The prophet" motif (9:17). It is important to sense the progression in the
man's understanding of Jesus. Initially, the man said, "the man called Jesus" (v. 11).
Now, the Pharisees unconsciously nudge the man into making his statement about Jesus
as "a prophet."

Scene IV: The Pharisees and the parents (9:18-23).

1. Cowardice of parents who are afraid of being "put out of the synagogue."
Now the man's parents enter. The Synoptic tradition says that the entrance of the gospel
has a strange divisive effect in families (Matt. 10:34-39; Lk. 12:51-53). It is no different
in Jn. 9, since the man's parents fail to support their son's witness. Can we imagine their
joy in the sight, which is given to their son; yet, they are afraid to voice their joy or to
express their praise to God before others. Fear of the ban controlled them. The word,
"put out of the synagogue"(ajposunavgwgo") means "excommunicated, put
under the curse/ban."10 It connotes both an economic and social boycott of the excluded
9 The plural form shmei'a reveals that His critics are already aware of other signs performed by Jesus,
notably the healing in ch. 5.
10 The term ajposunavgwgo" occurs only in FG and is used three times. It occurs in 12:42, as part

of the Evangelist's sad commentary on the religious hierarchy: "Nevertheless many even of the rulers
believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they were not confessing Him, lest they should be "put out of
 Story & Story, p. 5

persons. Thus, the fear of the parents is understandable, yet tragic. While the blindness
of the son may have been a previous source of embarrassment for the parents, his sight is
now a greater source of embarrassment, fear and shame.
What is the Pharisees' question to the parents? "Is this your son who you say was
born blind?" They do not ask the normal question, "Is this your son who was born
blind?" The man can clearly see. Thus, they attempt to get the parents under coercion, to
lie about his past, i.e. the lie that he could always see. His parents make the impersonal
and non-committal statement, "Ask him, he is of age. He will speak for himself." Irony is
clear, since the Jews have already asked him and he has already spoken for himself.
The parents are brought into the trial scene to confirm the identity of the man. No
doubt, the investigators want to extract from the parents an opinion about how the cure
was effected. Hopefully with divergent views they can play one person off against
another. What is sad is that the parents' embarrassment and fear now leads the parents to
almost disown their own son.
2. The fact of sight is established. There is a subtle shift that takes place. There is
now, no denying the miracle. In v. 18, it is clear that the Jews now own up to the fact
that the man had been blind and has now received his sight. These two facts are clear.
Thus, the subsequent interrogation is carried on in spite of the established miracle of
opened eyes. Disbelief in Jesus who opens eyes (faith) means there is a deliberate
blindness to the undeniable works of God.

Scene V: The blind man and the Pharisees (9:24-34).

1. Intimidation. Given their hostility and deliberate blindness, the authorities are
left with no alternative but to call for the man a second time. Their tactics are pure
intimidation and categorical statements. In v. 24, they say, "Give glory to God." What
this expression means is a solemn and religious adjuration to tell the truth.11 The Jews
invoke the name of God to deny the work of God, which has been effected through Jesus.
In one breath these men command the man to speak the truth, while in the next breath,
they prove they are closed to the truth."Which is it?"
2. The "sin" motif (9:24, 25, 34). The Pharisees say that "he is a sinner." The
disciples had asked about the man's blindness and sin (9:2). At the end of the scene, they
make the cruel statement, "You were born in utter sin." They echo the disciples' equation
of suffering and sin. Now their charge is particularly ridiculous since now the man sees.
Further, in v. 34, their statement about his being born in utter sin admits their knowledge
that this man who now sees had been born blind. It is about this very fact that they
wanted the parents to lie.
3. Discipleship (9:27) and origin from God (9:31-33). Throughout this section,
the blind man becomes weary of the pointless repetition. As his opponents continue to
hammer away as to "how" the miracle was done, he almost accuses them of being deaf: "I
told you and you didn't hear." "They are forced to listen to an uneducated man telling
them that they, amazing as it may seem, are incapable of assessing God's activity. He
contrasts their lack of knowledge with the knowledge of believing Jews (oi!damen)
that God does not listen to sinners, an idea frequently found in Jewish writing."12
His critics contrast their discipleship to Moses with the man's discipleship to
11 The expression, "Give God the praise" in this context has a specific application to situations in which
people would admit their guilt (cf. Josh. 7:19; I Sam. 6:5; II Chron. 30:8; Jer. 13:16).
12 Schnackenburg, p. 252.
 Story & Story, p. 6

Jesus. Just as in v. 17, they led him to confess Jesus as prophet, now they prod the man
toward discipleship. Thereupon, the blind man no longer mocks them, but advances a
very clear argument with ideas agreed upon by all. God does not listen to sinners, but to
those who do his will. He reminds them that such a gift of sight was unheard of. God did
this wonderful thing. Therefore, Jesus is no sinner, but he is from God. The blind man
becomes more persistent and confident. The man who was blind clearly sees their
insincerity. He gains in clarity and conviction while they lose in assurance. The lie
makes them weak and embarrassed. The truth makes him strong. Finally, the Pharisees,
having no other recourse, excommunicate the man. As with many human arguments,
once logical argument has failed, force takes over.
From the Evangelist's perspective, the force and effect of the argument is clear.
Jesus cannot be rejected on reasonable grounds. The true interpretation is ironically and
unconsciously made by the Jews. If we are to see this event in allegorical terms, he who
was altogether blind in Judaism, has been saved from his blindness. Correspondingly, his
critics become successively blind.

Scene VI: The blind man and Jesus (9:35-38).

1. Positive witness, "the Son of Man," "Lord," and worship. No sooner is the man
cast out than Jesus is at his side. The man makes confession of Jesus as "Son of Man,"
"Lord," and finally worships him when Jesus identifies Himself. Initially, Jesus asks the
man, "Do you believe in the Son of Man?" The man responds, "And who is he sir/lord,
that I may believe in him?"
This pattern is very similar to two other passages in the FG (4:19-26;
20:14-16—Mary). In all three cases, a person who does not know who Jesus is,
addresses Him as sir/lord and makes reference to the Messiah/the Son of Man/Jesus, who
is thought to be absent. In all three instances, Jesus quickly reveals his identity. To the
woman at the well, Jesus responds with the ejgw ei!mi formula, "I am He, the One
speaking to you" (4:26). With his dear friend Mary at the tomb, he calls her name
"Mary" (20:16). Now to the man born blind, Jesus says, "You have seen him—he is the
one speaking to you." This man understands the significance of the title "the Son of
Man," but he does not know that the Messiah has come, nor if he has come, does he know
who he is. He admits, at the word of Jesus, that there is a Messiah, and asks only to know
Him that he may believe on Him. "The depth and force of the faith expressed by the man
is shown by his behavior. He throws himself to the ground in front of Jesus and does
Him reverence. This prostration (prosknuei'n) can describe ordinary homage to a
human being, but the evangelist definitely intends it to mean more. Elsewhere in the
Fourth Gospel the verb is only used of the worship of God (4:20-24; 12:20)."13
In 9:12, the neighbors ask where the man is, and he says, "I do not know." Now
he receives his answer. Jesus is outside of the synagogue, at the side of those who are
cast out from the religious authorities and their synagogues. This affirmation possesses
special meaning for members of John's church who were excommunicated from the
synagogue. Jesus is there at their side, fulfilling the role of Paraclete. His presence with
the man, outside of the synagogue, is the embodiment of the claim in 6:37, "All that the
Father gives me will come to me; and the one who comes to me, I will not cast out."

Scene VII: Jesus and the Pharisees (9:39-41).

13 Schnackenburg, p. 254.
 Story & Story, p. 7

1. Explanation of Jn. 9. In v. 39, the entire narrative and dialogue of John 9 are
explained in miniature. Verse 39 states, "For judgment I came into this world, that those
who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind." As Jesus speaks, the
blind man fades from view and the spotlight falls on the Pharisees. An old adage
expresses the movement in the chapter, "The same sun that melts the wax, hardens the
clay."
The Pharisees then ask the question, "Are we also blind?" What kind of answer
would we expect from Jesus? We would think that Jesus will tell them that they are
blind, or perhaps answer them with silence. Instead, to our amazement and the Pharisees'
surprise, Jesus changes His tactic. He agrees with them, "If you were blind, you would
have no sin. But now you say, 'We see'; your sin remains." Jesus' answer comes in the
form of a contrary-to-fact conditional sentence, in which both halves are regarded as
untrue: "If you were blind (which you're not), then you would not be having sin (which
you do)." Jesus says, "You say that you see, so your sin continues to cling to you. Your
claim that you see is not accompanied by an openness to accept the work of God." Thus,
in accepting the claim of the Pharisees, "We see", Jesus recognizes their blindness as the
real blindness of willful sin.
The terms are deliberately ambiguous; the man born blind not only sees
physically, but now also sees spiritually. By way of contrast, those born with physical
eyesight, who apparently see, are blind for now they are losing their ability to perceive
spiritual reality. As they are confronted with the light of the world, the revealer of God,
they are like the physically blind, groping about blind in the darkness.
The blindness that Jesus speaks of is the kind of blindness that a person knows as
blindness. It is a blindness that admits need, knows how to beg, request help and obey.
The Pharisees' blindness, by way of contrast, is an illusion of sight or understanding,
which has led them into a far deeper darkness than they know, an unwillingness to
understand. They have been raging about the sin of the blind man and the sin of Jesus.
Their claim to see sin (v. 34) is what traps them in their own sin. Here, Jesus' scathing
word about "sin which remains" is a very serious charge, a horrible judgment, "your sin
remains," and is parallel to 3:36 "the one who disobeys the Son will not see life, but the
wrath of God remains upon him."
Barrett notes, "It should be noted that in some sense men predestinate themselves
by their confidence or lack of confidence in their own spiritual vision. The man born
blind emphasizes his ignorance throughout. He does not even know whether or not Jesus
is a sinner (9:25). He does not know who the Son of Man is (9:36). He emphasizes that
he knows only one thing—contrasted with the Jews' confident pronouncements about
Jesus (9:16, 22, 24, 29, 34)."14
2. Upward and Downward movement. We have noted the progression of faith
with the man born blind as he progressively refers to Jesus; he speaks of: "a man called
Jesus" (v. 11), then of Jesus as a "prophet", then implicitly of Jesus as one to whom he is
a disciple (v. 27), an origin from God (vss. 29-34), then the Son of Man (v. 37), then "I
believe" (v. 38), and finally worship (v. 38).
By way of contrast, the Pharisees initially seem to accept the fact of healing (v.
15). Some are positive (9:16) and willing to ask the man's opinion (9:17). By Scene IV,
they try to discredit the healing through his parents. They run up against the undeniable
evidence and lose all interest in the truth, and they make ludicrous attempts to trap the
14 Barrett, p. 366.
 Story & Story, p. 8

man (9:24). They hurl accusations against the man, against Jesus, and finally resort to
force by excommunicating the man. In the end, they are judged to be hopelessly in the
dark. Cf. the diagram on the first page.

Application
John lets his readers see that unbelief is a conscious and willful choice to not own
up to what the light shows. The Pharisees begin by putting the man and Jesus on trial.
They pronounce the man and Jesus as guilty. And they exile both. In reality, it is the
Pharisees who have been on trial and their guilt remains. Dodd aptly entitles this section,
"Judgment by the Light." The Evangelist, through the various trial scenes, withholds
judgment until the last scene. The giving of light is positive, "As long as I am in the
world, I am the light of the world"(9:5). But the giving of the light also has a fearful and
grim element--judgment: "And this is the judgment, that the light has gone forth into the
world, and men loved darkness more than the light, because their deeds were evil" (3:19).
The light drives them into the deepest darkness, the willing refusal to see. "Through all
specifically first-century polemic, this story exposes a fundamental feature of human
behavior: the person who is locked within himself and wants only his own advantage is
closed to God's claim because it challenges him. As he hardens in his attitude the more
brutally he is confronted with God's demand if he does not free himself from the
straitjacket of his egoism."15
On a more positive note, the Lord Jesus is still at work today as He draws men,
women and children into His redemptive purpose of "working the works of God." The
Light of the World has come and it is still day. We must work while it is yet day. Jesus
says that we must allow God to work in us. His mission stated in the plural, "it is
necessary for us to work the works of God" reaches out to us who profess the name of
Jesus. We too must allow our eyes to be opened and join with Jesus in shedding His light
and gift of sight to others. While others had led the blind man to his begging station, now
the man allows himself to be led by Jesus where Jesus wills. The same words spoken to
the disciples and the blind man also summon us to active discipleship.
The Light Crisis (krivsi" )
(John 9)
Progression upwards for the man born blind
and
Progression downwards for the Pharisees
Pharisees
see
accept
healing
(v.15)
not from So
God (v.
(v. 16)
origin from
unbelief God
(v. 18) (vss. 29-34)

attempt to disciple of
discredit Jesus
(v. 17) (v. 27)
15 Schnackenburg, p. 256.
 Story & Story, p. 9

prophet trap the man

(v. 17) (v. 24)

gift of accusation
sight (v. 7) (vss 31-34)

Siloam exc
"sent" mu
(v. 7) (v.
gift of
sight (v. 7)
Blin
d Man
(sin)

On a Side Note:
My friend, Dr. John Kuta supplied me with the following medical information
about the gift of sight for the blind for the blind man.
Jesus’ healing methods varied. He did not rely on a set pattern. He individualized
His treatment to the patient’s need. The healing was sometimes immediately obvious,
occasionally it was delayed. Some people were healed by Jesus’ word, some by His
touch. On two occasions He used other additional materials such as saliva or clay. For
the blind man in Jn. 9, we find the use of saliva and mud, with which, Jesus applied a
mud-pack to the blind man's eyes and then sent him to the pool of Siloam. With some
healings, He commanded that the healed follow certain procedures such as going to the
priest to be declared clean, going to the pool to wash, telling the lame to get up and walk,
asking the bound woman to straighten her back, and asking the man with the withered
arm to straighten it. Twice, the healing was completed in two stages; the healing of the
blind man (Mark 8:23) and the healing of the deaf/mute (Mark 7:32). Jesus is twice
quoted as using Aramaic phrases for healing, " 'Talitha kum' (which translated means,
'Little girl, I say to you, arise,'" in the case of Jairus’ daughter (Mark 5:41) and
"Ephphatha!" that is, "Be opened!" in the case of healing the deaf and mute man (Mark
7:34).
Two of Jesus’ healings were described in ways that would not be understood until
modern times. The two-stage-healing of the blind man in Mark 8:22-25 may be
understood with today’s medical knowledge. If eyes are damaged, early in life (as with
amblyopia, lazy eye, or with blindness from birth), repair of the eyes will not restore
sight. The brain has unlearned or never learned what to do with the neural stimulation.
With healing of the eyes only, the man would have sensory overload and could make no
sense of what he saw. Thus, the man says, "I see men, for I see them like trees walking
around" (Mark 8:24). A two-step approach was used for complete healing. The eyes
needed to be healed to see, and the brain needed to be healed to interpret what was seen.
At another time, Jesus touched both the ears and tongue of the man who was deaf and
spoke with difficulty (Mark 7:32-35). This takes into account the necessity of hearing in
order to learn to talk. One cannot articulate speech well without being able to hear how it
is supposed to sound. These miracles suggest authenticity to the truth of these miracles as
necessary for the two-stage healing. Certainly, this type of medical knowledge was not
known in the 1st Century.
Story & Story, p. 10
 Cullen I K Story, J. Lyle Story, p. 1

JOHN 11
THE RESURRECTION AND LIFE

Introduction
The climactic sign in John's book of Signs is the raising of the dead Lazarus.
True, there are other events recorded in the Synoptic Gospels in which Jesus raises a dead
person to life: Jairus' daughter (Mk. 5:21-24, 35-43) and the widow's son in Nain (Lk.
7:11-17). In Matthew 11:5, Jesus claims that the Messianic signs are at work in Him,
"the dead [ones] are being raised" (note the plural form). However, in the case of
Lazarus, Jesus is confronted with a situation in which Lazarus has been dead four
days—beyond all possibility of recall. In preparing this section, I read about an 86-year
old man in intensive care, who had suffered cardiac arrest and was pronounced dead after
the doctors and nurses had worked on him for one hour with all of their equipment.
Thirteen minutes later, the man started breathing again. In the case of Lazarus, he had
been embalmed, wrapped in strips of cloth and been already buried for four days. In
evaluating the event, we need to ask the all-important question of what the sign signifies.
Context. It is important to give careful attention to the context of this sign. The
section from 10:41-12:11 can be regarded as one major block that focuses on Bethany of
Judea and the two visits that Jesus makes to three siblings. He ministers to the two sisters
as he raises their brother from the dead. Then, after supper, He receives the ministry of
the two sisters as He reclines at table with their brother. The two seams that bind the
passage together are:
(1) 10:4-42—the "escape" of Jesus and his disciples from capture by the Jews
who "were seeking again to seize him" (10:39). While beyond the Jordan, word comes to
Jesus of the illness of His friend, Lazarus.
(2) 11:54-57—the "escape" from the malice of the religious leaders to Ephraim.
The text is marked by the same verb "to seize," "in order that they might seize Him"
(11:57). The escape cools the hostility, which arose due to the raising of Lazarus. The
brief haven in Ephraim is followed by Jesus' second visit to Bethany where He is
"anointed" beforehand for the day of His burial (12:7). Each event reveals an extreme
feature, i.e., the body of Lazarus has begun to decay (11:39) and the ointment which
Mary pours out on Jesus is costly (12:5). In John 11, life is imparted by Jesus; in John
12, service is lavishly rendered to Jesus.
The entire passage highlights Jesus' relationship to one home in Judea and the
response of the three siblings to Jesus' ministry. In no other place in the gospels does
Jesus give as much time to one family (Lk. 10:38-42).
We also need to relate this event to John's overall purpose: "These signs are
written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ . . . and that by believing, you may
have life in His name" (20:30-31). Martha confessed it in word, as she responded to
Jesus' question (11:27); however, she no doubt does not understand the implications
Mary confessed it in deed by her expensive ointment (12:1-8). Moreover, the final words
of the writer's purpose (20:31) concerning "life in His name" are powerfully
demonstrated by the raising of Lazarus.
By his description of Mary as the one who anointed Jesus (11:2), John informs his
readers of that which they would not have known from the Synoptic tradition (Matt. 26:6-
13; Mk. 14:3-9). In the Synoptic tradition, it was known that Mary and Martha once

jn11.doc
16/5/2008
© J.Lyle Story, Cullen I K Story
 Cullen I K Story, J. Lyle Story, p. 2

received Jesus into their home (Lk. 10:38-42), but the readers would not know that the
two sisters had a brother. Consistently in his Gospel, John makes inner connections
between events described in his Gospel. For example, according to 7:50, Nicodemus is
referred to as "the one who came to Him earlier (see John 3), and in 19:39 as "the one
who came to Jesus by night at the first." Similarly, in 4:46, the healing of the son of the
royal officer while Jesus is at Cana, is connected with the first sign at Cana during the
wedding feast (2:1-11). The various references to Judas (6:71; 12:4; 13:2; 18:2, 5)—are
bound together by the description of Judas' impending betrayal.
Specifically, in chs. 11-12, John draws two events together. We may say that the
death and raising of Lazarus mirror Mary's extravagant deed, which Jesus affirms to be
"for the day of my burial" (12:7). He, who was empowered through prayer (11:41-42) to
call forth Lazarus from the grave, was himself to be anointed for His death, when He
would be lifted up on the cross (12:32).

Act 1: Preparation for the Word (11:1-16)

1. Divine Delay. The sisters send a message, "Lord, behold he whom you love is
sick" (v. 3). This is a leading statement, and is more powerful than a simple request,
"Lord, our brother Lazarus is sick. Would you please come and heal him?" With the
leading statement, it is clear, that once Jesus hears the news, he will most certainly come
and heal in the way He has healed others, with whom He has not had a special
relationship. Special friendship does not need to make a request, only a statement of
need. This leading statement is similar to Mary's statement, "they have no wine" (2:3).
Where a vital relationship exists, no request is necessary; only a statement is needed.
In 11:5-6, a subtlety exists in the contrast between v. 5, "Now Jesus loved Martha,
and her sister, and Lazarus," and Jesus' inactivity in v. 6, "When therefore He heard that
he was sick, He stayed then two days longer in the place where He was." This verse
expresses an implicit contrast, building tension within the story. The readers are led to
feel, "Well, if this is so, why doesn't Jesus immediately go? After all, He has, in the past,
responded immediately to the needs of others without knowing them." Jesus' delay
highlights the unexpected. It appears utterly incongruous with His character, highlighting
the surprising.
2. Divine delay for the glory of God (11:4). In v. 3, Jesus states, "This sickness is
not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God may be glorified by it." This
is a paradox. The sequence of events must be carefully studied. It takes about one day
for a messenger to travel from Bethany to Jesus' location. After receiving the report,
Jesus stays an additional two days before going to Bethany, a trip involving one more
day. When He arrives, Lazarus has been dead for four days, which means that Lazarus
was dead when the messenger arrived. In a paradoxical way, Jesus says, "This sickness
is not unto death, but for the glory of God". This statement by Jesus is parallel to the
statement in 9:4 about the blind man, "It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents;
but it was in order that the works of God might be displayed in him." In 11:4, Jesus'
statement about Lazarus' condition is not a medical statement, but a promise of
resurrection and eternal life. Jesus sees the close correlation of His work with that of the
Father and also the same correlation of the glory of the Father with the glory of the Son.
In a clear way, Jesus associates Himself with God in life-giving activity. The idea of the
glory of God is found later in Jesus' word to Martha, "Did I not say to you, if you believe,

jn11.doc
16/5/2008
© J.Lyle Story, Cullen I K Story
 Cullen I K Story, J. Lyle Story, p. 3

you will see the glory of God?" (11:40), after the raising of the dead Lazarus.
3. Divine delay for the purpose of faith (11:9-16). In v. 15, Jesus says, "and I am
glad for your sakes that I was not there, so that you may believe." We read that statement
from hindsight, since we know the outcome of the story. However, for the disciples, this
statement is confusing and shocking. They are believers, but their faith will grow in
depth, understanding, and commitment as the story unfolds. Not only does Jesus seek to
deepen the faith of the disciples and the two sisters, but in 11:41-42, Jesus prays for the
unbelieving crowd, "that they might believe that you sent me." We receive the
impression that Jesus constantly asks, "What may I do to strengthen the faith of those
who believe and bring about the inception of faith in those who do not believe?" By way
of application, the raison d'etre for the church ceases to exist when the burning desire to
communicate the gospel dies and the deadly status quo concern takes hold. The Church
exists to bring about initial faith in unbelievers and to deepen the faith of those who
believe.
In 11:9-10, a rather puzzling response is found to the disciples' question in v. 8.
The disciples say, "Are you going back into the hotbed of Judea, which you just left,
where they were just trying to stone you?" Jesus' response with the light imagery that
there are twelve hours in the day" is puzzling. We need to recall the self-affirmation of
Jesus, "I am the Light of the world" (8:12; 9:5). The "day" is here in Jesus; "the light of
the world" is present in Jesus. How then can the disciples err or stumble if they walk
with Him in the day? Jesus says, "But if anyone walks in the night, he stumbles, because
the light is not in him" (11:10). According to the American College Dictionary, light is
"electromagnetic radiation to which the organs of sight /react," radiation "propagated at a
speed of about 186,300 miles per second." The best organs of sight cannot "react," they
cannot see anything unless there is light. In the darkest cave or in the night that is pitch
black, no one with perfect eyesight has an advantage over one who is blind. Jesus says
that the tragic issue is not to walk toward Judea where danger lurks, but to walk in
darkness without the Light of life within. To have the Son means to have the light and to
have life.

Act II: The Word (11:18-37)

Jesus is met by the two sisters, Martha first, then Mary. Martha's complaint is
stated in a contrary to fact conditional sentence, "If only you had been here (which you
weren't), my brother would not have died (which he did)" (11:21). It is a word of
accusation. Her complaint is however, immediately balanced by the confident claim,
"And now I know that as many things as you ask God, God will give to you." Her
confession represents the common Pharisaic understanding of the resurrection as a future
event, "I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day" (11:24). To
Martha, the resurrection is a doctrine to be believed about a future event.
Jesus responds with double contrast: between a doctrine to be believed and a
person to be believed/trusted, and between a future event and a present reality. Jesus
affirms, "I am the resurrection and the life." The resurrection is a person, not simply an
event to be witnessed in the future, but a person to be believed, confessed, and witnessed
to in the present. Jesus' claim in no way cancels the repeated promise in Jn. 6, "I will
raise that one up at the last day" (6:44); rather the doctrine becomes deeply personal and
present.

jn11.doc
16/5/2008
© J.Lyle Story, Cullen I K Story
 Cullen I K Story, J. Lyle Story, p. 4

1. "I am the resurrection = He who has faith in Me, even it He dies, will live
again." The immediate referent of this pronouncement is Lazarus, and all other believers
who have died. We find the clear pronouncement that all such dead believers will live
again.
2. "I am the life = He who is alive and has faith in me will never die (lives now--
eternally)." This affirmation includes Martha, Mary, the disciples, and all those through
the ages, that have and are putting their trust in Jesus.
Martha's answer to Jesus' question, "Do you believe this?" (11:26) is not as direct
as the question, and even appears unrelated to Jesus' claim. Yes, Martha does make a
strong affirmation of faith, which identifies Jesus as the "Christ" and "Son of God," and
as "the Coming One." However, none of these affirmations refer to Jesus' resurrection
power. Was it all so overwhelming to her in the hour of deep sorrow and anguish? Does
it mean that she simply could not grasp at the moment the significance of what she heard?
She only confesses what she knew and could affirm, and Jesus does not question her
answer. Is this how it is so often with us? The question will often be, "Do we grasp what
our Lord can signify to us in ever new and challenging situations?" Schnackenburg
writes, "It is this sort of confession of faith in Jesus which Martha makes. Her 'yes' to
Jesus' question does not mean that she has understood the meaning of His words.
Nevertheless she accepts his words as those of the bringer of salvation, as Simon Peter
did with the 'hard saying' of the bringer of salvation, of the revelatory discourse in the
synagogue at Capernaum (6:60, 63b, 68b). For the evangelist, who holds Jesus' meeting
with Martha up to his readers as a mirror for their own faith. Martha's attitude is an
example of faith, which proves its worth in a critical situation. "Believers are not able to
penetrate the darkness of the present with the light of reason or to understand the future
with human prescience, but they hold fast to Jesus and in faith and confidence in him are
sure of God's help."1
This pronouncement expresses the core of Johannine thought—eternal life, which
consists in the knowledge of God and His Son—the Sent One. This knowledge, as is
signified by the Word and the Sign—is a present reality (17:3). The previous six signs
lead up to this climactic Word and Sign. The climactic Word is that Jesus is the
Resurrection and the Life (both present and future). Such life is eternal life as is manifest
in John's stated purpose:
30 "Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are
not written in this book; 31 but these [signs] are written that you may believe
that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life
in his name."
In John 5:25,26,29, we find a prefigured commentary on John 11; we can sense
something of John's realized eschatology in that as people hear and believe, they move
from death to life, and figuratively speaking, step out of their tomb of death:

John 5:24-29 John 11

when the dead—all who are in tombs = He found Lazarus in the tomb (11:17)
(5:25,28)
will hear the voice of the Son of God (5:25) = He cried with a loud voice,
'Lazarus, come out!" (11:43)
will hear his voice (5:28)
1 Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Gospel Accoding to St. John, vol. 2, (NY: Crossroad, 1990), p. 332
jn11.doc
16/5/2008
© J.Lyle Story, Cullen I K Story
 Cullen I K Story, J. Lyle Story, p. 5

those who hear will live (5:28) = The dead man came out (11:44)
will come forth (5:29)

the resurrection of life(5:29) = I am the resurrection and the life

(11:26).2

The resurrection is both present and future. Note the parallel with ch. 11, with Lazarus.
The words "the dead" call to mind the same term found in Eph. 2:1ff., "dead in trespasses
and sins."

Act III: The Sign testifying to the Word (11:38-44).

The thrust of the next paragraph is the actual sign, witnessing to the truth of the
word spoken in 11:25-26.
1. Jesus' human response (11:33, 38). In 11:33, 38, a repetition is found of the
same Greek verb, ejmbrimavomai, translated as "deeply moved" (RSV). The first
occurrence of the term is in response to the complaint of the two sisters, while the second
use of the verb is in response to the criticism of the Jews who questioned His care for his
friend (v. 37). The verb ejmbrimavomai, is used of horses which "snort" and it
also means "to scold, censure." In Mk. 14:5, it is used of bystanders who witnessed a
woman's outpouring of expensive ointment on Jesus, "they were censuring her." In Mk.
1:43, the participle of the same verb is used to describe Jesus' command to the cleansed
leper, "sternly charging him." In Matt. 9:30, the verb is used as a stern warning to the
two blind men whom Jesus healed. It may be helpful to note that in each case, the three
synoptic passages contain an object—the woman, the leper and the two blind men.
Consequently, the object of the verb in John 11:33, 38 is Jesus himself. Thus, the second
part of v. 33 can be literally rendered, "he censured his spirit and troubled himself." In
both 11:33, 38, the question at issue is Jesus' attitude toward himself, or in himself. The
response of Jesus can be interpreted as, "Why did I not come sooner and save my friends
their grief and the grief of their friends as well? I have only myself to blame that I did
not come sooner." The thought may well be conveyed through our expression, "If only I
had. . ."
2. Jesus prays, emphasizing His dependence upon the Father (11:41-42). Jesus'
attitude of self-censure was not prolonged. He expresses confidence in His command,
"take away the stone." In His prayer, containing a thanksgiving that God has heard
(aorist) and continues to hear (present) Him. We do not know what He actually prayed.
Perhaps it was, "Hear me now, and through me raise Lazarus."
3. Jesus raises Lazarus still in the trappings of death (11:43-44). The climax of
the Lazarus narrative is found in the actual raising of Lazarus. All of the narrative in this
event and dialogues therein progressively build toward Jesus' raising Lazarus. Also, in an
inverse manner, this climactic event looks back to Jesus' statement, "I am the
Resurrection and the Life' (11:26). The Evangelist lays out the significance of the story,
much earlier, although the readers may not catch the full significance of this "I am"
statement until the climactic raising of Lazarus. Jesus issues a command, "Lazarus, come
2C. H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1968), p. 365.
Dodd notes several points of continuity between the two passages.
jn11.doc
16/5/2008
© J.Lyle Story, Cullen I K Story
 Cullen I K Story, J. Lyle Story, p. 6

forth," and Lazarus comes forth bound hand and foot with wrappings. Jesus issues a
second command, "Unbind him, and let him go." The linen cloths wrapped around
Lazarus' body are an intimation of the grave clothes soon to be wrapped around Jesus'
body (19:40; 20:7). The word for "face-cloth" (soudavrio") around Lazarus' face is
the same word used for the cloth to be bound around Jesus' head (20:7). The power of
the Father was joined to Jesus' power to call Lazarus forth, but the mighty power of God
alone raised up Jesus. The event announced in 5:28-32, finds an impressive prototype in
Jn. 11.

Act IV: Response to the Word/Work(11:45-53).

1. Faith of the spectators (11:45). The positive response of "many . . . of the
Jews", was to come to faith, i.e., personal trust. It was a momentous event; faith was
birthed in many. The faith-response is continued in 12:9, 12, 17ff. with Jesus' triumphal
entry into Jerusalem.
2. Unbelief of the rulers (11:46-53). The positive response of "many of the
Jews" is followed by the negative response of some of these people, who report the news
of this event to the Pharisees (v. 26). The rejection of this climactic miracle and Jesus
also occurs in the way in which the Pharisees gather together the Sanhedrin. The final
verses of Jn. 11 express a bitter and tragic irony. There is a double occurrence of the
verb, "to gather" (sunavgw 11:47, 53). The first occurrence relates that "the chief
priests and the Pharisees 'gathered together' the Sanhedrin" (v. 47), which does not know
what to do with this sign producing "this man." The second occurrence of the verb
relates Caiaphas' statement that Jesus must die for the nation (v. 50). John says,
Caiaphas' word was an ironical and unwitting prophecy that stopped short of the full
truth. Jesus' death, says the Evangelist, was to be not only for the nation, but in order that
He, i.e., Jesus, "might gather together into one the children of God that are scattered
abroad." It is a master-stroke of the Evangelist. The inimical intent of "gathering
together" the Sanhedrin to put Jesus to death serves the purpose—according to John—"of
gathering together" the scattered children of God into "one" (i.e., one flock, one
people—10:16; one community—17:20-21). It recalls what the Psalm writer has
affirmed, "You shall cause the wrath of human beings to praise You" (Psa. 76:10). A
united front to put Jesus to death results in a united people of God. The purpose-clause of
11:52 implies the resurrection of Jesus, for how else could the One, who was about to die
for the nation,
(v. 51) gather together God's children except through His power as the Risen One?
Children of God are what they are through faith, a theme so clearly stated in the Prologue
(1:12).
The ironic prophecy of Caiaphas had to do only with "one man" for "the people."
To Caiaphas, "the people" meant the Jewish people only. The "plus" item in 11:52 comes
from the Evangelist, "Caiaphas, the death that you speak of is not merely a death of one
man for the people of God, but for a purpose of a much wider scope. The purpose of
Jesus (not your puny self-serving purpose) means far more than the death of one man for
one nation, seeing that Jesus aims to gather in one, 'the scattered children of God'." We
think of John, the situation of Judaism, and the Church at the end of the first century
when Jewish and Gentile Christians were fractured by racial and ethnic barriers, and were
in need of a new sense of unity. Only the Risen Jesus can effect such a unity. The

jn11.doc
16/5/2008
© J.Lyle Story, Cullen I K Story
 Cullen I K Story, J. Lyle Story, p. 7

concern of Jesus is not merely for raising Lazarus, not merely to bring strength and
courage to a family, not merely that the disciples may believe (11:15), but his concern is
also for the crowd that stands around him that they also may believe (11:42). Earlier in
the high-priestly prayer (ch. 17), He prays not only for the disciples, but for those who
will come to believe in Him through their word (17:20ff.). Strange as it may seem, an
enemy prophesies what Jesus will do.
The religious hierarchy's response highlights the awful, willful grotesque
character of unbelief. Faced with innumerable witnesses to the raising of Lazarus, whose
body had already started to decay (11:39), they begin to plot not only to kill Jesus (11:51-
52), but Lazarus as well (12:10). They face the powerful and unmistakable sign, and are
even forced to admit, "This man continues to do many signs" (11:47). Yet, they are
afraid of losing their national status (11:48). Caiaphas crassly belittles the knowledge of
his fellows--"You know nothing at all", and then proceeds to take counsel against Jesus.
The mystery is great. The heart set against God and his Christ (Psa. 2:2) refuses to
believe in the face of "infallible proofs." Why is this? The question anticipates John's
own amazement at the issue as he writes in the next chapter (12:37ff.). All of these
events are set in motions by Jesus' raising of Lazarus. The blind man's story (cha.9)
issues in unbelief and is explained by Jesus as refusing to come to the revealing light.
Jesus' verdict is that "sin remains" upon the religious people as a dark cloud in which they
cannot see. The sole witness of the once blind beggar who now sees is contrasted with
the Pharisees self-blinding claim to see, which puts them in a state of "sin," which
remains. In chapter 11, Lazarus, Mary, Martha and many who believed—all are
contrasted with the religious leadership who use this life-giving event as an occasion to
kill Jesus. And if that is not enough, they seek to put back to death, the one who had just
been brought back from death.

jn11.doc
16/5/2008
© J.Lyle Story, Cullen I K Story
 Story p. 1

The Purpose of Luke's Gospel

(Luke 1:1-4)

Introduction
Luke is the only evangelist, who offers his reader(s) a prologue, which traces
some of his sources and explains the process of compiling and editing his Gospel. He
furnishes a justification or apology (ajpologiva) for his work. Once the Gospel
message extended into new territories and the eyewitnesses of the Jesus-event passed
away, the need for authority and authentication of the Gospel message become urgent.
Luke claims a place for Christianity on the center stage of world history. The opening
statements align Luke with his predecessors (and to me, kavmoi). The example of
others leads Luke to write a Gospel for his particular situation since many already
undertook to "set forth a narrative of the things which were accomplished among us."
Luke makes his readers aware that he is vitally concerned with the origin of the
Gospel (book of Luke) and the origin of the Church (Acts). Conzelmann notes, "The
attitude to the origins is expressed in Luke's use of the idea of the ajrchv. In Luke
1:2, and also in Acts 11:15, the idea is used in the full sense of the beginning of the
Church. "The 'beginning' in Galilee and the 'beginning' of the Church in Jerusalem are
deliberately placed parallel to each other . . . The similarity of Luke 1:2 and Acts 1:1, is
quite intentional."1
Luke 1:2 just as they were delivered to us Acts 1:1 In the first book, O Theophilus, I
by those who from the beginning were have dealt with all that Jesus began to do
eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, and teach,
In the Greek text of Lk. 1:1-4, the four verses are one sentence, classically
fashioned with independent and dependent clauses, joined together by conjunctions and
modifying clauses. The book of Hebrews begins in much the same manner (Heb. 1:1-
4)—a classical Greek preface for a historical work. "Luke ushers the NT into the world
of literary excellence. He moves with masterful control and delicate smoothness from the
classical style of the Prologue (1:1-4) to the strongly Hebraic tone of the Infancy
Narrative (1:5-2:52) to the heavily septuagintal pattern of the rest of his Gospel."2

Structural Analysis
The opening conjunction "inasmuch, since" (ejpeidhvper) is causal and
refers to a fact already well-known.3 The conjunction also affirms that Luke's gospel was
written after the writing of many others and introduces the first half of the conditional
sentence (vss. 1, 2-protasis), and is followed by the second half of the conditional
sentence (v. 3-apodosis), and then the clear statement of purpose (v. 4):

Cause Effect Purpose

1 Inasmuch as many have 3 It seemed good to me 4 that you may know the
undertaken also, having followed all truth concerning the things
1Hans Conzelmann, The Theology of St. Luke, (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1957), p. 211.
2Carroll Stuhlmueller, "The Gospel According to Luke", The Jerome Biblical Commentary, ed. by
Raymond Brown, (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968), p. 116.
3BDF, p. 456.

lk1prol.doc
1/16/2006
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p. 2

jEpeidhvper things closely for some of which you have been

polloiV time past, informed.
ejpeceivrhsan e[doxe kajmoiV i{na ejpignw'/"
1
parhkolouqhkov periV w|n
ti a[nwqen kathchvqh"
pa'sin ajkribw'" lovgwn thVn
ajsfavleian.
to compile a narrative of to write an orderly account
the things which have been for you, most excellent
accomplished among us, Theophilus
ajnatavxasqai kaqexh'" soi
dihvghsin periV gravyai,
tw'n kravtiste
peplhroforhmevn Qeovfile,
wn ejn hJmi'n
pragmavtwn,
2 just as they were
delivered to us by those
who from the beginning
were eyewitnesses and
ministers of the word
kaqwV"
parevdosan
hJmi'n oiJ ajp·
ajrch'"
aujtovptai kaiV
uJphrevtai
genovmenoi tou'
lovgou,

Cause: The opening verb means, "to set one's hand to, attempt, try"
(ejpiceivrw), and is often used in the context of literary compositions; in the NT it
is unique to Luke and conveys the idea of success.4 The infinitive," to compile"
(ajnavtaxasqai following the verb ejpeceivrhsan,"have undertaken")
is a form of the verb ajnatavssomai, meaning, "to arrange in proper order";
when used with the noun "account" (dihvghsi"5), it means "to reproduce in narrative
(in writing)." The use of the infinitive here means to report or narrate in proper
chronological order.
The use of the perfect participle, "the things that have been accomplished among
us" (peplhroforhmevnwn), denotes the results extending to the present,6
necessitating the composition of the gospel. The word pra'gma possesses a broad
meaning, "undertaking, concern, occurrence, situation, legal action," and is further
modified by two other high-sounding terms, "inasmuch" (ejpeidhvper), "to
4MM, pp. 250-51
5The verbal form of dihvghsi" is dihgevomai means "to tell, narrate, recount" and is found in
Lk. 8:39; 9:10; Acts 9:27; 12:17.
6The perfect participle is similarly used in Rom. 4:21 fully convinced that God was able to do what he had
promised.
lk1prol.doc
1/16/2006
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p. 3

compile" (ajnatavxasqai), and "narrative" (dihvghsin). The

introductory, "many" (povlloi), expresses the broad literary response of the
believing community to the Jesus event. "Luke wants to create the impression that a
great number of people have been involved in this earthshaking event."7
In v. 2, a progression of persons is found, people who are vitally concerned with
"the things that have been accomplished among us." They are successively involved with
the Jesus-event:
1. Eyewitnesses (aujtovptai)8
2. Preachers of the Word (uJphrevtai genovmenoi tou'
lovgou)
3. Compilers of the Word (kavmoiV parhkolouqhkovti).
Clearly Luke classes himself as belonging to the third type of person, one dependent
upon the first two persons for the truthfulness of the tradition.9 Luke distinguishes
between the material from the primitive witnesses (1:2) and the Gospel records known to
him (1:1). Luke wishes that his reader(s) appreciate the careful investigation he made
"from the beginning" (ajp j ajrch'"). His own personal involvement in the
process corresponds with the "we-passages" in Acts, e.g., Acts 21:15.
Luke may well have in mind a wider group of witnesses, such as the deacon
Philip (Acts 8:5; 21:8), Symeon Niger (Acts 13:1), Manaen (13:1) and various women
(Luke 8:1-3).10 It is also probable that Luke had interacted with the Johannine disciples,
either the disciple or his disciples, in that the Gospel of Luke shares many emphases with
the FG.11 Luke probably means the apostles, whose authority he consistently emphasizes
in Luke-Acts.12 The clear perspective is of an age in which the "eyewitnesses" had
passed away, and the need is keenly felt for a trustworthy account. A similar concern is
registered by the author of the book of Hebrews:
3 "how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation?" It was declared at
first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him,
4 while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by
gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his own will" (Heb. 2:3-4).
The term, "servant " (uJphrevth"), means "helper, assistant;" it can also be
used in the technical sense of "preacher of the word." It is often followed by the
objective genitive of whom to which the services are rendered. The term "word" means
the Gospel message, as embodied in the words and works of Jesus. Ignatius used the
expression, "ministers of the word" (uJphrevtai tou' lovgou).13 From the
7Helmut Flender, St. Luke: Theologian of Redemptive History, (London: SPCK, 1967), p. 64.
8In MM, the term is found of a man who was perhaps absent from his sister due to military service. He
writes that his sister not be anxious "for I am personally acquainted with these places and am not a stranger
here". Another text says, "Come for personal inspection". pp. 93-4.
9With the expression e[doxe kavmoi, Luke seems to place himself along the same line as the
persons mentioned in v. 1. The aorist e[doxe is epistolary in which the writer positions himself in the
position of the reader in that the aorist "it seemed" occurred prior to the actual reading of the letter.
10For extensive work in this area see D.E. Nineham, "Eye-witness Testimony and the Gospel Tradition,"
JTS, 9, 1 (1958), pp. 13-25.
11See J.A. Bailey, "The Traditions Common to the Gospels of Luke and John", Novum Testamentum
Supplementum 7, (Leiden: Brill, 1963): Jerusalem, the Temple, importance of Jesus' glorification,
exclusive facts about Nazareth ministry, and hymns of praise.
12See Acts 10:39-42.

13See I Trallians 2:3. Also BAGD, p. 850. See the use in Acts 6:4 But we will devote ourselves to prayer

lk1prol.doc
1/16/2006
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p. 4

papyri, several references link this term to worship and service within the context of the
religious cult.
Luke draws upon instructions, prayers, oral tradition and popular stories. In these
writings, the eyewitness tradition was ministered in the Church and may indicate the
presence of the worshipping community. Mark may be on of these "ministers." Eusebius
states that Mark wrote his Gospel mainly as a report of Peter's preaching.14
The third stage is marked by Luke's personal involvement and contribution noted
by the expressions "followed all things accurately for some time past . . . and who tried to
write an orderly account" with a distinct purpose in view. The participle
parhkolouqhvkoti "having followed" is translated by BAGD as "having
investigated everything carefully from the beginning." It indicates the careful, thorough
and diligent way Luke executed his task.
Effect: The second half of the conditional sentence (apodosis) begins in v. 3 with
the impersonal verb, "it seemed best" (e[doxe), the pronoun, "to me" (kavmoiv)
and then, the complementary infinitive, "to write" (gravyai).
The adverb, "accurately, carefully," describes the care by which Luke moved
through his investigation. The investigation, traceable to the beginning, is emphasized by
two expressions:
"from the beginning" (ajp j ajrch'"--v.2)
"from the beginning" (a[nwqen--v. 3), used temporally15
The two expressions are linked to the perfect tense, "having investigated"
(parhkolouqhkovti), which points to the enduring and solid witness of the
gospel account. "In the prologue Luke calls attention to the facticity of Jesus' history.
That this is the act of God can no longer be proved as fact. This side of Jesus' history is
discernible only to faith. But that does not exclude the need for faith to be assured about
the human side of that history. This attempt of Luke does not only apply to his own age,
when the Gospel was taken into the Greek world. It remains a fresh task for each
succeeding era, with its changed understanding of the world."16 The intent of careful
research into the Gospel narratives inspires the readers' confidence.
The adverb "in consecutive order" (kaqexh'") describes the methodical
manner in which Luke will write his account, "to write something for someone in orderly
sequence," which encompasses space time, and logic.17 It need not mean in rigid
chronological order; rather it is within Luke's purpose to write a narrative that formed a
connected and unified whole.
The particularized subject of the gospel is "Most excellent Theophilus"
(kravtiste Qeovpile). The adjective, "Most excellent" is an honorary form
14Historia Ecclesiastica, iii, 39. "And the Elder [i.e. the Presbyter John whom he is citing here] used to say
this: Mark having become Peter's interpreter wrote down accurately so far as he remembered what Christ
either said or did: not, however, in order (orderly fashion), for he neither heard the Lord, nor followed
Him, but subsequently, as I have said, followed Peter, who used to suit his instructions to the needs of his
hearers, but ;with no intention of giving a connected account of the Lord's discourses (Logia), so that Mark
made no error while he thus wrote some things as he remembered them. For he was careful of one thing--
not to omit any of the things which he had heard, and not to state any of them falsely."
15The fact that his investigation goes back to the beginning finds expression in his Gospel in that he does
not begin with the public ministry of Jesus (Mark), but begins with the annunciation of Jesus' predecessor,
John the Baptist.
16Flender, p. 66.
17BAG, p. 389.

lk1prol.doc
1/16/2006
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p. 5

of address used to acknowledge certain persons holding official or social position higher
than that of the speaker. The Gospel of Luke (1:3) and Acts (1:1) are dedicated to
"Theophilus," a name that means "Beloved by God"; BAGD suggests a Christian of
prominence. MM cite several uses of the proper name as early as the third century B.C.
It is possible that since "Theophilus" means "Beloved of God", the name may stand as a
representative name of Christian readers for whom the Gospel is intended. Perhaps this
person is charged with the dissemination of the Gospel of Luke.
Purpose: The explicit purpose of Luke's gospel is found in the clause:
4 "that you may know the truth" (i{na ejpignw/'". . .thVn
ajsfavleian). The use of the preposition ejpiv in the compound verb
ejpiginwvskw is surely felt, "know exactly, completely, through and through."18
The term "truth" (ajsfavlei), meaning "certainty," is used as a legal and technical
term for "security."19 It is used in the papyri as a written security (proof) against an
attack from the outside.20 Perhaps, Luke addresses issues such as the denial of the
resurrection or Gnostic speculation. In any case, Luke is clear about his purpose—to
build upon the certainty already possessed byTheophilus, a catechumen. Luke wishes to
lead him into a fuller comprehension of Christian truth, surely based on definite historical
facts—not on speculation, theories or metaphysical systems. While many of the religious
systems of Luke's day began with the struggle of humanity to know and enjoy deity,
Christianity begins with the living God who has entered into the life of humankind to
seek and save those who are lost. Thus, Luke emphasizes the historical and trustworthy
character of the Gospel narrative.
Luke's introduction follows the style of Greek Classics. He claims to write a
work of literary importance. Critical work on the text reveals that his goal has been
admirably achieved. The prologue to the gospel is majestic: one sentence interlocked
with clauses and participial constructions, grammatically joined by a protasis (1:1-2) and
apodosis (1:3-4). A prologue serves to introduce both of Luke's works. The normal
length of scrolls is ca. 30 feet, which is the length of this gospel scroll. The prologue in
Acts 1 serves to introduce the new scroll; Acts 1:1 refers to "the first account" of all that
Jesus began to do and teach which implicitly refers to Luke's gospel. Thus, the subject
matter of Acts is what Jesus continued to do and to teach.
Luke's purpose may be compared with Josephus' prologue:
I suppose that, by my books of the Antiquities of the Jews, most excellent
Epaphroditus, I have made it evident to those that peruse them, that our Jewish
nation is of very great antiquity, and had a distinct subsistence of its own
originally; as also, I have therein declared how we came to inhabit this country
wherein we now live. Those Antiquities contain the history of 5000 years, and
are taken out of our sacred books; but are translated by me into the Greek tongue.
However, since I observe a considerable number of people giving ear to the
reproaches that are laid against us by those who bear ill-will to us, and will not
believe what I have written concerning the antiquity of our nation, while they take
it for a plain sign that our nation is of a later date, because they are not so much as
vouchsafed a bare mention by the most famous historiographers among the
Grecians, I, therefore, have thought myself under an obligation to write somewhat
18BAG, p. 290.
19BAG, p. 118.
20MM, p. 88.

lk1prol.doc
1/16/2006
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p. 6

briefly about these subjects, in order to convict those that reproach us of spite and
voluntary falsehood, and to correct the ignorance of others, and withal to instruct
all those who are desirous of knowing the truth of what great antiquity we really
are. . .21
The Classical style is evident in the use of poluv", frequently found in formal
speeches or prefaces (Heb. 1:1; Acts 24:2—speech of Tertullius).
Interestingly, although Luke appears to have used Mark's Gospel in his
composition, the Markan term "gospel" (eujaggevlion) is not used. While
highlighting the historical aspect of the gospel, Luke makes it clear that the subject matter
of his writing really occurred. Luke's emphasis will lie in objective reliability, as in:
26 "But I have nothing definite (ajsfalev" ti) to write to my lord about
him. Therefore I have brought him before you, and, especially before you, King
Agrippa, that, after we have examined him, I may have something to write" (Acts
25:26).
Luke's purpose is clear—to lay claim to an authority derived from predecessors
(eye-witnesses and preachers) and from his own investigative work. He aims to give
Theophilus a solid basis in the gospel tradition to strengthen him in his newly found
Christian faith.
Luke offers four distinct reasons which justify his apology as a bona-fide witness
(ajpologiva):
1) Although there many written accounts of the Jesus-event, he tracked the
narrative to the earliest of witnesses.
2) He had made use of all of the material so as to serve his purpose.
3) He had done his best to foster a high standard of accuracy.
4) He had tried to present events with chronological precision.
Other suggestions offered, concerning Luke's purpose, take into account the larger blocks
of material in Luke's Gospel:
Cadbury: presentation of Christianity to the educated public,
Talbert: an anti-gnostic gospel,
Conzelmann: deal with the embarrassing delay of the Parousia,
Easton: apologetic purpose of Christianity to the Roman authorities,
Manson: show the depth of the breach between Church and synagogue,
Marshall: present salvation to the readers,
Ellis: theological concerns of Luke
Wilson: practical and pastoral.
Luke's primary purpose is to assure Theophilus of the certainty of the Gospel tradition;
however, that does not preclude nor exclude other purposes for Luke-Acts. Luke's
concern is to write a Gospel, a presentation of the saving-significance of Jesus' life and
ministry. "But he does so in the context of a two-part work which would go on to present
the story of the early church, thus demonstrating how the message of the gospel spread,
in accordance with prophecy and God's command, to the ends of the earth. He wrote for
people at some remove from the ministry of Jesus, both in geography and in time, and his
task was to provide them with such an account of the story of Jesus as would enable them
21Contra Apion 1.1.1ff. "In the first volume of this work, my esteemed Epaphroditus, I demonstrated the
antiquity of our race...I shall now proceed to refute the rest of the authors who have attacked us" Apion.
2:1f. These quotations and others suggest that Luke's prologue is meant to cover both parts of his two-
volume work.
lk1prol.doc
1/16/2006
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p. 7

to see that the story with which they had already become partially acquainted was a
reliable basis for their faith."22 Luke is the most conscious of the Evangelists in writing
as a historian. The earliest incidents in the Gospel of Luke contain clear historical
references: days of Herod, King of Judea (1:5), decree from Caesar Augustus (2:1),
historical persons used to introduce John the Baptist (3:1ff.). However, that historical
purpose becomes the vehicle for a theological interpretation of the saving significance of
Jesus. God's age-old promise of salvation is in the process of realization through the
good news in Jesus—His teaching, healing, and acts of compassion. That purpose is so
forcefully expressed in the purpose statement in the Zacchaeus pericope:
10 " For the Son of man came to seek and to save the lost" (Lk. 19:10).

Application

We can hardly imagine the human handicaps that were inherent in the
proclamation of the Early Church. For the Jews, a crucified Messiah was a contradiction
in terms; indeed Jesus' death on the cross was clear confirmation that Jesus was accursed
by God. For the Gentile audience, a crucified teacher was utterly absurd, compounded by
the foolish declaration that this teacher was raised from the dead.
Luke is one evangelist who takes his apologetic role seriously, by rooting the
Jesus event in a real history in space and time, proclaiming the wonderful news of
salvation that is offered to all (Gentile and Jew). Many of the writings of the first two
centuries that were apologetic in nature (Christians defending the Gospel with Jews,
Greeks and Romans) find their prototype in the prologue to the Gospel of Luke. The
prologue, which is framed in Greek terms and style introduces the saving history in
Jewish context in chs. 1-2, yet which is intermingled with references to the key political
figures of the Gentile world.
In many ways, Luke's challenge is our challenge in interpreting the significance of
the Jesus-event in the context of another culture far removed from the first century, yet
which is also in need of the same Savior for the desperate human condition. While his
concern is historical and theological, it is also pastoral as he is directed by the real history
that occurred in first century Palestine. To a Church that is undergoing issues of
inclusion and exclusion (Jew, Greek, Roman), the Gospel is offered as the means of
Divine salvation irrespective of race, religious background, gender or social status. The
Gospel of salvation transcends all such barriers and may well address some of the societal
issues of racial, religious and sexual reconciliation. The Gospel remains unchanged in
the midst of diversity and hostility as is unfolded not only in the book of Luke but in the
companion volume of Acts. The two-volume work provides the twenty-first century
Church with a model for the all-inclusive salvation of God as the Church works through
its own issues of unity, diversity and reconciliation.

22Howard Marshall, Commentary on Luke, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,1979),
p. 35.
lk1prol.doc
1/16/2006
©J.Lyle Story
 p. 1

The Temptation of Jesus

(Matt. 4:1-11; Mk. 1:12,13; Lk. 4:1-13)

Introduction

The season of Lent noted in church calendar begins with the story of the
temptation of Jesus in the wilderness. The forty days of Lent re-enact in the life of the
Church, this teaching moment in Jesus' personal life. It provides the Church with an
opportunity to remember the story and ponder its meaning. What really happened to
Jesus in the wilderness? And what did this event mean? Then, how can Jesus'
experience apply to the lives of Christians as they are "tempted" or "tested?"
In a very superficial way, some have interpreted the temptations to refer to sins of
gluttony, ambition, and covetousness. Others have viewed the temptations as the selfish
use of power, the desire to dazzle people, or compromise—interpretations, which are on a
devotional level.
The main theological interpretations of the temptation are as follows:
1. Anti-magical: In the light of this interpretation, the temptation event is
directed primarily against the Jews who seek signs from a Messiah, who refuses to give
these signs. Thus it is included in the gospel narrative to combat a craving for signs in
the early Church (Bultmann).
2. Adam-Messiah typology: In this interpretation, Jesus refuses the dignity of the
Messiah, like that of the Second Adam that we find in Phil. 2:5-11.
3. Filial: The Son is obedient to His father, victorious in His obedience
(Schlatter).
4. Messianic: The temptation narrative corresponds to the Messianic woes,
which are said to precede the transition from this age to the age to come.
5. Polemic against the Jews: In this viewpoint, the Lord Jesus succeeded in the
temptations in the desert to which the Jews of the OT had fallen (Holtzmann).
These are the main lines of interpretation; we should note that none of these are
mutually exclusive. Before we look at the three specific temptations, we need to look at
some preliminary observations that provide the setting.

Preliminary Observations:
1. Versions. The difference of versions immediately strikes the readers. When
we compare Matthew's and Luke's fuller version with the brevity of Mk. 1:12-13, we find
that the first two verses of Matthew form almost the complete narrative, which is found in
Mark. Mark records the fact of the temptation but does not indicate the nature of the
specific temptations. Matthew and Luke appear to agree well with each other regarding
the content of the temptations. Further, both Matthew and Luke describe Jesus' fast, and
conclude it with the verb he hungered (ejpeivnasen). Thus, it is clear that both
the fast and the related hunger serve as the necessary introduction to the first temptation
that is found in both Matthew and Luke.
2. Agent. Jesus does not go out into the wilderness to flirt with temptation but
follows the impulse and leadership of the Holy Spirit. There are different ways that the
writers convey this fact:
1 "Then Jesuswas led up by the Spiritinto the wilderness to be tempted by the

rmatt4.doc
1/28/2009
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 2

devil" (Matt. 4:1).

12 "The Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness" (Mk. 1:12).
1 "And Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan, and was led by the
Spirit" (Lk. 4:1).
Mark uses the forcible word, drove out, cast forth ejkbavllei. Matthew
and Luke both use the verb lead up (ajnavgw). Luke's version contains two phrases,
which refer to the Spirit: full of the Holy Spirit, was led by the Spirit. The first
expression, full of the Holy Spirit, specifically relates to the experience at the baptism,
and may well imply an ecstatic condition. The very Spirit which led Jesus was the Spirit
who had just descended upon Jesus in bodily form:
22 "and the Holy Spirit descended upon him in bodily form like a dove."
22




 (Lk. 3:22)
No sooner does Jesus receive the Spirit than the Spirit begins to function in a Messianic
capacity, driving him to the place of testing. Thus, preparation is made for successive
exorcisms through the temptations of Jesus in the wilderness. Jesus' entrance into the
house of the strong man and subsequent plunder is active and deliberate, not incidental or
accidental.
3. Purpose. Matthew is perhaps the clearest with respect to the narrative's
purpose, and expresses it with an infinitive clause, to be tempted (peiravsqhnai).
The verb or its compound (ejkpeiravzw) is used in different ways in the text:
1 peirasqh'nai uJpoV tou' diabovlou
"to be tempted by the devil" (Matt. 4:1).
3 oJ peiravzwn ei^pen aujtw'/
"the Tempter said to him," (Matt. 4:3)
7 Oujk ejkpeiravsei" kuvrion tovn qeonv sou'
"You shall not test the Lord your God" (Matt. 4:7).
In 4:1, the infinitive is used to refer to the purpose of the temptation narrative; in 4:3 the
participle is used to refer to the Tempter,while 4:7 reflects a certain defiant challenge in
which Jesus is challenged to force a test upon God.1 Several aspects of the word family
(peiravzw) are present in the narrative.
The root verb "to tempt" peiravzw is used in several ways in the Bible: a)
attempt, try followed by an infinitive (Acts 9:26 "he [Paul] attempted to join the
disciples"),2 b) to test in a positive way used of God or Jesus who put people to the test so
that they may prove themselves true and faithful (Jn. 6:6 "this he [Jesus] said to him
[Philip] to test him"; Gen. 22:1 "God put him Abraham to the test),3 c) to tempt as an
1 BAG, p. 646. Barrett notes, "As man he is tempted by the agent of God, that his faithfulness, his
dependence upon God, may be revealed; at the same time, in tempting Jesus, Satan is tempting God." C.K.
Barrett, The Holy Spirit and the Gospel Tradition, (London: SPCK, 1947), p. 51.
2 Also Acts 16:7; 24:6.
3 Wrongly translated in the KJV, "God tempted Abraham." See also Exod. 20:20; Deut. 8:2; Judg. 8:22.

rmatt4.doc
1/28/2009
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 3

enticement to sin (Gal. 6:1 "Look to yourself, lest you too be tempted"; James 1:13 "Let
no one say when he is tempted, 'I am tempted by God'"),4 d) the challenge or defiant trial
of God by people, to discover if God really sees sin and will punish them (I Cor. 10:9
"We must not put the Lord to the test, as some of them did and were destroyed by
serpents. . .").5 Several of these meanings surface in the temptation narrative: God tests
Jesus in a positive way; Satan, the Tempter, tempts Jesus to entice Him to sin; the
temptations constitute a defiant challenge to God, specifically, the temptation to throw
Himself off the pinnacle of the Temple, thereby forcing God to act. From the divine
standpoint, testing is the means by which God discovers the faithfulness and loyalty of
His people and a sign of God's love and educative purpose for His people. For Jesus, the
purpose is no different.6
4. Place and duration. The place is significant—the wilderness. Immediately a
parallelism with Jesus and Israel suggests itself in the parallelism between the forty
days/nights (Jesus) and the forty years (Israel) in the wilderness. According to Mark,
Jesus was with the wild beasts. This feature has been variously explained7 but the most
promising line of argument is to see that the dominion over the beasts is sometimes
associated with conquest over Satan and the demons.8 Barrett notes, "In all these
passages the wild beasts have, in different ways, ceased to be dangerous. In the
Testaments of the XII Patriarchs, which seem to have influenced the NT so widely, we
find side by side the discomfiture of evil spirits and the submission of animals."9
Testament of Issachar 7:7
Every spirit of Beliar shall flee from you,
And no deed of wicked men shall rule over you;
And every wild beast shall you subdue.
Testament of Benjamin 5:2
If you do well,
even the unclean spirits will flee from you,
and the beasts will dread you.
Testament of Naphtali 8:4
If ye work that which is good, my children,
Both men and angels shall bless you;
And God shall be glorified among the Gentiles through you,
And the devil shall flee from you,
And the wild beasts shall fear you,
And the Lord shall love you,
And the angels shall cleave to you.
If such allusions are possible, then we find in Mark's version a cataclysmic confrontation
between Jesus and the angels who serve Him and the Devil and demons (wild beasts).
This cataclysmic battle is immediately followed by the exorcism in the Capernaum
4 Also I Thess. 3:5, "For this reason, when I could bear it no longer, I sent that I might know your faith, for
fear that somehow the tempter had tempted you and that our labor would be in vain."
5 See also Heb. 3:9; Acts 5:9; 15:10. See BAGD, p. 646 for other examples.
6 Psa. 11:5; Prov. 3:12; Deut. 33:8; I Kgs. 22:21-23; II Chron. 32:31.
7See Barrett, pp. 49-50: 1)reminiscent of the friendly relation between Adam and the beasts before the
Fall, 2)emphasis on the loneliness of the place.
8See the Messianic prophecies in Is. 11:6; Ezek. 34:25; Psa. 91:11-13; Job 5:23.
9Barrett, p. 50.

rmatt4.doc
1/28/2009
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 4

synagogue wherein the very presence of Jesus evokes a violent response. Thus, as King
Messiah, Jesus is attended by the angelic forces in his war with Satan and the demons.
The period of 40 days (40 years) is often regarded as a time of oppression, humiliation or
cursing, and parallels Israel's time-period in the wilderness and Moses' fast on the
mountain of God.10
5. The order of the temptations. The sequence of the three temptations is
reported differently by Matthew and Luke. Matthew's third temptation on the high
mountain is Luke's second temptation, and Matthew's second temptation is Luke's third.
If Matthew's order is the more original, it is also the more climactic—all the kingdoms of
the world and their glory. Matthew's last temptation corresponds to the last phase of
universal proclamation—to the ends of the earth (28:18-20). On the other hand, Luke's
last temptation, the jump from the pinnacle of the Temple, accords with Luke's clear
intent of presenting Jerusalem and the Temple as the place where God reveals His
salvation. In Lk. 2:21-38 we find the account of Simeon—in Jerusalem, and in 2:49
Jerusalem is the place where Jesus must be about His father's business. The Gospel of
Luke both begins and concludes with scenes that transpire within the Temple. It is the
promised land of his exodus,11 and the place where the disciples are to remain until they
are endued with the power of the Holy Spirit (Lk. 24:49).12
6. Presupposition for the temptations. In Matthew and Luke, two of the three
temptations are introduced by the conditional clause, "If you are the Son of God. . ."(Eij
uiJoV" ei\ tou' qeou'. . . Matt. 4:3). The conditional clause introduced
by "if" does not need to suggest doubt as to the identity of Jesus. A purely sentimental
interpretation interprets the expression to mean that Jesus must examine or prove his
Sonship. The expression (protasis) can best be explained, "Since you are the Son of
God," which then emphasizes the second half of the conditional sentence, "then." The
drama is positioned upon an eschatological plane--stretching between heaven and earth.
The real issue is not his identity but how that identity is to be expressed.
The immediate antecedent to the expression of Jesus' Sonship is found in the
heavenly voice at the baptism of Jesus, "This is my beloved Son."13 We find another
subtle reference in Luke's gospel, with respect to Jesus as the Son of God. In 3:38, we
find the genealogy in which we find Adam identified as son of God:
38 son of Enos, son of Seth, son of Adam, son of God.
The story of the temptation is bound thematically to the baptism and the confirming
10 Similarly, Moses fasted and did not drink on Sinai for forty days and nights in Ex. 34:28; Deut. 9:9-18,
25; Elijah in I Kings 19:8; flood lasted forty days and nights (Gen. 7:12); Philistine oppression for forty
years (Judg. 13:1);.
11See Luke 9:51; 18:31-34; 18:31-34; 19:44; 24--stay in the city.
12 The Lukan order parallels Psa. 106:
Manna: 14 But they had a wanton craving in the wilderness,
and put God to the test in the desert;
Worship:19 They made a calf in Horeb
and worshiped a molten image.
20 They exchanged the glory of God
for the image of an ox that eats grass.
32 They angered him at the waters of Meribah,
Testing of God: and it went ill with Moses on their account;
33 for they made his spirit bitter,
and he spoke words that were rash.
13Matt. 3:17; Mk. 1:11; Lk. 3:22; Jn. 1:34.

rmatt4.doc
1/28/2009
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 5

heavenly voice, with a genealogy sandwiched in between. Luke may well trace the
ancestry back to Adam as if to underscore the universal character of this New Adam who
represents a new beginning with the human race. "A glance at Luke 3:38 in conjunction
with 4:3 suggests a far-reaching connection. Adam is God's son. So is Jesus of Nazareth.
The story of the failure of Adam under Satanic pressure stands in the background."14
This is the one who will incorporate both Jew and Gentile. Simeon had said, "Mine eyes
have seen your salvation which you have prepared in the presence of all peoples, a light
of revelation for the gentiles, the glory of your people Israel" (Lk. 2:30-32). Jesus is
tested in His Messianic capacity as the unique Son of God.15
7. The broader context of Jesus' exorcisms.Against a view that would interpret
the temptations in a mythological framework, with a borrowing from the OT, we note the
connection of the temptation narrative with the subsequent exorcisms. Jesus says,
29 "Or how can one enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he
first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house" (Matt. 12:29).
Jesus establishes a clear cause-effect relationship between entering the house of a strong
man from the outside and binding him up, on the one hand, and the ransacking of his
house, on the other hand. The binding of the strong man secures the possibility of
ransacking his house. In the context of Matt. 12, the ransacking of the house/spoiling of
his goods refers to the casting out of demons. According to the witness of the NT, the
demons are the subjects of Satan. Vos says, "Although our Lord does not say in so many
words, 'I had to pass through a temptation before I could cast out demons,' nevertheless
something quite definite must be referred to by Him, something that we can even, up to a
certain point, locate in time, because it must have fallen before the first casting out of
demons, and these acts marked the very beginning of His ministry."16

The First Temptation (Matt. 4:3-4=Lk. 4:3-4)

There is a clear cause-effect relationship between the hunger of Jesus (v. 2) and
the first temptation. The hunger, after a protracted fast leads to a ravishing physical need.
Thus, the word of the Tempter is to turn stones in that rocky wilderness into bread. On
the surface it does not appear to be sinful. After all, there would be instances wherein
Jesus effected such changes in food: feeding of the 5000, 4000, and the transformation
of water to wine at the wedding of Cana of Galilee. Further, what is inherently wrong
with using the new-found power of the Holy Spirit to satisfy His hunger?
It may well be that the first temptation is directly relation to Jesus' Messianic role.
This comes through in a particular way in the Fourth Gospel; when Jesus feeds the 5000,
the crowds attempt to force Him to be their King Messiah:
15 "When Jesus realized that they were about to come and take him by force
to make him king, he withdrew again to the mountain by himself" (Jn. 6:15).
The miraculous provision had fueled the Messianic expectation of the people.
Within Judaism, it was expected that when the Messiah would appear, he would renew
the gift of manna.17 In the Johannine passage, the theme of manna is part of the
14Everett Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1968), p. 81.
15In the OT the term son of God refers to angels, Israel as a whole, and Israel's king. In the LXX,
Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, the term applies to Israel, the godly and upright (4 Ezra). In the Rabbinical
literature the term refers to Israel and Israel's Messiah.
16Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975), p. 331.
172 Baruch 29:8, "And it shall come to pass at that self-same time that the treasury of manna shall again

rmatt4.doc
1/28/2009
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 6

argument, the next day, after the feeding of the 5000 (Jn. 6:41ff.). Barrett states, "The
crowds sought the specific manna sign as a proof that Jesus was the Mosaic Prophet-
Messiah."18
It is difficult to precisely understand the nature of the temptations until we turn to
the words of Jesus. Consistently, Jesus' answers from Deuteronomy lead us to a
contextual exegesis. His answer points to the force and direction of the specific
temptations. As He answers the Tempter, we can begin to sense the thrust of this first
temptation. Jesus quotes from Deut. 8:3 and we need to look at the full text so as to
understand this event in the life of Jesus (Deut. 8:1-3):
1 "This entire commandment that I command you today you must diligently
observe, so that you may live and increase, and go in and occupy the land that the LORD
promised on oath to your ancestors.
2 Remember the long way that the LORD your God has led you these forty years
in the wilderness, in order to humble you, testing you to know what was in your heart,
whether or not you would keep his commandments.
3 He humbled you by letting you hunger, then by feeding you with manna, with
which neither you nor your ancestors were acquainted, in order to make you
understand that one does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from
the mouth of the LORD."
Matt. 4:4, "One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds
from the mouth of the Lord."
4 oJ de; ajpokriqei;" ei\pen:
gevgraptai:
oujk ejpÆ a[rtw/
movnw/ zhvsetai oJ
a[nqrwpo",
ajllÆ
ejpi; panti;
rJhvmati
ejkporeuomevnw/
dia;
stovmato" qeou
(Matt. 4:4).

Certain parallels between the Deuteronomic text and Matt. 4:4 are clear. Israel
and Jesus are both led into the wilderness for a period of forty years/days. Israel was
brought to a place of humiliation and divinely-willed fasting. God brought Israel as He
brings Jesus to this point of humiliation to feel the ravishing huner so that they would
sense the need for daily help and depend upon God for daily provision. Manna (lit., what
is it?) was a gift of God, which was supplied to make Israel daily depend on the grace of
God. Repeatedly, God fed His people with manna and quails, but they immediately
18C.K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John, (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1978), p. 289.
rmatt4.doc
1/28/2009
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 7

complained and disbelieved, as soon as their immediate needs were met.19Israel came out
of Egypt with all of the plunder of the Egyptians, taking pride in their victory, and
forgetting their daily dependence upon God. The land of Canaan was rich; somehow, in
that richness, the temptation was real that they would forget God who delivered them out
of bondage. Later, in the Exile, the first-born son learned about God's threat to those who
turned to other gods for their needs. Even today we are called on a daily basis to ask for
daily food, continuing to remember and be grateful to God. As we read, testing is
designed to bring out what is really in the human heart. For Israel, the state of
dependence extended to their clothes, which did not wear out and sandals which did not
wear through.20 The lesson for Israel in the OT was that of a daily trust and obedience, a
dependence that could not be "saved-up" for the next day. If we carry through the lesson,
we can see the point of contact with trust and dependence. Jesus lives in obedience and
dependence and will not act independently of the will of the Father.
We note the occurrence of the words to prove, and to humble in the context of
Deuteronomy. Vos says, "the probation consisted in placing before Him the necessity of
exercising implicit trust in God as the One able to sustain His life notwithstanding the
protracted fast."21
One of the issues that is addressed is the question, "How can Messiahship and
human restriction go hand in hand?" If we look at the issue abstractly, then we might say
that the Messiah is exempt from certain restrictions imposed on ordinary people. He
could have assumed a sovereign attitude towards nature instead of submitting to human
limitation, which is at the core of the incarnation. It must mean that His Messiahship was
real, but was passing through a certain phase to which human limitations belong. The
descriptive word is humiliation. Exaltation would follow; that which is not inherently
sinful, is sinful now at this moment, because of a divinely-willed humiliation, under
which His life is placed. It is God who fed the people miraculously in the wilderness,
with food of His own. Correspondingly, Jesus, the Messiah, is God's Servant and cannot
usurp authority which is not accorded to Him. The miracle would be effected by Him for
Himself, apart from the will of God, apart from His commitment to follow the will of
God to die for others, and apart from care and concern for others, which surely governs
His other miracles. It is important that the words, which Jesus chooses, are taken from
the book of the Law, the Torah, as if again Jesus places Himself under the Law.

The Second Temptation (Matt. 4:5-7=Lk. 4:9-12)

The second temptation (Lk.'s third) pictures a journey to Jerusalem to the pinnacle
of the Temple. We are not told whether the experience was visionary or whether Jesus
was physically levitated to Jerusalem, the Holy City. The word Temple means the entire
complex of buildings within the sacred enclosure. The pinnacle (pteruvgion)22
appears to be a colonnade on the south side which overlooks a very deep ravine.
Josephus states that to look down from the roof makes one giddy.23 Most people feel a
nervous dread of heights. The southern colonnade is approximately 450 feet above the
19 Exod. 16:2 ff.; Numb. 11:4 ff., 33f.; 21:4 ff; Psa. 78:18 ff.
20See Deut. 8:4 and Neh. 9:19-21.
21Vos, p. 337.
22 Perhaps there is a word-play between the word "pinnacle" (pteruvgion) and the term "wing"
(ptevruga) of the LXX of Psa. 91:4, "you shal trust under His wings" (LXX Psa. 90:4).
23Antiquities, XV . 11, 5.

rmatt4.doc
1/28/2009
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 8

valley below. To hurl Himself down the abyss would surely intensify the nervous dread
that most people feel. Within Jewish tradition there was an expectation that the Messiah
would appear on the roof of the Temple24 but there is no indication that the Gospel
tradition depends on any tradition that the Messiah proves his title by jumping off the
pinnacle of the Temple.
The appeal to jump from the pinnacle of the Temple is predicated by the appeal to
Jesus' Sonship and the witness of Ps. 91:11-13. The appeal to Ps. 91 is obviously used in
a Messianic sense, i.e., "This is a promise that God has made to the Messiah; therefore
take him upon that promise." The Tempter requests that Jesus endanger His life with a
presumptuous challenge, based on God's protective care. However, when we turn to the
full text of Ps. 91, we find that this psalm is a song of utter trust and confidence in the
power of God. A phrase is omitted, "to guard you in all your ways":

Psa. 91:11-13 Matt. 4:6

11 "For he will command his "He will command his angels
angels concerning you to guard you in all concerning you,
your ways. and
12 On their hands they will bear On their hands they will bear you
you up, so that you will not dash your foot up, so that you will not dash your foot
against a stone." against a stone."

The text of Psa. 91 reflects the general sense of God's protection for His children,
especially in the Temple precincts.25 In particular, the Temple is designated as the place
which God will choose as His resting place, which likewise is understood as a safe place
for His people.26
Jesus again uses the Torah in His response to the Devil:

16 "Do not put the LORD your God to the test, as you tested him at
Massah."
16 Oujk ejkpeiravsei"
kuvrion to;n qeovn sou, o}n
trovpon ejxepeiravsasqe ejn
tw`/ Peirasmw`/ (Deut. 6:16).
7 "Jesus said to him, 'Again it is written, Do not put the Lord your God to the
test'" (Matt. 4:7).
7 e[fh aujtw`/ oJ jIhsou`":
pavlin gevgraptai: oujk
ejkpeiravsei" kuvrion
to;n qeovn sou .
The text refers to the event at Massah (Ex. 17:7); the narrative relates how Israel
24"When the King Messiah reveals himself, he comes and stands on the roof of the Temple". Pesiqta
Rabbati 36 (162a). See Str.-B. I. 151.
25 Exod. 19:4-5; Deut. 28:1-14; 32:10-11; Psa. 36:7-9.
26 See Deut. 12:18, 21; 14:23 ff.; 15:20; 16:2, 6, 11, 16; 17:8, 10.

rmatt4.doc
1/28/2009
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 9

tried to force God's hand by complaint and murmuring. In the Exodus narrative the
people of God came to Rephidim and there was no water to drink (17:1). There is a
revealing interchange between the people and Moses:
People to Moses: "Give us water that we may drink." (17:2a)
Moses to people: "Why do you quarrel with me?
Why do you test the Lord?" (17:2b)
People to Moses: "Why now have you brought us up from Egypt to kill us and
our children and our livestock with thirst?" (17:3)
In 17:7 we find the summary statement:
7 "He called the place Massah and Meribah, because the Israelites quarreled and
tested the LORD, saying, 'Is the LORD among us or not?'"
The name Massah means testing and the name Meribah means quarreling. Their
question was, "Is the Lord among us or not?" (17:7).27 Their rhetorical question means,
in effect, "God's presence is localized by the presence of water, which is not present here
in the wilderness. If we possess water, then God's presence is real. If we do not have
water, it means that God's presence is not with us." God brings Israel to a hard place;
water is brought forth from a rock in answer to murmuring. The rhetorical question is, in
fact, a challenge: "God, demonstrate your presence. If you are with us, prove it."28
To test God here demonstrates a lack of faith. Jesus is the Messiah, and as
Messiah, is also God's servant. The Messiah is not to dictate to God, but to trust and
obey. That path of obedience is to lead Him to a cross, not over a precipice. The
temptation to force a sign upon God is a temptation that would be voiced by his
opponents throughout His ministry, "Show us a sign." The temptation to force a sign is
parallel to Paul's warning against sign-seeking, which may work from the outside, but
leave the inside person unchanged. "He who from the time of the baptism is Messiah
cannot by any outward sign declare his title or enter forcibly upon his Kingdom."29 Satan
recognizes that Jesus is the messenger of God. In the first temptation, he desires to turn
Jesus away from a God-appointed fast. In the second temptation he wants to inspire
Jesus to force a miracle, a sign, which will ostensibly prove His Messiahship. This
challenge would also be voiced by Jesus' brothers, "So his brothers said to him, 'Leave
here and go to Judea, that your disciples may see the works you are doing. 4 For no man
works in secret if he seeks to be known openly. If you do these things, show yourself to
the world'" (Jn. 7:3-4). The tempter seeks to turn Jesus away from His vocation as an
obedient son, to use His authority and power, independently of the Father. It is true that
on other occasions, Jesus anticipates the new creation when He walks on water (Matt.
14:24) or changes water into wine (Jn. 2:1-11), but in those instances, He acts in saving
help to those who are in need, but not to satisfy His own needs.
Vos says, "It would have involved an impious experimenting with the
dependability of God. Afterwards His sense of safety would have depended, not on the
27The Massah event is later used as the typical example of unbelief:
Psalm 95:8 Harden not your hearts, as at Mer'ibah, as on the day at Massah in the wilderness,
See also Hebrews 3,4.
28This sort of testing God has been repeated in Christendom by a presumption which dictates to a
Sovereign God what He must do. Presumption isolates the promises of God and takes them out of context
and flings them up in the face of God, i.e., "The Scripture says, 'By His stripes we were healed.' Therefore
I believe my son is healed and I'll throw away his insulin." One of the most dangerous form of temptation
for a new Christian is to believe that there is Scriptural authority for such an action.
29Barrett, p. 52.

rmatt4.doc
1/28/2009
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 10

promise of God, but on the demonstration solicited by Himself. The answer, therefore,
here also addressed itself in the most direct manner to what was the springpoint of the
temptation: 'Thou shalt not make experiments with Jehovah, thy God.'"30
Ironically, the very appeal to Psa. 91 which the Tempter uses is amply fulfilled in
the mission of the disciples:
Psa. 91:13 You will tread on the lion and the adder,
the young lion and the serpent you will trample under foot.
Lk. 10:19 Behold, I have given you authority to tread upon serpents and
scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy; and nothing shall hurt you.

The Third Temptation (Matt. 4:8-10=Lk. 4:5-7)

The third temptation (Matthew's order) is also Messianic. The Devil takes Jesus
to a high mountain. Luke's phrase, in a moment of time (ejn stigmh'/
crovnouLuke 4:5) Suggestsanentire visionary experience in a fractional moment.
The heavenly voice in the baptismal scene echoes the language of Psa. 2, "You are my
son, today I have begotten you" (Psa. 2:7; Matt. 3:17). The fuller text of Psa. 2:7 affirms
"Ask of me and I will make the nations your heritage and the ends of the earth your
possession" (Psa. 2:8). The scene appears to be a mountain with a summit, which makes
the whole of the inhabited world visible. His experience parallels Moses' experience of
seeing the Promised Land from a mountain (Deut. 3:27; 34:1-4). In the inter-testamental
period, various texts connect the high mountain with universal sovereignty:
"Therefore, go up to the top of this mountain, and all the countries of this earth
will pass before you, as well as the likeness of the inhabited world, and the top of
the mountains, and the depths of the valleys, and the depths of the seas, and the
number of rivers, so that you may see that which you leave and whither you go. This
will happen after forty days." (2 Baruch 76:3,4).
"From there I went to another place of the earth, and he showed me a mountain..."
(Enoch 24:1ff)
"This tall mountain which you saw whose summit resembles the throne of God is
(indeed) his throne, on which the Holy and Great Lord of Glory, the Eternal King,
will sit when he descends to visit the earth with goodness..." (Enoch 25:1)
The texts in Enoch suggest a summit on a high mountain, similar to a throne; it is
there that God will sit when he comes to visit the earth with goodness. Here, in the
narrative, the mountain is a very suitable place for Satan's offer of all the kingdoms of the
world and their glory. In the first two temptations Satan appears as a friendly counselor
who taps Jesus on the shoulder, giving Him advice, but here the force of the temptation is
felt as a shock that is instantaneous and explosive--in the blink of an eye, all the power,
wealth and glory of all that the world has to offer pass before Jesus' minds eye.
The only condition for such an incredible promise is a momentary submission to
Satan, a fleeting bowing of the knee to Satan. The appeal is especially deceptive since it
is aligned with what Jesus is destined for, rulership over the Kingdom of God; the appeal
is also in keeping with Jesus' deep-seated commitment to obedience. Manson says, "The
speech of Satan in Lk. is subtle: (a) the unqualified promise, 'I will give it to you': (b)
the claim, 'It is mine to do with as I please': (c) the trap, 'I will let you have it on very
easy terms.'"31
30Vos, p. 338.
31H.D.A. Major, T.W. Manson, C.J. Wright, The Mission and Message of Jesus, (New York: E.P. Dutton,
rmatt4.doc
1/28/2009
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 11

Jesus' answer to the Tempter is again taken from Deuteronomy and refers to the
time when Israel was poised to take possession of the Promised Land. Here with Jesus,
the threat to faith is very real. The offer is summarily rejected through the language of
Deut. 6:13:
13 kuvrion 10 tovte
to;n qeovn sou levgei
fobhqhvsh/ aujtw`/ oJ
kai; jIhsou`":
aujtw`/ u{page,
latreuvsei" satana`:
kai; pro;" gevgraptai
aujto;n gavr:
kollhqhvsh/ kuvrion to;n
kai; tw`/ qeovn sou
ojnovmati proskunhvsei"
aujtou` kai;
ojmh`/. aujtw`/ movn
w/ latreuvse
i" .
13 "The LORD your God you shall fear; 10 "Jesus said to him, 'Away with you,
him you shall serve, and by his name Satan! for it is written, 'Worship the Lord
alone you shall swear" (Deut. 6:13). your God,
and serveonly him'" (Matt. 4:10).
There is a change from fear to worship/do homage to and the addition of the
adverb, only. Satan only adds the condition of worship or homage; Jesus answers that
worshipis to be rendered to God solely, who alone must be the object of human loyalty
and obedience. Israel, poised on the mount, ready to take possession of the land, was
warned about the reality of compromise in worship when they entered an agricultural
land. Yahweh was not to be worshipped alongside of the Canaanite deities, who
promised agricultural success. Israel's worship was to reflect Yahweh's zeal or jealousy.
Frequently, idolatry and demon worship were allied in Jewish thought (Psa. 106-37-38;
Deut. 32:17).32 As Jesus begins his public ministry the issue of worship and homage still
must reflect that same divine jealousy which refuses to tolerate any rival or companion
deity.

Narrative Conclusion
The three temptations express the truth that at the outset of His ministry, Jesus
32 "And again I swear to you, ye sinners, that sin is prepared for a day of unceasing bloodshed. And they
who worship stones, and graven images of gold and silver and wood [and stone] and clay, and those who
worship impure spirits and demons, and all kinds of idols not according to knowledge, shall get no manner
of help from them" (I Enoch. 99:6-7).
rmatt4.doc
1/28/2009
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 12

chooses the path of obedience. In a fuller sense, His obedience will lead to His death as
Messiah. The Messianic hope that He embodies cannot be realized immediately, but
would find fulfillment in His death. His obedience unto death is the necessary prelude to
His Kingship.
Each of the specific temptations finds its counterpart in the wilderness experience
of Israel, wherein Israel failed to pass the divine "tests," expressed through Satan's
"temptations." Jesus' response to each temptation is a resounding triumph as He learns
obedience and dependence upon God.
Matthew and Luke both narrate the departure of the Tempter. Matthew and Mark
add the details of the ministry of the angels to Jesus.33 In Luke's version, we read that the
Tempter left after He had tried every kind of temptation. This appears to include both the
three temptations and the ones alluded to in v. 2: where for forty days he was tempted by
the devil. Luke also adds the detail at the conclusion that Jesus' release from temptation
was only for a time: until an opportune time (Lk. 4:13), with the implication that other
temptations would follow. Luke anticipates other satanic activity:
18 "And he said to them, 'I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven'" (Lk.
10:18).
18 "And if Satan also is divided against himself, how will his kingdom stand? For
you say that I cast out demons by Be-jezebel" (Lk. 11:18).
16 "And ought not this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for
eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath day?" (Lk. 13:16).
31 "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift
you like wheat" (Lk. 22:31).
The temptation narrative is only to be understood when seen as a clear and
successful contrast to the failure of Israel. The context, locale, chronology and texts from
Deuteronomy clearly point us in this direction. Taken as a whole the temptations reflect
the clash between what Israel had failed to do and that to which, God had summoned
Jesus. Satan offersthe popular expectation and demand of the sign-seeking crowds.

Application
Satan's defeat and Jesus' victory represents the strategic moment, wherein Jesus
binds the Strong Man. Through His ministry, particularly in His exorcisms, He plunders
the goods (people), held captive in the Strong Man's house. The final victory over Satan
transpires at the cross, to be consummated at the Parousia when Satan is finally
destroyed. Through Jesus' victory, He makes it possible for His people to inherit the
promises of God, assured of a victorious brother and merciful high priest, who
understands and helps His people in their times of testing and temptation.
12 "Therefore he had to be made like his brethren in every respect, so that he
might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make
expiation for the sins of the people" (Heb. 4:12).
18 "For because he himself has suffered and been tempted, he is able to help those
who are tempted" (Heb. 4:18).
15 "For we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our
weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without
sin" (Heb. 4:15).
These texts emphasize the essential similarity of Jesus' temptation with ours in that they
33 Similar to I Kgs. 19:5-8.
rmatt4.doc
1/28/2009
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 13

contained the possibility of failure. The dissimilarity lies in the fact that Jesus was
"without sin."
"To insist that he could not have sinned takes the incident out of line with the
primeval probation. By reducing the temptation to a demonstration of sinlessness the
nerve of connection is cut with believers also, For then it would be logically impossible
for New Testament writers to appeal to Jesus' temptation as a ground of confidence for
the believer's overcoming of temptation by his sympathetic help (Heb. 2:18; 4:14-16)."34
Frequently, we do not look at testing or temptation in a positive way. We adopt a
survival mode with respect to temptation and testing. We wonder how we can make it
through loss without "losing it" altogether and our approach may be negative. As we
look at the narrative of Jesus we see Him look to the higher and positive gain, thereby
securing and modeling victory for others. What would it be like if we faced testing and
temptation with the positive purpose in view, "How can I take this test in a positive
way?" "What new thing can I learn in and through the process of temptation?" Wherein
Israel had failed, Jesus is victorious and by virtue of His victory, completed at the cross,
He extends that victory to His own. He secures our well-being. His victory is the
necessary factor for the victory of others. The casting out of demons was part of Jesus'
ransacking of the goods of the Strong Man, based in part upon the victory of His battle in
the wilderness, completed in the crucifixion. It is an anticipation of the fruit of Jesus'
final and conclusive work on the cross. Jesus sees His entire ministry as "trials/testings"
(peirasmoiv Lk. 22:28) and thus, He prepares His disciples for various
"temptations" and "testings" (Mk. 14:38; Lk. 22:40, 46). Discipleship means to follow
the example of Jesus in sharing His various trials and temptations. His disciples are to
grapple with the power of the Strong Man with the sure confidence of Jesus' triumphant
victory over the Strong Man.
Further, the same temptations that Jesus experiences in the wilderness, also
confronted Him during His ministry from people, e.g., Show us a sign. His disciples,
then and now, similarly wrestle with similar challenges. We also struggle with issues of
daily dependence and trust, compromise, and worship as we try to live out our lives in the
context of the concerns, complexities, and ambiguities in the twenty-first century.

34Harrison, pp. 81-82.

rmatt4.doc
1/28/2009
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 1

Introduction to MATTHEW
AUTHOR: Anonymous (early church tradition--Matthew)
DATE: About A.D. 75

THEME: Jesus is the fulfillment of OT scriptures and the Church is the true Israel,
called to live according to a righteousness, higher than ancient Israel knew.

KEY WORDS: Fulfill, the Kingdom of Heaven, Son of Man, Son of God, Church,

AUTHOR. Based upon a saying of Papias, an early church father, the early church
believed that Matthew the disciple (9:9) wrote the first gospel. What later tradition may
suggest to us is that the apostle Matthew stands behind the gospel at some stage of its
composition. Scholarship has established that Matthew used Mark, a collection of Jesus'
words and deeds that is common to both Matthew and Luke, and other material that is
unique to the writer. Matthew's Gospel incorporates almost the whole of Mark's Gospel,
and indicates that Matthew was written later than Mark. Matthew has enjoyed high
popularity in church history, being known at times as "the ecclesiastical gospel."

DATE. The ongoing tension between Jew and Gentile that is reflected within the
gospel, suggests a period when Judaism and early Christianity still overlapped. That is to
say, the Judaism that is found in Matthew is that of the post-Jewish war period, when
Jerusalem fell and the Temple was destroyed (A.D. 70). Polemical statements in
Matthew seem to say to the Jews, "Do you want to know why Jerusalem fell and the
Temple was destroyed? Explanation can be found in your rejection of Jesus the Messiah,
the Son of God." . . . . . . . . .

BACKGROUND. While the prologue (Matt. 1-2) points particularly to the

significance of Jesus for Israel, the "epilogue" (ch. 28) reveals that He is Savior (1:21)
for the world (28:19--"all nations"). Jesus stands within Israel's history and hope as
Messiah, the very presence of God--Emmanuel. The main body of Matthew's gospel
supports the prologue with its high view of Jesus. Jesus is the one to whom all authority
has been given (see 7:29; 9:8; 28:18). The gospel/good news focuses primarily on Israel
(10:5,6), but there are significant "break-throughs" into a Gentile audience (8:5-13;
15:21-28), a harbinger of the "Great Commission" (28:18-20). In essence, Jesus, the
Fulfiller of OT hope and Teacher of renown, as well as Emmanuel, Messiah, and Judge-
for Israel, becomes also Lord of the Church (16:18; 18:17; 28:18-20).
Matthew presents Jesus, not only as Messiah, but as Teacher who gives the true
interpretation of the old Law (5:17-20), and, above all, a new law. Matthew is the only
gospel to use the word, "church" (16:18, 19; 18:15-20), including at the end (28:18-20)
the charge of the Risen Christ to the Church, and the promise of Christ's living presence.
Matthew, therefore, combines a broad sweep of salvation history, with a polemic against
Israel, instruction of the new people of God. In essence, Matthew is the gospel/good
news of the New Israel, concerned with equipping its members with a higher
righteousness than that of Israel, and a missionary burden for the whole of humanity.

CONTENTS. The clear structure of Matthew is built on five blocks of material, each
ending with a similar formulaic phrase, "And when Jesus finished these sayings..." (7:28;
11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1). Each of the five sections contains a combination of narrative
and teaching material. This five-fold structure, common in Judaism, may reveal
Matthew's purpose of showing Jesus as the fulfillment of the Law, "Do not think that I
came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill." (5:17).
 Story, p. 2

Matthew looks to the prophetic significance of Jesus. For example, the suffering.
In the Prologue (1:1-2:23), Matthew shows that Jesus is the Messiah (1:16) by
linking Him with promises made to Abraham and David. The birth of Jesus highlights
the fulfillment theme, portrays Jesus' royalty, and underscores the significance of Jesus
for the Gentiles.
Book I (3:1-7:29) narrates the beginning of Jesus's Galilean ministry with the
ministry of John the Baptist (3:1-12), the Baptism of Jesus (3:13-17), and His Temptation
(4:1-11). The first Galilean proclamation (4:12-17), followed by the call of the first
disciples (4:18-22), concludes with a summary of His journey in Galilee (4:23-25). The
narrative is then followed by the Sermon on the Mount (5-7), which unfolds teaching on
the Kingdom of God, the good news of God's reign. This is what life in God's reign is
like.
Book II (8:1-11:1) continues the account of Jesus' Galilean ministry. The main
narrative (8:1-9:34) includes ten miracle stories and two other narratives, i.e., the call of
Matthew (9:9-13) and the issue of fasting (9:14-17). Book II concludes with an extended
discourse on the disciples' mission that is fraught with hardship and danger (9:35-10:42)
to which they are to respond with courage and self-renunciation.
Book III (11:2-13:52) builds upon Jesus' Galilean ministry including several
controversy-stories. Seven parables (ch. 13) of the Kingdom of Heaven (God) explain
both the nature of God's reign/rule and the appropriate response to it.
Book IV (13:54-19:1) points the readers to the gathering of the new community,
the Church. The narrative section (13:54-17:27) unfolds successive episodes which occur
prior to Jesus' final journey to Jerusalem, including a major discourse on life in the
Church (18:1-35).
Book V (19:2-26:1) narrates the final journey of Jesus to Judea and Jerusalem and
reveals the climactic conflict of Jesus with Judaism. Jesus' entry into Jerusalem is
dramatic and dynamic (21:10) and heightens the meaning of His Messianic mission. His
controversy-speeches with the religious hierarchy (21:12-23:39) are followed by
discourses with His own disciples on the end of the present age and the coming of the
Son of Man (24-25).
The Passion Narrative (26:1-27:66) unfolds conspiracy by the Jewish authorities
(26:1-5), the anointing of Jesus for His burial (26:6-13), Judas' betrayal (26:14-16),
Passover preparations (16:17-19), the Lord's Supper (26:26-29), the Gethsemane struggle
(26:36-46), the arrest and trial before the Sanhedrin and Pilate (26:47-27:26), and the
crucifixion and death of Jesus (27:27-56).
The Resurrection Narrative (28:1-20) includes the witness of the empty tomb, and
His appearance to the women (28:1-10), the bribing of the guards (28:11-15), and the
missionary mandate given to the disciples in Galilee (28:16-20). The Church is a
missionary Church, charged to carry the message of the cross and resurrection, to all
nations, and guaranteed the personal presence of the Risen Jesus as she bears her witness.

CONTEMPORARY AND PERSONAL APPLICATION. Matthew's Gospel, the

"ecclesiastical gospel", is clearly directed to the Church and its mission in the world.
Distinctive features call for comment:
1. The Church, with Matthew, must see the grandeur and majesty of Jesus, who
comes into the world in fulfillment of a long and unbroken history of the people of God
down through the centuries. Jesus does not represent a Divine "Plan B" because "Plan A"
has failed. Quite the contrary, the many fulfillment passages lead us to the clear
understanding that Jesus' life and ministry were all part of the single plan of God through
the history of Israel. The Jesus we find in Matthew is as gentle as He is majestic,
compassionate yet demanding, revered by Jew and Gentile alike. Throughout the gospel,
we are reminded that Jesus is Emmanuel--God with us.
2. Jesus' teachings in Matthew's Gospel, on true piety, inner righteousness,
 Story, p. 3

forgiveness, etc. call for obedience from the individual and from the Church. Matthew's
Gospel continues to expose sham and hypocrisy in personal and corporate life.
3. The Church receives a clarion call to mission, the proclamation to all peoples,
of the Lordship of the Risen Christ. To be sure, church discipline is a basic need, but the
locus of concern is the world and its need for the One who will save His people from
their sins. The mission of the twelve (ch. 10) becomes the mission of the Church (28:16-
20).
4. Christian disciples must learn to live within the tension of two ages, the
present age of fulfillment in the person of Jesus (in His words and works), and the age to
come, i.e., the consummation of all things. The interim period summons Christians to be
humble, patient, genuine, faithful, watchful, and responsible--assured of the risen Jesus'
presence as they are expectant of His return when faith will give way to sight.

CHRISTOLOGY IN MATTHEW. The portrayal Matthew gives of Jesus is quite

diverse:
1. Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT Scripture. Matthew's opening
verse, "The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of
Abraham" (1:1) immediately connects Jesus with two great OT covenants--the
Abrahamic and Davidic. The genealogy (1:2-16) not only echoes OT formulae of
enrollment, but points to the pattern of promise-fulfillment. Likewise, the play on words
"Jesus/Joshua" in 1:21, underscores the fulfillment of OT hope. The details surrounding
His birth in chs 1-2 similarly emphasize the realization of OT expectation. . . .
Matthew quotes from the OT some 41 times. His introductory formula, "that it might be
fulfilled", means that Jesus is the fulfillment of OT prophecy. What stands out as unique
is that 37 of the 41 quotes are introduced with the formula, "that it might be fulfilled".
While Mark contains the idea of a hidden/secret Messiah, Matthew, more often in an
open and transparent manner affirms that Jesus is the Messiah of the OT. . . If one
misses His significance, it is due to willfull unbelief.

2. Jesus is the Son of Man. Jesus alone uses the title to refer to Himself. The
term is ambiguous, in that it builds upon the language of the OT, and can mean "man"
(Ps. 8:4) or an apocalyptic person , a pre-existent heavenly being who brings with Him
the Kingdom of God (Dan. 7:13, 14). It is probable that Jesus intended this ambiguity.
There are a number of passages in Matthew in which the term refers to an earthly
suffering Son of Man (9:6; 8:20; 12:8) who is destined to suffer ( 17:12,22; 20:28;
26:24 etc.). Other passages are used to refer to an apocalyptic Son of Man, who comes in
glory (16:27; 24:30; 26:64; 24:44; 13:41; 19:28 etc.). With this self-designation, Jesus
was able to claim in a somewhat veiled way, a supernatural character and origin (Dan.
7:13-14), and thus avoid the title, "Messiah", often misunderstood. Together with the
Suffering Servant motif, "Son of Man" enabled Jesus to interpret both His redemptive
mission and coming in glory.
3. Jesus is the Son of God, a title used by Matthew, to underscore Jesus' divine
Sonship in a clear and transparent manner. Witness the infancy narratives of the virgin
birth, of Emmanuel=God with us (1:23), and of the fulfilled prophecy, "Out of Egypt I
called My Son." (2:15; Hos.11:1). Jesus' baptism, in Matthew reveals Jesus' sinless
character (3:13-15), and the divine pleasure in Him (3:17). Only in Matthew, is Peter's
confession, a "full-blown", "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God." (16:16). A
passage common to Matthew and Luke (see Luke 10:21, 22) underscores the direct and
unmediated relationship that Jesus the Son has with His Father, "All things have been
delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does
anyone know the Father except the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal Him."
(11:27). In its context, the words reveal the instinctive and unaffected way that Jesus
viewed His relationship to the Father. Jesus knows the Father in the same way the Father
 Story, p. 4

knows the Son--directly, intuitively, and intimately.

4. Jesus is Lord and Teacher of the Church. In 5:1, Matthew presents Jesus as a
second Moses, who ascends the mountain to deliver His teaching (see Moses on Sinai).
He is the Teacher of the new community, His Church, concerning the new ethic of the
Kingdom of Heaven. Support for Jesus' concern is found the term, "the Church"
(16:18ff.; 18:15-20). Quite possibly, the gospel of Matthew may have served as a
teaching manual for the early church, including the amazing world-oriented Great
Commission (28:18-20), with its guarantee of Jesus' living presence.
. Matthew is the gospel of the Messiah, and the new people of God, the Church, that
fulfilled the old covenant nation of Israel.
. . . .

THE HOLY SPIRIT IN MATTHEW'S GOSPEL. The Holy Spirit is initially referred
to as early as 1:18,20. The text relates how Mary, "was found with child of the Holy
Spirit"--a divine conception of unique proportion. In 3:11, the baptism of the Holy Spirit
is set in contrast to John's baptism "with water." John's baptism is merely preparatory, for
Jesus is immeasurably greater than he. Just as John's candidates for baptism were
immersed in water, so Jesus' candidates will experience immersion in the Holy Spirit and
fire. In the context, the Holy Spirit connotes blessing for the repentant, while fire implies
judgment on the unrepentant.
Before Jesus begins His public ministry, He receives the Spirit of God as well as
the divine confirmation from the heavenly voice: "He saw the Spirit of God descending
like a dove and alighting upon Him. And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying,
'This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.'" (3:16-17). It is this very Spirit
that leads Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil (4:1), as further preparation
for His messianic vocation.
While the Spirit is not mentioned in 4:23-25, we should observe an implicit cause-
effect relationship between Jesus' reception of the Spirit (3:16), "led up by the Spirit"
(4:1), the choice of the first disciples (4:17-22), and the beginning of the Galilean
ministry, with preaching, healing, and exorcism (4:23-25). Jesus' healing ministry finds
support later in 8:14-17, in which Matthew interprets the language of the Suffering
Servant (Isa. 53:4) to refer to Jesus' pre-Calvary ministry of healing and compassion. An
explicit link between the Spirit-anointed Suffering Servant and Jesus' healing ministry is
found in 12:15-21, which builds upon Isa. 42:1-4. Healing of the multitudes occurs in
12:15 by the Servant who is anointed with the Spirit. The primary reason for the quote
from Isa. 42 lies in the enjoinder to silence, "And he warned them not to make Him
known, that it might be fulfilled..." (12:16-17). The healing work of the Servant is quiet,
unassuming, concerned with the needy, broken, and unfortunate, who need restoration
and justice.
In 7:21-23 we find a warning directed against false charismatics, those in the
Church who prophesy, cast out demons, and do wonders, but do not do the will of the
Father. Presumably the same Holy Spirit that inspires charismatic activities, must also
empower the people of the Church to do the will of God (7:21). In 12:28, the work of the
Spirit of God is connected to Jesus' exorcisms and the present reality of the Kingdom of
God: "But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, surely the kingdom of God has come
upon you." It is not the fact of exorcism per se that marks Jesus off from His opponents,
for the Pharisees' sons (disciples) also practice exorcism (12:27). It is rather that the
Spirit is with the Messiah who effects the new event, "the kingdom of God has come
upon you." (v. 28).
The following paragraph concerning the unpardonable sin, introduces the contrast
between two types of sins and their corresponding results:
a word against the Son of Man..................it will be forgiven him
but
 Story, p. 5

whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit...it will not be forgiven him..(12:32)
The context makes it clear that the immediate referent is vss. 22-30, where the Pharisees
claim that Jesus casts out demons by Beelzebul, the ruler of demons (v. 24).
The last explicit reference to the Holy Spirit is found in the Great Commission
(28:16-20). The disciples, after going, are commanded to make disciples of all nations,
"baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (v. 19).
The expression "baptizing them in" means "baptizing them unto/with reference to" the
name (sg.) of the triune God. Along with their commission to make disciples, baptize,
and teach, Jesus' disciples are assured His ongoing presence with them.

OUTLINE OF MATTHEW

Prologue: Genealogy and Infancy Narratives 1:1-2:23

A. The genealogy of Jesus 1:1-17
B. Jesus' birth 1:18-25
C. Worship of the Magi 2:1-12
D. Flight into Egypt, the slaughter of the infants 2:13-23
and the return to Israel (Nazareth).

Book I: Proclamation of the kingdom of Heaven 3:1-7:29

A. Narrative: Beginning of Jesus' ministry 3:1-4:25
B. Discourse: Sermon on the Mount 5:1-7:29

Book II: Jesus' ministry in Galilee 8:1-11:1

A. Narrative: Ten miracle stories 8:1-9:34
B. Discourse: Mission and martyrdom 9:35-11:1

Book III: Controversy stories and parables 11:2-13:52

A. Narrative: Controversy which escalates 11:2-12:50
B. Discourse: Parables of the kingdom 13:1-52
Book IV: Narrative, controversy, and discourse 13:53-18:35
A. Narrative: Various episodes preceding 13:53-17:27
Jesus' final journey to Jerusalem
B. Discourse: Teaching on the church 18:1-35

Book V: Jesus in Judea and Jerusalem 19:1-25:46

A. Narrative: Jesus' final journey and
the mounting conflict 19:1-23:39

B. Discourse: Jesus' eschatological teaching 24:1-25:46

The Passion Narrative 26:1-27:66

The Resurrection Narrative 28:1-20
 Story, p. 1

Miracles in the Gospels

Introduction
The earliest Christian proclamation of Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God also
included special reference to His miracles that were an integral part of Jesus' ministry. In
two of the sermons that we find recorded in the book of Acts, several terms are used to
refer to the miracles that attended the ministry of Jesus:
22 "Men of Israel, hear these words: 'Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by
God with mighty works and wonders and signs (dunavmesi kaiV
tevrasi kaiV shmeivoi" which God did through him in your
midst, as you yourselves know'" (Acts 2:22).
38 "how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power
dunavmei ; how he went about doing good and healing
eujergetw'n kaiV ijwvmeno" all that were oppressed by the
devil, for God was with him" (Acts 10:38).
In both sermons, Peter states that God invested Jesus with an external and visible
demonstration of His power to impart well being to others. God was with Jesus in a
special way and invested Him with the power of the Spirit to heal and exorcise men,
women and children; indeed He brings back some individuals from the dead.
At the outset of Jesus' ministry, it is clear that the presence of the Kingdom of
God is expressed through the person, words and the works of Jesus. The Evangelists
narrate thirty-four miracles (not including parallels) and fifteen summary passages (not
including parallels), which refer to Jesus' miraculous activity.
Typically, the miracles have been divided into several categories:
q Healing the physically ill (the paralytic—Mk. 2:1-12 par; Peter's mother-in-
law (Mk. 1:29-31)
q Exorcising/healing the demon-possessed (the demoniac in Capernaum Mk.
1:21-28 par.; the Gadarene demoniac(s) Mk. 5:1-20)
q Bringing back to life an individual who has died (Jairus' daughter Mk. 5:21-43
par.; widow of Nain's son (Lk. 7:11-17), (Lazarus (Jn. 11)
q Nature miracles (miraculous feedings Mk. 6:30-44 par.; 8:1-9 par.; stilling of
the storm (Mk. 4:36-41).
A few of the summary passages link Jesus' proclamation, teaching and His miraculous
activity, notably through healing and exorcism. Matthew parallels three clauses in a
summary form, which narrate His activity:
23 "And he went about all Galilee,
teaching in their synagogues
and
preaching the gospel of the kingdom
and
healing every disease and every infirmity among the
people" (Matt. 4:23).
In this summary verse, Matthew signals the presence of the Kingdom, demonstrated
through Jesus' teaching, preaching the Gospel and healing. Jesus' reputation as a miracle-
worker is deeply embedded in the Gospel tradition, particularly in the first phase of His
ministry, before the corrective of His forthcoming Passion is signaled.

miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 2

Another similar summary is found in Matt. 9:35:

"And Jesus went about all the cities and villages,
teaching in their synagogues
and
preaching the gospel of the kingdom,
and
healing every disease and every infirmity" (Matt. 9:35).
When Jesus is asked by John the Baptist's disciples as to whether He is the
Coming One or not, Jesus directs the messengers to report to their leader what they hear
and see (Matt. 11:2-6 = Luke 7:18-23).1 When Nicodemus comes to Jesus by night, he
states that these signs certainly entitle Jesus to be treated as a respected Rabbi sent from
God and authorized by the presence of God in His activity.2 Mark places Jesus in the
synagogue in Capernaum at the outset of His ministry. And the people express
astonishment at his teaching with authority (1:22), and then, His ability to exorcise a
demon-possessed man (1:27).
His teaching with authority and miraculous activity reveal the Divine response to
human need in a beneficial way. The texts frequently affirm that God is the initiator or
author of such miracles (Acts 2:22; Mk. 6:2, 5, 14); God is at work through Jesus or His
hands in a special way. The miracles serve as an organic and natural expression of the
coming of the Kingdom of God. Jesus also speaks of Himself as a charismatic miracle
worker. In the passage following the reply to John the Baptist, Jesus describes His own
ministry in terms of mighty works:
21 "Woe to you, Chora'zin! woe to you, Beth-sa'ida! for if the
mighty works done in you had been done. . .
23 And you, Caper'na-um. . .For if the mighty works done in you had been done. . . "
(Matt. 11:21, 23).
The judgment that is pronounced on these cities is determined only by their rejection of
the mighty works, which were done in their midst.
Presuppositions and Definitions. When we begin to probe into the miracles we
immediately must grapple with a certain set of presuppositions and principles that lie at
the basis of our thinking. And it is clear that a definition is only as good as its
presuppositions. If we begin with the presupposition that miracles are impossible, then
we already exclude the possibility of a miracle for the sake of definition. Or, more
pointedly, if we approach a definition of a miracle with the presupposition of universal
and natural laws, then our definition of a miracle will reflect that presupposition. Various
positions have been argued:
· A miracle is a violation of natural law. The approach by Spinoza is
naturalistic with an all-inclusive mechanistic concept of the world. Although
Spinoza denied the possibility of miracles, since he believed that natural laws
are inexorable, he nonetheless held the view that the universe itself with all of
its complexity is a miracle. David Hume also picked up on this
presupposition, and further argued that faith cannot be based on reason or
1 Luke draws the link more closely than Matthew in terms of the observable miraculous activity:
Lk. 7:21 In that hour he cured many of diseases and plagues and evil spirits, and on many that
were blind he bestowed sight.
2 Jn. 3:2 This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, "Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come

from God; for no one can do these signs that you do, unless God is with him."
miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 3

rational investigation of historical evidence. Historical research can only lead

us to statistical probability. Hume argued for the bankruptcy of theology,
which attempts to equate faith with historical data and scientific facts. And
yet, we must ask, "What is actually not possible?" "What is medically, "not
possible?" People around the world, in different cultures, then and now, look
at the world in much different ways; our western culture is saturated with a
rationalistic approach. For example, Dr. Dow Robinson, from Wycliffe Bible
translators talked to me about some of the differences between the Aztec
Indians and Americans. Let us suppose that an overweight Aztec Indian sat
on a rather flimsy chair and the chair broke and dumped the Indian on the
floor. The Indian would conclude that the spirit forces were angry with him;
we would conclude a cause-effect relationship between the weight of the
Indian, the flimsy nature of the chair and the minor accident. We need to be
aware of the fact that there is no such thing as a complete and generally
accepted philosophical understanding of reality. We know so much but we
know so little.
· A miracle is a phenomenon produced by the operation of a natural law that
we do not know. In this view, a miracle is a natural event, which to our
viewpoint is a supernatural event—only because we are ignorant of its natural
cause. There is an assumption here that when science fully masters a
particular area of knowledge, the aura of mystery will be taken away from a
particular event. An analogy might be drawn with the exploration of the atom
and the subsequent release of energy, in a submarine or nuclear bomb. The
discovery is amazing that some of the electrical particles of atoms do not
follow a principle of order or regularity. We see a different "law" at work in
the strange operation of the atom, which is part of the whole of the world as
we know it. However, it is far different than anything we have yet seen or
advocated as a “law.” The theological rationalism of the 18th and 19th century
maintained that the miracles of the Gospels were capable of rational
explanation. For example, the rationalist argued that when the disciples saw
Jesus walking on the water, he was actually walking on the shore, but the
disciples were in a fog and could not see clearly; thus, the fog created the
optical illusion of a ghost. Correspondingly, people who had been thought to
be dead had actually fallen into a swoon.3
· A miracle is to be believed because it is absurd. . .and impossible. The early
Church Father Tertullian, in this epigram thought of the birth, death, and
resurrection of God’s Son Jesus, which are incomprehensible to human
reason. He assumes the beginning point of revelation, and he recognizes that
there are elements of truth, which lie beyond reason and rational thought or
explanation.
· Since nature is the will of God, then a miracle is also an expression of the will
of God. Augustine4 argued against the view that a miracle is contrary to
nature. He said that nature is not merely the observed order of things, but
whatever God does in the universe. If we assume the existence of God as the
creator and ruler of the world, then there should be no problem connected with
3 Albert Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus (1962), pp. 52ff.
4 The City of God XXI.8.
miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 4

miracles since they are the expression of His will. He questioned the rigid and
unchanging character of the order and laws of nature. In many ways,
Augustine raised questions and issues which anticipate many of the modern
approaches. Thomas Aquinas, who based his discussion of miracles on
Augustine, departed from Augustine with a more rigid approach. He spoke of
a miracle occurring outside the order of nature.5
· A miracle is part of the general providence of God. A distinction is
sometimes drawn between creation and providence. The doctrine of creation
affirms the miraculous creative activity of God at some point in the past. The
doctrine of providence suggests the continuous activity of God in maintaining
His creative purposes:
28 "for 'In him we live and move and have our being'; as even some of
your poets have said, `For we are indeed his offspring'" (Acts 17:28).
· A miracle is viewed against the background of the “Essential Miracles.”
Renev Descartes affirmed three essential miracles: creation, freedom of the
will,6 and the incarnation. Descartes argued that these three miracles are
essential to Christian faith. Once they are accepted, we are more able to look
at the specific miracle stories that we find in the Bible.
It appears that the basic question is bound up in our understanding of God. If we
believe in God, His creation and the nature of God's loving involvement without total
control of the world, most of the inherent difficulty in miracles ceases. One who believes
in the reality of God will have no intrinsic problem with the possibility of miracles.
Those who hold to a mechanistic order of nature and history with clear cause-effect
processes and a closed-system, generally have great difficulty with the "miracles."
The Bible and the “laws of nature. The writers of the Bible do not presuppose
any sort of distinction between "natural laws" and miracles. The world or universe is not
some machine, which has been set in motion once and for all by its inventor. The world
exists and lives only by the Divine will, and God remains its master and reveals Himself
on an ongoing basis. We read of creation and nature that participate and celebrate in the
drama of redemption (Rom. 8:22). In the words of G. K. Chesterton, "The sun shines
every day because God says, ‘Get up and do it again!'"
A working definition. The word "miracle" (Latin miraculum) literally means a
marvelous event that causes wonder. So as to clarify our discussion, we suggest the
following elements that constitute a "miracle":
· An extraordinary event of supernatural power that is inexplicable in terms of
ordinary natural forces, which transcends ordinary patterns. We are not
suggesting a closed system of "natural law" but a pattern or usual order of the
external world, as we know it.
· The beholders or writers of the extraordinary event attribute it to the power of
5 Summa Theologica, I.cs.4:I.cxiv.4; II.ii.178.1-2.
6 “Not the least of miracles is the freedom of man’s will. This is illustrated in human use of the materials
and forces of nature. Man’s intelligence enables him to analyze both his own needs and desires and the
things of nature. Then he is able to create things for his own use which do not exist in nature. A man who
cannot cross the seas by his own natural strength builds a ship; one who cannot fly builds an airplane; and
so man constructs automobiles, radios, and all the instruments and machines with which we are familiar.
These things are examples of the freedom of man’s will, by means of which he goes outside the order of
nature to make things for his use and enjoyment.” S.V. McCasland, "Miracle", Interpreter's Dictionary of
the Bible, vol. 3, (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), p. 397.
miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 5

God, i.e., the Holy Spirit. Usually this power works in conjunction with the
will (but not always) of Jesus.
· The extraordinary event serves as a sign with implications far wider than the
event itself. The recipients are directed towards the meaning of the event.
Different miracles in the ministry of Jesus emphasize various aspects, dependent on the
perspective of Jesus or the evangelists, e.g., the FG emphasizes the sign-character of
these wonderful events. He impels his readers to look beyond the event to its meaning or
interpretation.

The Terms and their Use

Introduction. In Luke's companion volume, Acts, Peter uses three categories to
describe the wonderful and powerful works of the Lord Jesus:
22 "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by
God with mighty works (dunavmesi) and wonders (tevrasi) and signs
(shmeivoi") which God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves
know" (Acts 2:22). The same terms are used in the gospels either by Jesus or his
audience to refer to his powerful works.
Idiomatic use of "signs and wonders" (<ytpwmw twta—shmei'a kaiV
tevrata in the LXX). While the Hebrew term, ta) means sign and the term,
tp@om denotes, wonder, there are a number of passages in which the terms occur
together as a unit with approximately the same meaning, e.g., Exod. 4:8. speaks of
wonders (ta)), which God has shown Moses how to perform, designated as signs
(tp@om) in 4:21.7 The combination designates portents and prodigies and God's
involvement within history or the wonders of God in natural phenomena. "They were
bound together so closely that they entered into a standard idiom."8
The same idiom is found in the Gospels and Acts in much the same sense, which
appears to be taken over from both the Hebrew and LXX texts:
24" For false Christs and false prophets will arise and show great signs and
wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect" (Matt. 24:24).
22 "False Christs and false prophets will arise and show signs and wonders, to
lead astray, if possible, the elect (Mk. 13:22).
48 "Jesus therefore said to him, 'Unless you see signs and wonders you will not
believe'" (Jn. 4:48).
Power (duvnami" ). The word, duvnami", means strength, might,
power and ability, and is used in the LXX as an equivalent of the term, host(s).9 It is the
very power of God that shaped human history, experienced in a fundamental way through
Israel's nodal experience of the Exodus (Ex. 6:26; 7:4; Deut. 3:24). In the NT, it comes
7 Exod. 4:8 "If they will not believe you," God said, "or heed the first sign (ta)h)*, they may believe the
latter sign. (ta)h*)
Exod. 4:21 And the LORD said to Moses, "When you go back to Egypt, see that you do before Pharaoh all
the miracles (<yt!p=M)h) which I have put in your power; but I will harden his heart, so that he will not let
the people go.
8 Used nine times in Deuteronomy (4:34; 6:22; 7:19; 13:1; 26:8; 28:46; 29:3; 34:11; see also Exod. 7:3;

Neh. 9:10; Psa. 105:27; Isa. 8:18; Jer. 32:20). McCasland, p. 394.
9 It is frequently associated with the title, Lord of Hosts, toab`x= = kuvrio" dunavmewn, Lord

of the Hosts (angelic).

miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 6

to mean an "act of power." While the term power (duvnami") covers a wide range of
meaning,10 there are three specific uses that directly bear upon the powerful works of
Jesus:
· Miracle. The term is used to signify might, mighty act, or miracle,
and is used in positive way even in a negative context to designate a
miracle.
21 "Woe to you, Chora'zin! woe to you, Bedside! for if the mighty
works done in you had been done in Tyre and Simon, they would
have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes."
23 "And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You shall
be brought down to Hades. For if the mighty works done in you
had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day"
(Matt. 11:21,23 = Lk. 10:13)
Woes and judgments are pronounced on the cities. The works of power
that they have witnessed should have moved them to repentance and faith.
Their fate will be worse than Sodom's fate, i.e., fire and brimstone.
2 "And on the Sabbath he began to teach in the synagogue; and
many who heard him were astonished, saying, 'Where did this man
get all this? What is the wisdom given to him? What mighty works are
wrought by his hands!'"
5 "And he could do no mighty work there, except that he laid his
hands upon a few sick people and healed them" (Mk 6:2, 5 = Matt.
13:54, 58)
10 duvnami" is also used as
A) A Circomlocution for the Divine Name:
Mk. 14:62 "And Jesus said, 'I am; and you will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of
Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven."
B) An Expression of Doxology:
Matt. 6:15And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and
the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. (KJV--although not in the earlier manuscripts). The text here
may reflect the Hebrew form, The Kingdom and the glory:
Psa. 145:11 They shall speak of the glory of thy kingdom, and tell of thy power,
C) As Heavenly Beings or Spiritual Powers:
Mark 13:25 = Matthew 24:29 = Luke 21:26
25and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken.
The apocalyptic scene is painted as a time of great affliction with accompanying signs in the upper world.
D) As Apocalyptic and Eschatological Power:
Mk. 9:1 And he said to them, "Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste
death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power."
Mk. 13:20 And then they will see the Son of man coming in clouds with great power and glory.
These texts speak of a final display of God's power at the end of time and are used as a contrast with the
earlier coming of the Son of Man in humiliation and suffering.
Lk. 10:19 Behold, I have given you authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and over all
the power of the enemy; and nothing shall hurt you.
The power of the enemy is a power temporarily allowed by God. In the context of their short-term
mission's project, the disciples are promised an authority over the power of the enemy.
Mk. 12:24 Jesus said to them, "Is not this why you are wrong, that you know neither the scriptures
nor the power of God?
The Sadducees, who deny the resurrection, err, in that they do not know the Scriptures or the power of God
to raise the dead and the power to transform them into an existence which is independent of marriage or
sexual expression, i.e., like the angels in heaven.
miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 7

In this short account of Jesus' preaching, we find the implication that his
hometown's recognition of Him as a man from Nazareth, should actually
limit the extent of His miraculous activity. In an ironic sense, their
limitation of Jesus in fact becomes Jesus' limitation of his miraculous
activity.
39 "But Jesus said, 'Do not forbid him; for no one who does
a mighty work in my name will be able soon after to speak evil of me'"
(Mk. 9:39)
The disciples here wish to limit miraculous activity to their own
company—which Jesus expressly forbids.
· Miraculous Power. The Evangelists narrate a few instances in
which there is a power that appears to be resident within Jesus almost like
an electrical charge or fluid that seems to operate independently of Jesus.
There are a number of instances in which a healing is worked through
Jesus conveyed by physical contact.11
30 "And Jesus, perceiving in himself that power had gone forth
from him, immediately turned about in the crowd, and said, 'Who
touched my garments?'" (Mk 5:30 = Lk. 8:46).
What stands out in the text is the fact that this power that is resident within
Jesus, in this instance appears to operate independently of his will or
knowledge. This woman believes that the hemorrhage of blood will cease
if she can just touch the clothes of Jesus. "Her belief is justified by the
event, and Jesus is able to feel, without having seen the woman, that
power (duvnami") has drained away from him into her sick body."12
Lk. 9:1 "And he called the twelve together and gave them power
and authority over all demons and to cure diseases" (Lk. 9:1).
The power here can be transferred to the disciples in their own missionary
activity.
17 "On one of those days, as he was teaching, there were
Pharisees and teachers of the law sitting by, who had come from every
village of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem; and the power of the
Lord was with him to heal" (Lk. 5:17).
· As the Power of the Spirit. There are some texts, which state that
the power of Jesus to heal and exorcise is not simply the general power of
God but the power of the Holy Spirit. Luke especially identifies the power
for ministry with the power of the Holy Spirit and the antecedent baptism
of Jesus. Luke 3 and 4 are tied together by the person and work of the
Holy Spirit who comes upon Jesus to effect the work of the Servant
Messiah:
"John answered them all, 'I baptize you with water; but he who is
mightier than I is coming, the thong of whose sandals I am not
worthy to untie; he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with
fire' (Lk. 3:16).
"and the Holy Spirit descended upon him in bodily form, as a dove,
11e.g., Mk. 1:40-45 with the leper.
12Barrett, p. 75. See also Mk. 6:14 King Herod heard of it; for Jesus' name had become known. Some said,
"John the baptizer has been raised from the dead; that is why these powers are at work in him."
miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 8

and a voice came from heaven, 'Thou art my beloved Son; with
thee I am well pleased'" (Lk. 3:22)
"And Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan, and
was led by the Spirit" (Lk. 4:1).
14 "And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into
Galilee, and a report concerning him went out through all the
surrounding country" (Lk. 4:14).
"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to
preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release
to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty
those who are oppressed" (Lk. 4:18).
The powerful activity of the Spirit is revealed in the prophetic and miracle-working
ministry of Jesus and is ascribed to the Spirit of God, who works both independently and
dependently on Jesus.
Wonder (tevra" ). The word tevra", wonder, designates a marvel that
makes its appeal to the senses. The focus of the word lies in the awed response of an
onlooker to a miraculous event. In the OT (tp@om = tevrata), the term denoted
fright and horror at a "powerful event which contradicts the ordered unity of nature."13 In
the OT, it was an unusual event that pointed back to God. In the NT, the noun tevra"
occurs 16 times (9 in Acts), and is found in the plural form in combination with
shmei'on, sign.
Sign (shmei'on ). The term, shmei'on, sign is that which signifies; it
points beyond to the spiritual truth of which the miracle is the outward sign. It serves as
an "acted parable, whose value lay in its correspondence with the spiritual lesson it was
intended to convey."14 The symbolic aspect of a miracle, which is secondary in the
Synoptic Gospels becomes primary in the Fourth Gospel. The physical miracles are
important in that they signify the related spiritual truth, e.g., Jn. 9 does not highlight the
healing of the blind man but the spiritual sight wherein one comes to trust in Jesus. Both
the noun sign (shmei'on), and the verb, to signify (shmaivnw) in the Fourth
Gospel, point beyond themselves, to the spiritual reality.15 Karl Barth said,
When the biblical miracle stories excite serious and relevant wonderment, they
intend to do this as signals of something fundamentally new, not as a violation
of the natural order which is generally known and acknowledged. . .Though
these changes were isolated and temporary, they were nevertheless radically
helpful and saving. What took place were promises and intimations,
anticipations of a redeemed nature, of a state of freedom, of a kind of life in
which there will be no more sorrow, tears, and crying, and where death as the
last enemy will be no more.16
One of the key indictments in the FG is that the multitude is satisfied with the
signs, which are interpreted by them as marvelous events; they evoke a superficial
13 O. Hofius, "Miracle", The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, vol. 2, (Zondervan
Publishing House, 1971), p. 633.
14 Everett Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1968),

p. 112.
15 See Jn. 2:1,18,23; 3:2; 4:54; 6:2,14,26,30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18,37:20:30 for the noun, sign,

and 12:33; 18:32:21:19 for the verb, to signify.

16 O. Hofius, p. 632.

miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 9

response; however, these signs fail to reach their intended goal (Jn. 6:26). There
are occasions where the Jews demand a "sign" from Jesus to prove His origin in a
conclusive way (Mk. 8:11-13 par.; Matt. 12:38 par.; Lk. 23:28).17 Jesus rejects
the use of a miracle for display; to "produce" miracles, for the fascination of the
people would contradict the essence of His mission to bring salvation and
wholeness to people. The people fail to comprehend their meaning and are
content to be astonished and fascinated.
Work (ejvrgon ). The term, ejrgovn, work or plural form, ejvrga,
works is also used with the specialized sense of a miracle. When John the Baptist, in
prison, sends messengers to Jesus, he heard of the works of Jesus, which occasions the
question as to whether Jesus is the Coming One:
2 " Now when John heard in prison about the works (taV ejvrga) of the
Christ, he sent word by his disciples" (Matt. 11:2).
The term work(s) is similarly found with frequency in the FG,18 and we also find the
idiom, signs and wonders:
48 "Jesus therefore said to him, 'Unless you see signs and wonders you will
not believe'" (Jn. 4:48).
Authority (ejxousiva ). Since the term, power (duvnami") designates
the power of God in action, the term "authority" conveys the underlying right to exercise
such power. “In comparison with this kinetic energy, as it were, ejxousiva
corresponds to potential energy; it is the divine authority which may at any moment
become manifest as power, duvnami", through the impulse of God’s will.”19 The
term is variously used with respect to the gospel miracles:
· As an expression equivalent to duvnami". Luke appears to use the
term authority, as a synonym for power:
36 "And they were all amazed and said to one another, "What
is this word? 'For with authority and power he commands the
unclean spirits, and they come out'" (Lk. 4:36).20
1 "And he called the twelve together and gave them power and
authority over all demons and to cure diseases" (Lk. 9:1).
19 "Behold, I have given you authority to tread upon
serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy; and
nothing shall hurt you" (Lk. 10:19).
The parallelism of the text makes it clear that the power, which is
transferred to the disciples, is regarded as authority.
· As an authority antecedent to the exercise of power.
15 " and have authority to cast out demons" (Mk. 3:15).
7 "And he called to him the twelve, and began to send them out
two by two, and gave them authority over the unclean spirits" (Mk.
6:7).
The Markan texts speak of an authority given to the disciples by Jesus for
their ministry of healing and exorcism. Thus, Jesus bestows upon them an
17 This is probably what Paul means when he says that the Jews seek "signs" (I Cor. 1:22).
18 Jn. 5:20, 36; 7:3; 10:38; 14:11,12;15:24.
19 Barrett, p. 78.
20 Compare with Mk. 1:27 And they were all amazed, so that they questioned among themselves, saying,

"What is this? A new teaching! With authority he commands even the unclean spirits, and they obey him."
miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 10

authority that they may exercise power.

8 "For I am a man set under authority, with soldiers under me:
and I say to one, 'Go,' and he goes; and to another, 'Come,' and he comes;
and to my slave, 'Do this,' and he does it" (Lk. 7:8)
The ground for the centurion’s confidence is that he himself is a man
under authority. He is a man who is both a subordinate and superior. He
directs his attention to those who are subordinate to him; they obey his
orders instantly without question. "Jesus, to whom he appeals, is on the
contrary in no subordinate position; his absolute authority will therefore be
all the more certain of an immediate response in the healing of the sick
man."21
The argument clearly moves from the minor to the major. “Jesus may be
expected to work a miracle because he is in a position to command the
events of nature."22
· As divine authority.
"But that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to
forgive sins' – he said to the paralytic – 11 'I say to you, rise, take up
your pallet and go home'" (Mk. 2:10 = Matt. 9:6 = Lk. 5:24).
The paragraph as a whole underscores the authority of Jesus to forgive
sins, which is stated four times:
5 "My son, your sins are forgiven" (Mk. 2:5).
7 ". . .Who can forgive sins but God alone?" (v. 7).
9 Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven'
(v. 9).
10 " But that you may know that the Son of man has authority on
earth to forgive sins" – he said to the paralytic" (v. 10).
The authority of Jesus to forgive sins is Divine, and is substantiated by the
healing of the paralytic. The prerogative of forgiving sins remains the
exclusive right of God; the Scribes are right in their limitation of
forgiveness, "Who can forgive sins, but God alone?" In Matt. 9:8, the
response of the crowd to the miracle is expressed:
8 "When the crowds saw it, they were afraid, and they
glorified God, who had given such authority to men" (Matt. 9:8).
The crowd refers to the miracle and to the miraculous power of Jesus
when they glorify God who had given such authority to men.

The Purpose of Miracles

Miracles are an intrinsic vehicle of revelation. A traditional view of miracles is
apologetic in that the miracles are viewed as external confirmations of one's claims, in
this case, confirmation of the Gospel message, i.e., proving the Gospel by an appeal to
miracles. But there are some inherent problems with this position. If we follow the logic
of the apologetic line of approach it does not really matter what is done as long as there is
a miracle: "a man can show he has more than natural power just as effectively by making
a tree walk as he can by making a cripple walk."23 In the apologetic view, miracles are
21 Barrett, p. 79.
22 Barrett, p. 79.
23 David M. Stanley, Raymond Brown, "Aspects of New Testament Thought", Jerome Biblical

miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 11

regarded similar to a trumpet to attract notice, credentials, testimonials and

self-authentication.
However, when we look at the gospel narratives, we encounter a different sort of
conclusion. We find a picture of Jesus, who flees from fame and popularity and who
avoids the superficial and fickle response of the masses. Again and again He follows up
His healings or exorcisms with the silence charge, "See to it that you tell no one . . ."24
That is the utter opposite of a "Madison Avenue" broadcast of one's claims. The whole
idea of appealing to people on the basis of the miraculous and the dramatic seems so
foreign to the motives and methods of Jesus. We see Him refuse to compel faith by a
startling miracle like a pinnacle-jump off the Temple and He refuses the challenge of His
critics when they say, "Show us a sign. . ."25 during His ministry as well as His
crucifixion. Further, if Jesus had looked upon miracles as proofs of His divinity, or as
external proofs of His claims, then He surely would not have communicated that same
power to His disciples in the context of their mission. The Gospel writers affirm, in a
very matter-of- fact manner, that Jesus transmitted that same power to the disciples and
believed that they could exercise that power in the context of their short-term mission
trips. We hear a certain ambivalence of Jesus to the miracles and their ability to produce
genuine faith:
31 "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'" (Lk. 16:31).
The miracles are an essential part of God's revelation and they are vehicles of
revelation itself, and not merely proof or credentials of revelation.
The miracles signify the fulfillment of OT hope. There are times in the Gospels
where the miracles are used in a symbolic way to refer to the fulfillment of prophecies.
In the answer that is given to the Baptist's disciples, the listed miracles are used to refer to
the fulfilled Isaian prophecies of the days to come.26 Similarly, the healing of the deaf
and dumb man is regarded as the fulfillment of Isa. 35:5-6, "He has done all things well;
he has made the deaf to hear and the dumb to speak." The directionless people in
Ezekiel's day and the multiplication of the loaves (Mk. 6:34) is regarded as the fulfillment
of Ezekiel's promise that God would be like a shepherd who would pasture His flock.27
The miracles are signs of the presence of the Kingdom of God. The entire
ministry of Jesus through His Person, His words and His works, seems to center in upon
24 Matt. 8:4; Mk. 8:26; Luke 8:56.
25 Jesus clearly refuses to work His miracles as proof of His deity or Messiahship (Matt. 12:38-42; Luke
11:29-32).
26 Isa. 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me, because the LORD has anointed me to bring good
tidings to the afflicted; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and
the opening of the prison to those who are bound; 2 to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor, and the day of
vengeance of our God; to comfort all who mourn; 3 to grant to those who mourn in Zion -- to give them a
garland instead of ashes, the oil of gladness instead of mourning, the mantle of praise instead of a faint
spirit; that they may be called oaks of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he may be glorified.
Isa. 35:5 Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped; 6 then shall the
lame man leap like a hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing for joy. For waters shall break forth in the
wilderness, and streams in the desert;
Isa. 26:19 Thy dead shall live, their bodies shall rise. O dwellers in the dust, awake and sing for joy! For
thy dew is a dew of light, and on the land of the shades thou wilt let it fall. (RSV)
27Ezek. 34:11 "For thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I, I myself will search for my sheep, and will seek

them out. (RSV)

miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 12

the presence of God's reign, His rule and His kingdom. God is at work in Jesus in a
special way. Since humanity's first sin, Satan has exercised a certain dominion over
nature and humanity. And there is a certain way in which the miracles are weapons in the
struggle with Satan. This thought comes through most clearly in the exorcism narratives:
28 "But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of
God has come upon you" (Matt. 12:28).
Exorcism is not new within Judaism, nor is the Holy Spirit. What is new is the utterly
unique combination of the Spirit working in conjunction with the Messiah that signals the
present Kingdom of God breaking up Satan's stronghold.
In addition, as Jesus directly attacks the stronghold of Satan in His expulsion of
demons, the cure of sickness is also seen as another facet of Jesus' war against Satan:
16 "And ought not this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for
eighteen years, to be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath day?" (Lk. 13:16).
32 "And he said to them, 'Go and tell that fox, 'Behold, I cast out demons and
perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I finish my course'" (Lk.
13:32).
Sickness, possession and death, which are integral to Satan's realm, are spheres that Jesus
invades. Jesus binds the Strong Man, presumably because He is the Stronger One, and
thus is free to take vessels from the Strong Man's house, that is, people who are sick and
possessed.
In the Synoptic tradition, the miracles of Jesus, especially in summary form, link
Jesus' miraculous activity with His proclamation of the presence of the future Kingdom
of God. Likewise, the mission that is entrusted to the disciples is also linked to the
proclamation of the nearness of God's reign (Mk. 6:2, 30, 34-44). God's royal power is
already at work, anticipating the Kingdom yet to come.
The miracles demonstrate the authority of Jesus in the broader context of His
Person and words. There is a numinous (other-worldly) quality of Jesus that is variously
perceived by others including His own disciples. They recognize that there is something
"different" about Jesus, expressed even by the various acts of physical prostration before
Him. Needy people kneel before Him (Mk. 1:40; 5:22); demoniacs recognize His
authority and identity and convulse before His very presence (Mk. 1:24; 3:11; 5:7; 9:20);
and He summons people from their vocations and they follow, leaving everything behind
them. Even His opponents recognize that authority when they question its source, "By
what authority do you do these things?" (Mk. 11:28). As Dunn notes, "The aim of the
question was to expose Jesus' lack of authority; but the very fact that it was put to Him
demonstrates a recognition on the part of Jesus' opponents that his words and actions
embodied and expressed a claim to high authority—only it was an authority they could
not recognize, without rabbinic or priestly sanction."28
His teaching, likewise evokes a sense of awe and amazement (Mk. 1:22) and is
also linked with His exorcisms (Mk. 1:27).29 His authority is evident in His teaching in
that it is immediate, expressed through the contrast between the Rabbinic or prophetic
voices: "You have heard it said . . . But I say to you" (Matt. 5:21-48). Even His
hometown folk struggle with the "otherness" of Jesus, recognized through His teaching,
28Dunn, p. 77.
29Lk. 4:36 And they were all amazed and said to one another, “What is this word? For with authority and
power (ejn ejxousiva/ kaiV dunavmei) he commands the unclean spirits, and they
come out.”
miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 13

His wisdom and mighty works, "And on the Sabbath, he began to teach in the synagogue;
and many who heard him were astonished, saying, 'Where did this man get all this? What
is the wisdom given to him? What mighty works are wrought by his hands!'" (Mk. 6:2).
His authority is expressed through the forgiveness of sins, substantiated by healing
(Mk.2:1-12). His authority is expressed through effective power: blind receive sight,
lame walk, lepers are cleansed, and demoniacs are set free, dead are raised, and the poor
and sinners experience His power to forgive their sins. The authority to act in wholeness
for others is explicit and is transferred to Jesus' disciples, who are sent out on a short-term
mission's trip, "Behold, I have given you authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions,
and over all the power of the enemy; and nothing shall hurt you." That very authority is
perceived by a Roman Centurion who seeks out Jesus on behalf of his suffering servant
(Matt. 8:5-13).
The miracles express and embody the sympathy and compassion of Jesus.
Frequently the Gospels record that the sight of human suffering and human need move
Jesus to act to relieve the various forms of distress. A man who has the communicable
disease of leprosy is ostracized by his people, is unclean and not to be touched according
to Levitical law, and yet, Jesus acts with a certain freedom over the law and touches the
leper. The word family associated with the verb, "I have compassion"
(splagcnivzomai), comes from the noun meaning, "inward parts, bowels, heart,
liver, lungs, and kidneys" and is used in a figurative way to refer to as the center or seat
of feeling, emotion, and sensitivity.30 The English word compassion comes from the
Latin expression, to suffer with. The verb is used in the Gospels only in reference to
Jesus or is expressed in the parables. In the Gospels, Jesus suffers with the leper, with the
epileptic, and the anxious father of the epileptic boy, and suffers with a brokenhearted
mother.
The miracles of healing and exorcism express the holistic concern of Jesus.
While the verb, "to heal" (qerapeuvw) is the most frequent verb, another major
term is the verb, "to save" (swvzw), which means, "to make sound or whole." There is
an inner connection within the human person between the physical, emotional and
spiritual aspects of well being. To the woman who was healed of a hemorrhage of blood,
Jesus says, "Daughter, your faith has made you well (siskin); go in peace, and be
healed of your disease." (Mark 5:34). In other instances, the healing of the body is
closely linked to the pronouncement of the forgiveness of sins (Mk. 2:1-12). The
exorcism of the Gadarene demoniac results in the man "sitting there, clothed and in his
right mind, the man who had had the legion; and they were afraid." (Mark 5:15)
The miracles are signs that point to the mystery of Jesus. In the Book of Signs
(chs. 2-12) in the FG, the noun, "sign" is a thematic concern of the Evangelist, is clearly
important and is stated with the context of his purpose for the Gospel (Jn. 20:30-31). The
multitude is satisfied with the signs of Jesus (6:2, 14, 26; 12:18, 37) and interprets them
in a very superficial sense, but they do not arrive at the point that the sign reveals. They
stop at the sign and do not press in to see the Person signified by the sign. Jesus remains
for them an enigmatic person, but He is not the Son of God. While Jesus affirms that the
crowds seek Him because of the sign (Jn. 6:26), He does not denigrate the sign, but
intends that the masses follow Him because they understand the mystery of His Person.
But if they cannot accept Him for His message, He is content for the moment that they
believe him because of the miracles:
30Köster, "splavgcnon", TDNT, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publ., 1971), p. 556.
miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 14

Jn. 10:37 "If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me;
38 but
if I do them, even though you do not believe me,
believe the works,
that you may know
and
understand
that the Father
is in me
and
I am in the
Father."
In Jn. 12, the signs serve a judicial purpose in the same way that the parables are
used in the Synoptic Gospels. They evoke a crisis, which issues in hardening (judgment)
or a confirmation and growth in faith (12:37-40). The people see in Jesus the operation
of a mysterious power (5:19), which fascinates them; they desire gain and profit (6:26)
but do not come to Him in faith and trust. A sign, similar to a parable may well anger
and harden the adversaries of God's work.31

The Relationship of Miracles and Faith

Miracles are conducted in an atmosphere of faith. Since trust is the pre-condition
for personal salvation, it is not surprising that trust also belongs to the atmosphere in
which healing takes place. Indeed two-thirds of the miracles highlight the all-important
role of faith32 before or after the event. Normally, the Synoptic Gospels highlight the
importance of faith expressed by the needy person prior to the healing, while the Fourth
Gospel emphasizes the response of faith subsequent to the healing. It is this vital
response that Jesus looks for in the case of those to whom he ministered, either to a
crowd or in a boat. Frequently, we read of a question before a healing or an affirmation
after a healing, which affirm that faith is the necessary requisite for healing:
5 "And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, 'My son, your sins are
forgiven'" (Mk. 2:5).
In this context, faith is vicarious and is expressed by the dogged determination of the four
men who refuse to take a closed door for an answer, but demolish a roof to get their
friend before Jesus. Their faith is for another.
34 "And he said to her, 'Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace, and
be healed of your disease'" (Mk. 5:34).
Here, it appears that God has acted by healing this woman, independently of the will or
decision of Jesus—as a response to her faith in a touch of Jesus' garment.
Faith in the recipient as it were completed the circuit so that the power could flow.
In other words, there was nothing automatic, nothing magical in the power of
Jesus, either in its exercise or in his consciousness of it. It was not something he
could use or display at will, nor did he want to (Mark 8:11ff). It is this
independence on winning a response, on winning people to faith, which
distinguishes Jesus' dunameis from the possible parallels in Jewish or Hellenistic
circles, where faith plays no part.33
31 Jn. 2:18; 6:30; 9:16; 11:47; 12:37.
32 e.g., Mk. 5:36; 9:23f.; 11:22ff.; Matt. 9:28; Lk. 17:6.
miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 15

In His hometown, the presence of unbelief inhibits Jesus' miraculous activity:

5 "And he could do no mighty work there, except that he laid his hands upon
a few sick people and healed them. 6 And he marveled because of their unbelief.
And he went about among the villages teaching" (Mk. 6:5).
Mark records his observation that the attitude of Jesus' townsfolk was such that prevented
Jesus from affecting a mighty work. It may be that only that the few that had faith were
healed or that Jesus consciously limited Himself because the reception was stifling.34
Perhaps the statement here parallels Jesus' rejection of the Jewish demand for conclusive
signs. Blackburn notes a further link between "faith and struggle: pistis is concretely
demonstrated when the one(s) seeking a miracle encounter(s) a barrier which is
subsequently overcome through a determined struggle (Mk. 2:4-5; 5:27-34, 34-36; 7:27-
29; 9:22-24; 10:47-52)."35 Further, Jesus expected His disciples to do miracles and He
rebukes them for their unbelief (Matt. 17:20). Jesus looks for trust in His miraculous
power that transcends all human possibilities.
Miracles are intended to elicit and confirm faith. The fourth evangelist speaks of
the signs, which Jesus worked in the presence of the disciples and he is certain that his
readers will grow in their trust in Jesus the Christ, the Son of God, and in trusting they
may have life in his name:
Jn. 20:30 Now Jesus did many other signs
in the presence of the disciples,
which are not written in this book;
31 but
these are written that you may believe36
that Jesus is the Christ,
the Son of God,
and that believing
you may have life in his name.
For the reader of the Gospel of John, the miracles are designed to elicit and
nurture faith. It may well be possible that the verb, "to believe" may convey both senses
in the FG. An example of faith as initial trust and growing trust may be seen in the
person of Nicodemus, who comes to Jesus at night, convinced that He is from God, and
authenticated by signs (3:2). Later we find Nicodemus risk himself and his position in
his defense of Jesus in 7:50 and his risky decision to bury Jesus (19:39). The same kind
of progression of faith is evident in Nathaneal:
49 " Nathanael answered him,
'Rabbi, you are the Son of God!
You are the King of Israel!'
50 Jesus answered him,
'Because I said to you, I saw you under the fig tree,
do you believe?
34 The knowledge of Jesus and His origins seems to suggest to the townspeople that Jesus is just like
everyone else--Why should we expect anything different?"
35 B. L. Blackburn, "Miracles and Miracle Stories," Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, (Downers Gove:

InterVarsity Press, 1992), p. 559.

36 The reading of an aorist subjunctive means "that you might come to believe,"--which then suggests that

the FG is intended as an evangelist document, while the reading of a present subjunctive conveys the sense
of "that you might continue to believe,"--and thus suggests that the book is written for believers who had
already been convinced of the person of Jesus who now needed to be confirmed in their faith.
miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 16

You shall see greater things than these.'

51 And he said to him,
'Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see heaven opened,
and
the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son
of man'" (Jn. 1:49-51).
Nathaneal's initial confession of Jesus' identity is interpreted by Jesus as faith, that is then
coupled with the promise of seeing greater things, even the heavens opened. In the signs
Jesus manifests His glory. However, Jesus desires to propel His disciples beyond the
sign, to trust Him—apart from the signs.
While Jesus seeks to elicit faith in an atmosphere of faith, He does not portray
Himself as an example of faith. The evangelists do not speak of His own faith;37 rather,
they speak of His singular and unmediated relationship with God. Jesus summons men
and women to believe in Him, that God is acting in Him in a special way, that God
demonstrates His grace through Jesus.

General Features
Structure. The healing and exorcism narratives fall into a certain format:
· Setting. The stories often provide a narrative and description of the sick
person's illness, often coupled with accounts of past failure to cure him or
her (Mk. 5:24; 9:17-22). Sometimes there is an expressed scorn or doubt
in Jesus by the bystanders, while there is a response of faith by the ill
person.
· Cure. Jesus' healing is usually effective immediately, and it is brought to
pass by a simple word of Jesus (Mk. 5:41; 7:34). Often there is physical
touch between Jesus and the sick person (Mk. 1:31,41; 5:41; 7:33)
· Result. The reality of the cure is stressed through the sick person's
response. A cripple walks (Mk. 2:12), a blind man sees (8:24-26), or a
dead girl rises and eats food (5:4). Generally, there is an awed or joyful
response to the healing, often by the crowd (Luke 7:16; Mk. 1:27; 5:20).
Characteristics. There are several characteristics of the Gospel miracles that
differentiate the healing miracles from some of the pagan stories:
· Open and public. Generally, the healing miracles are accomplished in a
very public manner, in the view of many spectators and devoid of magic
or paraphernalia.
· Free. Jesus levies no fee and His healings are in accord with the nature of
the Gospel, wherein God moves in grace and good will towards those in
need. In some of the Hellenistic healing cults, payment to the temples was
an expected part of a visit.
· Useful and beneficial. Jesus' miracles meet genuine human needs, the
relief of hunger, the cleansing of leprosy, or strength to limbs that are
atrophied. Further, his miraculous activity is utterly free from retaliation.
Even when his disciples ask Him about using fire from heaven to dispose
of His adversaries, Jesus refuses.

37 Similarly, Jesus does not speak of "our faith."

miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 17

Application
Jesus' miracles and His own understanding of them belong to the tension of the
two ages, the "already but not yet" (Ladd) of the Kingdom of God. He is no celestial
being who performs healings, exorcisms or magical acts to compel faith in the beholders
that the Kingdom has finally and conclusively come. Rather, He avoids the publicity that
often comes with miraculous activity. Repeatedly, He charges people to silence in the
case of healings, exorcisms and acts of raising people from the dead. In particular,
Matthew interprets Jesus' miracles in the quiet and unobtrusive manner, in which He
performs His cures, thereby fulfilling the Servant passages of the OT,
15 ". . .And many followed him, and he healed them all,
16 and ordered them not to make him known.
17 This was to fulfil what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah:
18 “Behold, my servant whom I have chosen,
my beloved with whom my soul is well pleased.
I will put my Spirit upon him,
and he shall proclaim justice to the Gentiles.
19 He will not wrangle or cry aloud,
nor will any one hear his voice in the streets;
20 he will not break a bruised reed
or quench a smoldering wick,
till he brings justice to victory;
21 and in his name will the Gentiles hope" (Matt. 12:15-21).
Matthew understands that the very silence charge is a fulfillment of Isaiah's Servant Song
(42:1ff.). Jesus is gentle, quiet and unobtrusive, and does not publicize or seek publicity
among the masses but moves to meet their needs, particularly, those who are beaten down
("bruised reed," "smoldering wick"). The very paradox of Jesus is reflected in His
miraculous activity through various contrasts: strength versus weakness, sternness versus
gentleness, authority versus compassion, popularity versus silence.
Jesus recognizes the need for wholeness of the entire human person; He does not
compartmentalize people but demonstrates through His activity the need for wholeness at
every level of the human person: spiritual, physical, emotional and relational. While the
friends brought a paralytic to Jesus for physical healing, Jesus points to the deeper
spiritual need for the forgiveness of sins and substantiates His authority to meet that
spiritual need by an act of physical restoration. Through His acts of healing and exorcism
as well as His words, He orients His audience to the way life was meant to be.
There are so many things we do not know and often question. We do not know
the inter-relationship between forms of mental illness and demon possession. We do not
fully understand how far the mind affects the body or how far relational issues affect the
human spirit. We do not understand the relationship between medical science and
healing. We need to bear in mind that a physician cannot heal individuals but treat the
obstacles within the human body that prohibit or inhibit healing. We do not fully
understand the vital relationship between intercessory prayer and healing of the entire
human person. We do not understand the selective purpose of Jesus at healing one
paralytic individual at the Pool of Bethesda while other needy people remain there at the
pool in their same condition.
While our questions and answers await the final consummation, we can affirm

miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story, p. 18

Jesus' commitment to our well being in all aspects of our existence. He brings healing to
individuals, frees demoniacs from their inner torment, pronounces the forgiveness of sins,
brings recovery of sight to the blind, raises the dead to new life, and seeks to bring about
wholeness in inter-personal relationships as much as He seeks to orient people to a new
relationship with God. Through the various miracles, Jesus says in word and deed, "God
is at work in me in a special way, imparting life as it was meant to be."
Similarly, that mission is entrusted to His disciples, the early Church, and the
Church in the 21st Century. God still intends that Christian proclamation continue to
embody the holistic concern of the Lord through word and deed. He has entrusted the
Church with the Spirit and the gifts of the Spirit to mediate life as it was meant to be.
Correspondingly, the Church must continue to stir up the gifts of power, healing,
discernment of spirits, so as to mediate wholeness in the Christian community. Gifted
individuals are called upon to use their gifts for the glory of God, community upbuilding,
the common good, by mediating wholeness of life to needy individuals. God is a
compassionate and powerful God who seeks to mediate His compassion through acts of
power and grace.
Blaise Pascal said that the heart has reasons that the mind does not understand.
We need to keep in mind that our faith is grounded in the very possibility and reality of a
miracle—the incarnation and the resurrection, the grandest miracles of all. Trust is based
in the primary revelation of God and is the only proper human attitude towards God's
action and activity in Christ, then and now. Presumably Jesus looks for the same sort of
response and atmosphere of faith and trust wherein people can be made whole and grows
in their understanding of Jesus and His saving purpose. We also need to grow in our
expectation that the Lord can and will use us as His people to bring wholeness to the lives
others in a manner that is consistent with the character of Jesus.

miracles.doc
6/8/1999
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p.1

The Parable of the Unmerciful Servant

Matt. 18:21-35

Introduction
The Parable of the Unmerciful Servant closes a chapter dealing with several
matters concerned with community life: restoration, private and semi-private
confrontation, discipline, decisions, prayer, and the issue of forgiveness. Each issue must
be interpreted within the broader context, so that the major thrust of the chapter is not
lost. For example, it is not enough to stress the process of discipline in vss. 15-20,
without looking at the broader context of divine compassion and forgiveness as the
Church is to be engaged in restoration and reconciliation.
Discipline, at every level of confrontation must be viewed against the all-
important background of divine mercy, which affects the way in which human
relationships are handled. The process of discipline within a church may be painful, but
must be tempered by the imperative of forgiveness, mercy and gentle restoration.
The Parable of the Unforgiving Servant places all human relationships under the
norm of compassion, mercy and forgiveness that Christians have received. Such
compassion ought to make a difference in the way that Christians relate to others in
community (religious and secular). Indeed, compassion must not only be received but
appreciated; a lack of appreciation signals that it never was fully received. Compassion,
mercy and forgiveness serve as the wonderful setting for situations involving sin,
restoration and conflict within the community.

The Larger and Immediate Context:

Like the treasure hidden in the field (Matt. 13:44), the parable of Matt. 18:23-35
of the unmerciful slave appears at first to be thrown into a strange context. Strange, and
yet, as one searches further and digs deeper, the impression gradually emerges that the
parable fits its surroundings like a glove. The entire 18th chapter of Matthew hovers
around the question, "Wherein lies true greatness in the Kingdom of God?" And the
answer is found:
1) in unpretentious, open-hearted little children, and
2) in undeserved and unexpected divine forgiveness.
Both truths constitute unforgettable answers to the questions which the disciples raise.
"Who is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven" is their first question (Matt.
18:1). And the answer is found in the "little child" (paidivon), whom Jesus places in
their midst (18:2). He urges His disciples to become child-like in their openness to Him,
like this little one. He proceeds to warn them not to cause "one of these little ones who
believe in me" (18:6) to stumble nor to despise any one of them (18:3-10). Each is dear
to Him as a lone lost sheep [an erring brother or sister], whom the shepherd seeks and
finds (18:12-14).
Jesus then portrays how the community of faith, the Church, is to live in a
forgiving attitude to each other (18:15-20), including the erring brother, as it is guided by
the all-important imperative of restoration. To that end, Jesus offers guidelines for
dealing with personal injury and assures the community of His ongoing presence with
them as they work through difficult decisions. In this communal context, a second
question from the disciples is raised by Peter alone (18:21-22). Had he sensed some

mt18obsb.doc
10/05/2000
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p.2

resentment among fellow disciples at His evident place of leadership among them? Peter
asks Jesus to what extent forgiveness can function—am I to forgive my brother as many
as seven times? The brief "numerical" answer of Jesus (18:22) is followed by a further
answer in the parable before us. The answer in the parable lies as far beyond numerical
computation as heaven is above earth. The answer is found in the undeserved,
unimaginable, unheard-of forgiveness of the debt of a helpless, hopeless slave by a
compassionate king. It is a forgiveness that suggests a divine forgiveness that exceeds all
bounds of the imagination. But the forgiven slave refuses himself to forgive. He never
comprehended the depth of forgiveness that was freely given to him.
Structural Analysis
Introductory question (v. 21)
Answer (v. 22)
Parable
Introduction to parable (v. 23)
Act 1: Reckoning of Servant #1's debt (vss. 24-25)
Plea for time (v. 26)
Remission of debt by king through mercy (v. 27)
Act 2: Reckoning of Servant #2's debt (vss. 28)
Plea for time (v. 29)
Failure to remit debt of Servant #2 by Servant #1 (v. 30)
Act 3: Second reckoning and judgment of Servant #1 by king (vss. 31-34)
Summary of parable's lesson (v. 35)

Translation
Introductory question (v. 21) "Then Peter came up and said to him, 'Lord, how
often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven
times?'
Answer (v. 22) 22 Jesus said to him, 'I do not say to you seven times, but seventy
times seven.'
Parable: Introduction to parable (v. 23) 'Therefore the kingdom of heaven
may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his servants.
Act 1: Reckoning of Servant #1's debt (vv. 24-25) When he began the
reckoning, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents; 25 and as he
could not pay, his lord ordered him to be sold, with his wife and children and all that he
had, and payment to be made.
Plea for time (v. 26) So the servant fell on his knees, imploring him, 'Lord,
have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.'
Remission of debt by king through mercy (v. 27) And out of compassion
for him the lord of that servant released him and forgave him the debt.
Act 2: Reckoning of Servant #2's debt (v. 28) But that same servant, as he went
out, came upon one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred
denarii; and seizing him by the throat he said, 'Pay what you owe.'
Plea for time (v. 29) So his fellow servant fell down and besought him,
'Have patience with me, and I will pay you.'
Failure to remit debt of Servant #2 by Servant #1 through demand (v. 30)
He refused and went and put him in prison till he should pay the debt.

mt18obsb.doc
10/05/2000
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p.3

Act 3: Second reckoning and judgment of Servant #1 by King (vv. 31-34) When
his fellow servants saw what had taken place, they were greatly distressed,
and they went and reported to their lord all that had taken place. 32 Then
his lord summoned him and said to him, 'You wicked servant! I forgave
you all that debt because you besought me; 33 and should not you have had
mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?' 34 And in anger his
lord delivered him to the jailers, till he should pay all his debt.
Summary of the parable's lesson (v. 35) 'So also my heavenly Father will do to
every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.'"
There is clear harmony between Peter's introductory question and Jesus' answer
concerning repeated forgiveness. Within the parable itself, the dominant contrast lies
between the mercy of the king in Act 1 and the harsh demand of the servant in Act 2.
Finally, there is a cause-effect relationship between the events of Act 2 and the need for
another reckoning of the first servant before the king in Act 3. In Act 1, the chief
protagonist is in a very bad situation that turns good for him. From this good situation in
Acts 2 and 3, he moves from good to worse, to a fate far more desperate than what was
threatened in Act 1.

Interpretation
Introductory question (v. 21). Matthew's text differs from Luke 17:4 in that no
mention is made of the repentance of the offender. Within Jewish teaching, the guilty
party must repent, apologize and make restitution for the wrong done. The injured party
is then expected to forgive: "Love ye one another from the heart; and if a man sin against
thee, speak peaceably to him, and in thy soul hold not guilt; and if he repent and confess,
forgive him . . . But if he be shameless and persist in his wrong-doing, even so forgive
him from the heart, and leave to God the avenging."1 Seven times is to be regarded in a
general way as a round number.2 The question is a bit strange. Can a person establish
theoretically, in advance, how often a person should forgive? The whole idea of
forgiveness is lost when counting begins, "Let me see, and is it the third or the fourth
time?" This would seem to suggest the ridiculous idea that sins are "saved up" until the
coupon book is ready to be cashed in.
Answer (v. 22). Jesus' answer, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to
seventy times seven,"3 precludes any sort of limit to be placed upon forgiveness. The
rounded numbers exclude any tabulation of personal offenses. There is a clear allusion to
the Old Testament—Lamech's song (similar to drinking songs in a bar) in Gen. 4:24, "If
Cain is avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy-sevenfold." Lamech's blood-lust
reflects a fearful reality that has entered the human sphere as a result of the Fall, a lust for
revenge that knows no limit. Because of such an appalling tendency, the OT prescribes a
limit on revenge through the lex talionis, i.e., the law of just revenge. Thus, in Jesus'
answer about unlimited forgiveness is found a clear counterpart to the dreadful song of
Lamech.
Parable--Introduction (v.23). The parable is introduced by the expression, "For
this reason, the kingdom of heaven may be compared to ...," (DiaV tou'to
wJmoiwvqh hJ basileiva tw'n oujranw'n). In light of the
1 Testaments of the XII Patriarchs, Gad 6:3-7.
2 cf. Gen 4:15; Lev. 26:21; Prov. 24:16.
3 The text may also indicate 77 times.

mt18obsb.doc
10/05/2000
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p.4

question and answer, an assumption can be made that the parable will illustrate and
support the point made in v. 21f.—repeated forgiveness. However, the parable addresses
another issue, which is even more critical. The comparison is made between this parable
and the Kingdom of Heaven, i.e., the situation and lesson as it is unfolded in the story-
parable. At first glance, the Parable of the Unmerciful Servant appears to be Jesus'
answer to the question posed by Peter in v. 21, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin
against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?" However, between the introductory
question and the parable there already is an answer, "I do not say to you, up to seven
times, but up to seventy times seven" (v. 22). The parable itself does not deal with the
issue of repeated forgiveness, but rather with the principle, spirit and theological context
for the practice of forgiveness.
Act 1-Reckoning of Servant #1's debt (vss. 24-25). A government official is in
hopeless debt—10,000 talents. A talent is the largest currency unit in the whole of the
Near East. To give an idea of the enormity of the sum, the whole of Galilee paid only
200 talents in tax in the year 4 B.C. As Jeremias notes, "10,000 is the highest number
used in reckoning."4 The king's official is unable to pay the debt. Even the sale of his
family and possessions is not able to make a dent into the immense debt. Jeremias
comments, "Does the sale of the family make sense? Since the average value of a slave
was about 500 to 2,000 denarii, the amount realized from the sale of the family bore no
relation whatever to the monstrous debt of the 100 million denarii."5
Plea for time (v. 26). Ostensibly the plea is for more time, and yet, time will do
nothing but prolong the inevitable. It is a "promise given in fear and need"6 but is not in
touch with reality.
Remission of debt by king through mercy (v. 27). The king does not give the
requested time but something far more profound, the release of the debt through his
compassion7 for the servant's pitiful condition. The order to sell the family and
possessions is rescinded. The king is moved with compassion and expresses that
compassion through rescinding the enormous debt.
Act 2: Reckoning of Servant #2's debt (v. 28). The attitude of the first servant is
well expressed by what he does to the second servant, even before a reckoning is made,
"He seized him and began to choke him" (v. 28). "If he does not pay on the spot, he will
be thrown into prison, or an order issued for his arrest (cf. Matt. 5:25f.)"8 This is a
drastic method of collecting a debt, noted in the Mishnah, "If a man seized a debtor by
the throat in the street . . ."9
Within the parable, Act 2 is told in such a way as to highlight both the similarities
and contrasts with Act 1. The contrast of debts is made to stand out: 10,000 talents
contrasted with 100 denarii. The first debt is astronomical, the second minor.
Plea for time (v. 29). The parable reminds the hearers of the plea for time, which
is expressed by both servants in similar language. The first servant forgets the plea he
4 Joachim Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus, (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1963), p. 210, cf. Luke
12:1; I Cor. 1:15; 14:19.
5 Jeremias, p. 211.
6 Eta Linnemann, Parables of Jesus: Introduction and Exposition, (London: S.P.C.K. Press, 1966), p. 109.
7 The verb "I have compassion" (splagcnivzomai) occurs in three parables (Matt. 18:27; Lk.
10:33; 15:20), and elsewhere is used only of Jesus.
8 Jeremias, p. 212.
9 Baba Bathra 10 8.

mt18obsb.doc
10/05/2000
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p.5

has just made, "I will repay you all these things" (pavnta—v. 27), while his fellow
servant simply says, "I will repay you" (v. 29). The hearer/reader is led to remember that
plea through its similar wording. The plea of the second servant is legitimate, while the
similar plea of the first servant is ludicrous, "I will repay you all these things."
Failure to release debt of Servant #2 by Servant #1 (v. 30). The legitimate plea
for time is in vain. While the wording of the plea of both servants is similar, the response
of the two debtors is clearly contrasted. Servant #1 determines that his fellow servant is
not to be sold into slavery as was threatened to him in Act 1, but imprisoned until the
debt is paid. He will be released only when his dependents raise the sum of his debt and
ransom him.
Act 3: Second reckoning and judgment of Servant #1 by king (vv. 31-34). The
fellow servants/colleagues are "exceeding sorry"10 and thus, express their indignation at
the disgraceful behavior of their fellow-servant. The king agrees with them and takes
immediate action against this servant, "You wicked servant..." He hands the servant over
to the torturers. "Torture was regularly employed in the East against a disloyal governor,
or one who was tardy in his delivery of the taxes, in order to discover where they had
hidden the money, or to extort the amount from their relations or friends."11 The
expression, "till he pay all" means that the punishment will never end.
The real point of the comparison is expressed in v. 33, "Should you not also have
had mercy on your fellow-slave, even as I had mercy on you?"(oujk e[dei kaiV
se; ejleh'sai toVn suvndoulon sou, wJ" kagwV seV
hjlevhsa;). The message of this verse resounds beyond the players of Act 3,
probing deeply into the audience (then and now).
Summary of the Parable's Message (v. 35). The parable concludes with a
warning, underscoring the need for genuine forgiveness, "So shall My Heavenly Father
also do to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart." Jesus voices
an implicit contrast between forgiveness from the heart and forgiveness only with the
lips. The comparison is drawn between the fate of the servant and the one who withholds
forgiveness from another.
The readers, drawn into the verdict of the king, are made to feel the rightness of
the king's assessment. We cry out, "How could anyone be so ungrateful?" In
condemning the ungrateful servant, the question of "Why?" must be taken seriously.
If it were not for Act 1, we might agree that the first servant is acting within his
rights by demanding payment for a past-due debt, certainly harsh, but within his rights.
However, the clue for the parable's interpretation lies in the contrast between Act 1 and
Act 2. The compassion of the king has had no effect on the first servant; this is the
unconscionable sin—the unthinkable. Not only are the debts contrasted, but also the
actions of the king and the contrasting behavior of the first servant as well. What the
parable makes so clear is that there ought to be an inherent connection between the two
acts.
The heart of the parable centers, first of all, on an astronomical debt that is owed
by a helpless slave. He is caught in the web of an unpayable debt. This is the first thing
to meet our eyes in the story. It falls outside the description at hand to ask how this slave
10 ejluphvqhsan sfovdra -- "they were shocked." The adverb sfovdra means "very
much, extremely, greatly" (BAG p. 803). The same expression is found in Mt. 17:23. In the LXX of Neh.
5:6; Jon. 4:4,9, the Greek verb translates a Hebrew verb meaning "to burn with anger."
11 Jeremias, p. 212.

mt18obsb.doc
10/05/2000
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p.6

ran up such a large debt. He himself cannot think in terms of any cancellation of it—he
simply pleads for patience and time so that he might pay back everything, a promise
which is ludicrous. That is as impossible as for all the water of the sea to wash away the
sin and guilt of one human being. And then the compassion of the King floods the scene:
"Tis mercy all, immense and free
And oh, my God, it found out me."12
The forgiveness of sins is far greater, far more impressive than the massive debt of the
slave. The gift is also free in that it defies all rules and regulations as it issues from the
noble heart of a compassionate King.
Peter, the disciples, Jesus' audience—all are somehow urged to see themselves in
the hopeless position of the slave—hopeless, yet miraculously forgiven of an incalculable
debt. Still, powerful though the parable is, in the light of the Passion Predictions (16:21;
17:22-23), the word from the king on the throne to the hopeless debtor (18:27) leads us
forward to another word from a king, the King, on His throne, the cross, a word that tells
us that the ransom from sin for all cost this King His very life.
Thus, how crass and cruel and unconscionable is the attitude and action of the
"forgiven" slave as he finds his fellow slave and begins to choke him. The word
"forgiven" is here put within quotes for forgiveness to be true forgiveness, the mind and
heart of the recipient will be moved by a thankfulness and wonder that is reflected in
one's attitude and action toward others. Forgiveness received in the heart must inevitably
issue in a forgiveness of a brother or sister, as Jesus affirms, "from your heart" (18:35).
The relationship of these two acts makes it clear that Act 1 makes a definite claim
upon Act 2. The actions of the first servant are unconscionable in that the kingly
forgiveness of the servant's astronomical debt had no effect and made no difference in the
way he treated his fellow servant. The first servant was insisting upon justice which he
received.
The parable reverses the roles of justice and mercy in community life. Mercy
becomes the norm, the obligation and is to be expressed in mercy that is extended to
another.13 The rules of the game have changed. The parable warns the audience, "If you
want to play by the rules of justice—go ahead. But be aware that the same will be
applied against you." The compelling message of the parable lies with the verdict of
mercy and the risky living that is envisioned. The readers can reflect upon the hymn, "O
happy day, O happy day, when Jesus washed my sins away." Anyone who has felt the
joy of sins forgiven, debts released, a slate washed clean, a past which is forgotten, has a
new command, to forgive as she has been forgiven. When one is realistic about the
relative degree of debt, how can one really insist upon one's rights? Yet, our experience
demonstrates how it is possible to insist upon our rights, while losing out upon the mercy
of God, who can and will insist upon His sense of justice as well. Does not God have His
right as well? The broader issue of forgiveness must be positioned within an experience
of joy that is unspeakable. Forgiveness does not become a burdensome duty, but a joy to
be expressed in view of the magnitude of debt that has been forgiven.
What makes the conduct of the servant so offensive is that mercy had absolutely
no effect upon him. His insensibility to mercy is expressed by the fact that immediately
upon leaving the presence of the king, he seizes his fellow servant by the throat. His
coldness is also expressed by not remembering that the words of his fellow servant were
12 Charles Wesley.
13 See Linnemann for further explanation. pp. 111-113.
mt18obsb.doc
10/05/2000
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p.7

actually his own words, "Have patience with me and I will pay you."
Our sympathy recoils, however, when we witness his behavior in part two. His
understanding of human relationships—that they are constituted by claims justly
made and necessarily paid—had been challenged but not altered by the mercy
shown him. At the end he still had not come to recognize what mercy does and
had to be told—after it was too late—what he should have grasped on his own
and what the consequences of his failure would be.14
It is the grace and mercy of God that makes human forgiveness both a gift and
demand. Human forgiveness of others does not win God's forgiveness, but confers upon
the forgiven one the genuine ability to forgive. People who are appreciative for the
Divine forgiveness will forgive others as the Lord taught, "Forgive us our debts as we
forgive others" (Matt. 6:12). Forgiveness is no unusual occurrence but a pattern of the
new life that comes through the Gospel. It involves taking risks and human vulnerability.

Application
Matthew 18 offers practical and helpful perspectives with issues needing
reconciliation against the broad theological background of God's mercy and forgiveness.
Jesus calls for commitment from individuals and the Christian communities to restoration
and peacemaking. Moreover, the parable manifests the all-important environment of
grace, compassion, mercy and forgiveness, which cannot be "assumed" or "taken lightly."
Appreciation for the grace of God in one's life is paramount for healthy personal
relationships and strong Christian communities. Indeed, by taking Divine grace for
granted, without thankfulness, one loses that very forgiveness. The parable reminds the
communities (then and now) that they live by dependence on mercy; this should affect
every relationship. Mercy is to become the new norm for relationship with God and
proper relations within the community. Within this theological context, Jesus gives
certain guiding principles:
Christians must prioritize the need for reconciliation and peacemaking. Before
the process of church discipline is given, Jesus affirms the all-important need for
restoration. The emphasis of the Parable of the Lost Sheep (18:10-14) is to be found
within the call to restore the wandering or erring one who needs to be brought back to the
community. As the process of discipline is unfolded, the first step (also the next two) is
marked by the desire to "gain a brother" without involving others in the sin or personal
injury.
Christians must seek for reconciliation of parties at the lowest possible level of
confrontation. The process of Christian conciliation begins at the lowest level—between
two concerned parties. When a Christian is approached about personal sin or injury
within an organization, the immediate question should be, "Have you talked about the
issue with . . . ?" Too often, one calls another to account, assuming an adversarial
posture at the outset, which may lead to further irritation and injury. Often, the injured
party finds others who may serve as allies, not seeking resolution or reconciliation. It
might be more appropriate to say, "Good friend, I will be glad to talk to both of you,
either individually or together—but only after you have made an honest effort between
the two of you to resolve the issue." Further steps are taken, only after the attempt at the
lowest level has failed to resolve the problem.
Christians must be willing to deal with conflicts and injury in a straightforward
14 Dan Otto Via, Jr., The Parables, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967), p. 141.
mt18obsb.doc
10/05/2000
©J.Lyle Story
 Story p.8

manner. No one likes to confront another, especially in a culture where people are often
told to "mind their own business." However, if offenses and problems are not resolved,
friction and tension will only worsen and "get out of hand." Unresolved conflict violates
Jesus' enjoinder for peace and unity. Christian leaders may need to serve as Christian
conciliators in listening, dealing with the issues, probing questions—and if need be, they
will serve as "witnesses" in a more formal procedure.
Christians must be deeply and personally aware of their own need of divine mercy
and the need to have that mercy be expressed in the community context. As the Parable
of the Unmerciful Servant unfolds, we find that Christians are indebted to the new
commandment of mercy since they have been recipients of mercy. This does not mean
that discipline is inappropriate—but that Christians are to recognize their fundamental
need for the ongoing grace of God that meets them where they are—in their sins.
Correspondingly, all relations within the Church are to be governed by the new
norm—mercy, not the exaction of justice at the expense of mercy. The enormity of a
forgiven debt should be the guiding norm and principle of the Christian's life, which
directly impacts the way in which others are treated.
Appropriate help should be sought out when private resolution of the conflict
cannot be obtained. This second stage is a means of resolving a problem of an offender
in a semi-private manner, and is to be implemented if the first step does not work. At this
stage, the two parties concerned could be helped by neutral persons who may be mutual
friends who know both parties well. They do not need to be professional conciliators or
arbitrators, but people who are acquainted with both parties, who can give fair advice
without partiality. Someone who knows both parties, who has a freedom to be honest
and frank, without partiality, is in the best position of resolving a conflict in a peaceful
semi-private setting. The practical benefit of such an agreement or settlement is
enormous. It can mean the saving of money, time, energy, avoidance of publicity, legal
fees, etc. A conversation at this level may be expressed as following:
Bob, I would prefer to resolve just between the two of us. Since that has not
happened and because this involves issues that are too important to walk away
from, my only other option is to obey what the Bible commands, which means
asking some people from our churches to help us out. I would prefer that we go
together to get that help, but if you will not cooperate, I'll ask for it myself."15
Forgiveness is difficult and "messy." It may be difficult for both parties to walk through
the process in an honest manner. However, genuine forgiveness can flow in similar
situations when both parties come to grips with the unheard-of miracle of Divine grace
and forgiveness. This can serve as "common ground" for genuine reconciliation.

15Ken Sande, The Peacemaker, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992), p. 148.
mt18obsb.doc
10/05/2000
©J.Lyle Story
 The Bible
My Basic Presupposition: The Bible is the Word of God (Spirit-inspired) in human words, within a historical process—that summons a
personal response from the reader and faith community. It can be summarized by:

1) What God has said or done,

2) What humans have done or should do in the light of what God has said or done,
3) A call for a personal or community response.

Our beginning point for understanding the Bible is human words. That’s where we start. And it begins with careful OBSERVATION of
the text, followed by INTERPRETATION of the observations we’ve made, leading to APPLICATION of our interpretation, in personal,
communal and missional contexts.

Materials in Observation (The Raw “Stuff” of the Bible)

Biography – persons (biographical material) History – events (historical material)
Geography – places (geographical material) Ideology – ideas (ideological material
Chronology – time (chronological or temporal material)

Literary Relationships Chart (How the Raw Stuff is related)

Literary Relationships
Cause-Effect- >From action to the result produced
Climax - a series of advancing events or ideas, with focus on the
highest or greatest point being realized
Comparison - similarity between two or more particulars,
association of like things
Grounds-Conclusion - the basis or substantiation of an argument
with the logical conclusion (e.g., if . . . then)
Identification - the meaning or significance of something is
established by being equated with something else
Instrumentality - a reference to the means by which an end or
result is achieved. The means is identified apart from the cause

Complementation - two paired items wherein one is the
counterpart of the other; the latter fulfills what is called for in the
first (question/answer, promise/fulfillment, problem/solution,
disease/remedy, beginning . . . [interruption] . . . sequel)
Completion - a progression of events or ideas to conclusion or
resolution
Continuity - a recurrence of similar but not identical terms,
phrases, clauses, statements, or events
Contrast - a difference between two or more particulars which in a
broad sense are comparable
Interchange - the alternation of elements (persons, places, things,
events, ideas) that occur in a series; or the exchange of one
element with another
Particularization - one or more specific references or statements
which are part of a more inclusive reference; a movement from the
general to the particular; many to one
Pivot - a movement of events or ideas to a crucial point on which
subject matter turns in another direction
Preparation (Introduction) - the background or setting for events
or ideas that enable the reader to understand what follows

Effect-Cause - from result produced to source action Progression - an extension or development of a particular item in a
certain direction
Explanation - the presentation of an event or idea followed by a Repetition - a recurrence of the same terms, phrases, clauses, or
reason, interpretation, illustration, or clarification; statements; repetition of word family
Purpose –a goal or purpose that is in view
Generalization - an inclusive reference or statement that Summarization (Conclusion) - a wrap-up or survey of material
embodies on or more particulars; a movement from the particular that has been (or is to be) presented
to the general; one to many
Logical Connectives
Connective Literary Relationship Connective Literary Relationship
After Chronological Relationship, Cause-Effect Likewise Comparison
Also Comparison Much more Comparison, Contrast
Although Contrast Nevertheless Contrast
As Chronological Relationship, Comparison Not Contrast
As . . . so Comparison Now Usually Progression, sometimes Temporal
Because Explanation Only Emphasis, Contrast
Before Chronological Relationship, Effect-Cause Or Contrast, Series of Statements or Facts
But Contrast Otherwise Contrast
Finally Summarization Since Explanation, Cause-Effect
First of all Progression, Series of Statements or Facts So Comparison, Cause-Effect
For Explanation So also Comparison, Cause-Effect
From there Geographical Progression So that Explanation, Statement of Purpose (look for result)
However Contrast Then Chronological Relationship, Cause-Effect
If Conditional Cause-Effect Therefore Explanation, Grounds-Conclusion
In order that Explanation, Statement of Purpose Thus Explanation, Cause-Effect
Indeed Emphasis Until Chronological Relationship
Instead Contrast When Chronological Relationship, Cause-Effect
Just as ... so Comparison Where Geographical Relationship
Last of all Summarization, Series of Statements While Chronological Relationship
Like Comparison, Simile Yet Contrast
Figures of Speech
Anthropomorphism – attributing human characteristics to what is
not human; speaking of God in human terms; a kind of metaphor
Allegory - an extended metaphor (figurative vs. literal)
Euphemism - a term substituted for one that would be more
harsh, distasteful, or unpleasant
Hyperbole - a conscious exaggeration for effect
Irony or Sarcasm - words used to denote the opposite of what the
speaker intends
Metaphor - implicit comparison without key words; one thing
described in terms of something else
Observation Categories
Category 1 – how the segment relates to preceding/other segments
Category 2 – relationships within a single paragraph (¶)
Types of Interpretive Questions (A, B, & C refer to the historical or literary)
Type A – what does this term, relation, form, phrase, etc. mean?
Type B – why or how did the action or event occur?
Type C – what is the author’s intent in recording this here?
Metonymy - using one thing for another because the two are
closely associated
Parable - an extended simile
Personification - a thing, quality, or idea is represented as a
person
Simile - explicit comparison using key words such as like or as
Synecdoche – A part represents the whole, or the whole represents
a part
Category 3 – relationships between parts of 2 or more ¶’s
Category 4 – relationships between overall themes of 2 or more ¶’s
Type D – why is this statement or principle true or necessary?
Type E – what does this imply?
(E responds to observations & answers to interpretive questions)
Story, p.1

Pauline Ethics

Paul is a Jew whose life has been shaped by the Old Testament. Accordingly, his
theological affirmations are expressed in ethics and morality. Ethics is not a separate
item of study outside of the overall structure of theology, but is integral to the process of
dogmatic or biblical theology. In the past, the Lutheran dichotomy of law-gospel has
been used to polarize the biblical message. Thus, the Old Testament with its ethical
concern and command is subsumed under the category of law, misinterpreted as mere
legalism, and then often dismissed as the antithesis of Pauline grace found in the New
Testament.
Paul connects the basic Christian kerygma (preaching) with Christian didache
(teaching). Teaching on ethics is essentially grounded in the preaching the gospel of
grace. However, this is not a pattern that is unique to the New Testament or more
specifically, to Pauline thought. The divine gift of The Ten Words (teaching) is
predicated and grounded in the Nature of God and His saving acts (preaching of grace).
The confessional statements (indicatives) are accordingly knit together with the
commands (imperatives):
Preaching--2 I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of
Egypt, out of the house of slavery; (indicative)
Teaching--3 you shall have no other gods before me. (imperative) Exodus 20:2-3
Preaching—4 You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on
eagles' wings and brought you to myself. (indicative)
Teaching--5 Now therefore, if you obey my voice and keep my covenant, you
shall be my treasured possession out of all the peoples. Indeed, the whole earth is
mine, (imperative—command) Exodus 19:4-5
Similarly, Pauline ethics are grounded in the confession of the basic elements of Christian
theology. His ethical injunctions are grounded in the theological affirmations. The
forgiven one is urged to forgive (Eph. 4:32). God's indicative ("Christ loved us"—Eph.
5:2) is the solid base of His imperative ("walk in love"—Eph. 5:2). The imperative is
based in the indicative, i.e.; the ethical injunctions are grounded in the theological
affirmations.1 The pattern cannot be reversed; it is false to assume that careful obedience
to the imperatives will lead to the Divine affirmation. For example, in Rom. 6:11 Paul
states that Christians are dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus (indicative-statement
of fact). Correspondingly, the imerative follows, "Thus sin is not to rule in your mortal
body that you should obey its appetites" (imperative--command).2 What the believer
does is dynamically related to the divine salvation that has already been received as a
gift.3 "The imperative does not admonish one to obtain alvation, but to hold fast and not
to lose the salvation that has been received."4
1The indicative describes what God has already done, and provides the basis for the imperative, which tells
the reader how to respond—based upon divine activity. Originally, this indicative-imperative pattern was
noted by Bultmann.
2Romans 6:So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12
Therefore, do not let sin exercise dominion in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions.
31Corinthians 4:7 For who sees anything different in you? What do you have that you did not receive?
And if you received it, why do you boast as if it were not a gift?
4Werner Georg Kümmel, The Theology of the New Testament, (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1973), p. 227.

paulethi.doc
2/21/02
©J. Lyle Story
Story, p.2

Thus, there is a vital connection established between the indicative and the
imperative—realize through your character and conduct what God's action in Christ has
made you to be:
Gal. 5:1 For freedom Christ has set us free (indicative); stand fast therefore, and
do not submit again to a yoke of slavery (imperative).
Gal. 5:25 If we live by the Spirit (indicative), let us also walk by the Spirit
(imperative).
Rom. 6:4 Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that,
just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father (indicative), so
we too might walk in newness of life (imperative).
1 Cor. 5:7 Clean out the old yeast so that you may be a new batch (imperative), as
you really are unleavened (indicative). For our paschal lamb, Christ, has been
sacrificed (indicative).
Phil. 2:12-13 Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed me, not only
in my presence, but much more now in my absence, work out your own salvation
with fear and trembling (imperative);13 for it is God who is at work in you,
enabling you both to will and to work for his good pleasure (indicative).
In the Pauline corpus, we sometimes find a "formal" organization of his thought, wherein
a doctrinal portion (indicative), which is followed by his ethical directives (imperative).
For example, Ephesians 1-3 expresses the Divine provision of the Cosmic Christ,
followed by the process (imperative) of living out the implications of what it means to be
a Christian. The opening conjunction in 4:1, "therefore" (ou\n), expresses a clear
causal relationship between the unity that has been effected by summing up all things in
Christ, the fullness that belongs to the community (3:19), the reality of the "one new
man" (Jew and Gentile--2:15), and the exhortation to preserve that unity found in 4:1-6.5
There is nothing that lies outside the purview or authority of Christ's universal fullness,
which has now been entrusted to the new community. In Eph. 4-6, there are 39
imperatives, many of which are "positive" ("walk, forgive, be filled . . . love . . . put on")
while others are "prohibitive" (4:17—no longer walk as the Gentiles," 4:26--"do not keep
on sinning," 4:30—"do not grieve," "do not have fellowship with"). Since Ephesians is
more of a cyclical letter not written to just one individual or community, this may explain
why a "formal" organization is made. Other examples occur in the transition from
Romans 11 to 12, Col. 2 to 3 or Gal. 4 to 5. If Ephesians expresses a "formal"
organization, there are other letters which express a more "informal" organization of his
ethical directives. Ethical pronouncements are inserted into a treatment of a problem or a
question that has been directed to Paul ("I Cor. 1:26—"take a good look at your call,"
5:7—"cleanse out the old leaven," 6:20—"glorify God in your body," 10:24—"let no one
seek," 10:31—"do all to the glory of God"). Frequently, the ethical injunctions appear in
Paul's appeal to the church as he raises a practical issue. However, we need to note that
Paul is no split-person, Paul the theologian and Paul the pastor. From the start to the
finish of each of his letters, he writes as a pastor; his theological affirmations are always
directly related to personal and community life and the witness to the world. His
theological principles are always used in the service of praxis. "Paul's theology is a
"living theology, a practical theology through and through."6
5 The verb, "to entreat/exhort" (parakalew) is frequently found in Paul to introduce brotherly
exhortation (Rom. 12:1; Phil. 4:2).
6 James Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1998),

paulethi.doc
2/21/02
©J. Lyle Story
Story, p.3

This living theology reveals certain guiding principles:

1. The kerygma-pattern gives the structure to Christian morality. We are

indebted to C.H. Dodd for his summation of basic Christian preaching, which is
connected with moral exhortation. Paul's evangelical preaching is accompanied by an
ethical appeal.
a. The fulfillment of Scripture. Just as Jesus appeared as the
fulfillment of Scripture, so Paul likewise grounds basic Christian
teaching within the stream of Israel's history:
Rom. 15:4 For whatever was written in former days was written
for our instruction, so that by steadfastness and by the
encouragement of the scriptures we might have hope.
1 Cor. 10:11 These things happened to them (indicative) to serve
as an example, and they were written down to instruct us
(imperative), on whom the ends of the ages have come.
The text in Rom. 15:4 looks back to Psa. 69:6 as the grounds for
personal encouragement, pleasing others and bearing with the
weaknesses of others.
b. The Example of the Messiah's Incarnation. Paul uses a hymn
celebrating the pattern of Jesus' incarnation in Phil. 2:5-11 to plead
for the corresponding need for humility and selflessness in the
Philippian congregation; in a meaningful way they are summoned
to follow the amazing condescension of their Lord.
Phil 2:4 Let each of you look not to your own interests, but to the
interests of others.
5 Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus
(imperative),
6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality
with God as something to be exploited,
7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in
human likeness. And being found in human form (indicative),
c. The death (crucifixion) of Jesus. Paul uses the death of Jesus on
the cross to point to the supreme worth of an individual. That
person (brother or sister) is of inestimable worth and must be
treated as such. People are not ordinary individuals but are the
special objects of the love of God and must be treated as
exceptional persons. They are people of supreme worth, since
Christ died for them. In the context, the strong in faith are to
forego personal freedom for the sake of a weaker brother, who
could stumble by violating his own personal conscience:
Rom. 14:15 If your brother or sister is being injured by what you
eat, you are no longer walking in love. Do not let what you eat
cause the ruin (imperative) of one for whom Christ died
(indicative).
d. The burial of Jesus. As Paul speaks of faith-union with Christ,
he uses the language of baptism to affirm the death of believers

paulethi.doc
2/21/02
©J. Lyle Story
Story, p.4

with Christ in the watery grave. Christians have died with Christ
to their old way of life and have, correspondingly, been given a
new path of life to follow with Him:
Rom. 6:4 Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into
death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory
of the Father (indicative), so we too might walk in newness of life
(imperative).
Correspondingly, Christians are to put sin to death in their
members (6:12-14) since they are under the Lordship of Jesus
rather than the lordship of sin.
e. The resurrection and ascension of Jesus. Not only are
Christians united with Christ in death, they are united with Him in
His resurrection and ascension. This means that they are to set
their minds upon a different sphere that corresponds with their new
position.
Col. 3:1 So if you have been raised with Christ (indicative), seek
the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand
of God (imperative).
2 Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on
earth,
This new position means that certain virtues such as compassion,
kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience (3:12) belong to the
new sphere where Christ is seated. Their new position in the
heavenlies must lead to behavior that is consistent with their
position.
f. The gift of the Spirit. Paul similarly uses the life and gift of the
Spirit to affirm the spiritual nature of the Christian's new life:
Gal. 5:25 we live by the Spirit (indicative), let us also be guided by
the Spirit (imperative).
26 Let us not become conceited, competing against one another,
envying one another.
The Spirit, which is the basis for the new life, also provides the
dynamic and organic connection, thereby enabling the fruit of the
Spirit to be lived out in the context of the community.
g. The eschatological judgment. Paul also affirms that the
judgment seat of Christ is a worthy and serious motivation for
proper ethical conduct. He directs the readers to the future reward:
II Cor. 5:10 For all of us must appear before the judgment seat of
Christ (indicative), so that each may receive recompense for what
has been done in the body, whether good or evil (implied
imperative).
Paul intends that the people regard the judgment seat as a future
time of reckoning; it should lead to the genuine response of "being
pleasing to Him" (II Cor. 5:9).
At every step of Paul's ethical program, he argues and pleads for a basic inner
consistency between salvation history and morality. The moral demands, which are

paulethi.doc
2/21/02
©J. Lyle Story
Story, p.5

binding upon the people of God, are vitally linked to God's saving activity in Christ,
portrayed so clearly in baptism. Paul asks the rhetorical question,
Rom. 6:1 What then are we to say? Should we continue in sin in order that grace
may abound?
Through faith-union and baptism, one is united with Christ, which means that
behavior must be consistent with the new life in Christ:
Rom. 6:3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus
were baptized into his death?
6 We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might
be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin.
For Paul, the juxtaposition of the indicative and the imperative expresses the dual
existence of the believer. The indicative of God's grace states that the Christian has
obtained a share in the age to come. Without an indicative, an imperative can only spell
despair and defeat instead of a sure hope. Similarly, without the imperatives, Christians
become irresponsible revealing no regard to the wonderful gifts that have received. The
believer is "newly created and shaped by God's saving actions in past and present and by
the assured hope of the anticipated early consummation of salvation."7 In the same
breath, Paul also affirms that the Christian also lives in, and is threatened by, the powers
of the old age/aeon. The believer is to hold on to the deliverance that has already been
received.

2. Christian morality must be governed by a love, which frees others. By far,

the most important gift, which the Christians receives, is love. Love is the law of Christ.8
What Paul does is to place the Decalogue (Ten Words) under the principle of love. In
Rom. 13, he lists four specific commandments and then sums them up:
Rom. 13:8-10 Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for the one who
loves another has fulfilled the law.9 The commandments, “You shall not commit
adultery; You shall not murder; You shall not steal; You shall not covet”; and any
other commandment, are summed up in this word, “Love your neighbor as
yourself.”10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore, love is the fulfilling of
the law.
Similarly, he says that love fulfills the demands of the law (13:10). Paul echoes Jesus'
statements in which He had prioritized the commandments under the double love
commandment.9
Gal. 5:14 The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor
as yourself."
The priority of the love commandment is also expressed through the language of pleasing
another, with a view to what is good and builds up the other:
Romans 15:1 We who are strong ought to put up with the failings of the weak,
5Romans 8:7 so that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the
flesh but according to the Spirit.
6Ibid., p. 227.
8Gal. 6:2 Bear one another's burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. (NRSV)
9 Mark 12:30 you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your

mind, and with all your strength.' 31 The second is this, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is
no other commandment greater than these." The text here is taken from the Shema of Deut. 6:4-5 and the
text of Lev. 19:18.

paulethi.doc
2/21/02
©J. Lyle Story
Story, p.6

and not to please ourselves.2 Each of us must please our neighbor for the good
purpose of building up the neighbor.3 For Christ did not please himself; but, as it
is written, “The insults of those who insult you have fallen on me.”
Through three coordinated antithetical clauses, Paul links together "faith operating
through love = a new creation = keeping the commandments of God:

What does not count What does count

Gal. 5:6 For in Christ Jesus neither
circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for
anything;
Gal. 6:15 For neither circumcision nor
uncircumcision is anything;
1 Cor. 7:19 Circumcision is nothing, and
uncircumcision is nothing;
the only thing that counts is faith working
through love.
but a new creation is everything!
but obeying the commandments of God is
everything.

Love gives full expression to the content and purpose of the divine Law; faith operating
through love is the expression of the new creation and constitutes genuine obedience to
the commandments of God. The newfound freedom in Christ provides no opportunity for
the expression of selfish concerns but rather, directs one to serve others in a spirit of love.
The supernatural infusion of the love of God into the human heart produces the
other virtues that are noted (hope, rejoicing in suffering, perseverance, character) in Rom.
5:3-5. While love does not replace the Law, it provides the new motivation and dynamic
for fulfilling and surpassing the demands of the Law. While the Law was good and
expressed the will of God for His people, it was also impotent (toV gaVr
ajduvnaton tou' novmou, "for what the Law could not do" in Rom. 8:3)
in terms of the power of sin (Rom. 7:11-17; II Cor. 3). The Spirit of God sets the people
of God free from the condemnation, which arises from the weakness of the human person
in terms of sin, flesh and death. Paul does affirm that the just requirement of the Law
remains in effect—as the standard of righteous living—in tune with love:
2 Tim. 3:16 All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for
reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
When Paul comments on the first fruit, love, he then shows how love behaves
(Gal. 5:22-23). Paul's hymn in the praise of love affirms the utter priority of love. This
hymn "is at the centre of all Paul's teaching both for the individual and social ethics."10
This gift and virtue transcends all others.
In support of the fulfillment and enduring perfection of love, "love never fails" (I
Cor. 13:8), Paul uses a temporal contrast between the present and future. In doing so, he
underscores both the transience of the spiritual gifts and the permanence of love. It is
love and love alone that endures. All other religious activities, gifts and attainments will
be nullifed.
Now Then

prophecies (v. 8) will be done away (v. 8)

10 "The indicative describes what God has already done, and provides the basis for the imperative, which
tells A. S. Herbert, "Biblical Ethics," A Companion to the Bible, (New York: Oxford University Press,
1958),
p. 434.

paulethi.doc
2/21/02
©J. Lyle Story
Story, p.7

tongues (v. 8) they will cease (v. 8)

knowledge (v. 8) it will be done away (v. 8)
we know in part (v. 9) when the perfect comes (v. 10)
we prophesy in part (v. 9) the partial will be done away (v. 10)
Now Then
Two illustrations which picture the and the permanence of the then
transience of the now
when I was a child (v. 11) when I became a man (v. 11)
I used to speak as a child (v. 11) I did away with childish things (v. 11)
I used to think as a child (v. 11)
I used to reason as a child (v. 11)
For now we see in a mirror dimly (v. 12) but then face to face (v. 12)
Now I know in part (v. 12) then I shall I know fully
just as I also was fully known (v. 12)
But now abide faith, hope, love, these but the greatest of these is love (v. 13)
three (v. 13)

When the perfect comes, love alone remains. All of the other gifts, such as knowledge
and virtue will end at their own appropriate time. The passing from one age to another
will leave love unchanged, while all the charismatic gifts and virtues will undergo change
or dissolution. Love is the one virtue whose potential worth and work know no end.
Christian love frees others and stands in stark opposition to every form of spiritual
individualism and egoism; this issue is addressed to some extent in I Cor. 8-10 and Rom.
14.11 In a general way, Paul affirms that the freedom in Christ must manifest itself in
Christian service through love. On the one hand, he celebrates the freedom of Christians
in relation to meat and drink, and yet he is also aware of the need to be sensitive to the
weak Christians. From a theological perspective, Paul sides with the strong, those who
are free to enjoy meat that has been offered up to idols in pagan temples. He says that
nothing in and of itself is unclean;12 "all things are permitted" (I Cor. 10:23). However,
Paul is likewise concerned with the attitude of the "strong," wherein their freedom could
be used to violate the conscience of the "weak." Ladd states, "love requires that when the
free man finds himself in a situation where the exercise of his freedom would really
offend a brother and cause him to violate his conscience, thus, lead him to sin, in love he
is to abstain."13
Responsible love maintains an appropriate balance between legalism and
freedom. We have modified Dunn's diagram:
111Cor. 8:2 Anyone who claims to know something does not yet have the necessary knowledge;
1 Corinthians 10:23"All things are lawful," but not all things are beneficial. "All things are lawful," but not
all things build up. 24 Do not seek your own advantage, but that of the other.
Romans 14:15 If your brother or sister is being injured by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love.
Do not let what you eat cause the ruin of one for whom Christ died.
12Romans 14:14 I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but it is
unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean.
13George Eldon Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Co., 1974), p. 523. Ladd goes on to state that this does not mean that the behavior of all Christians is to be
governed by the conscience of the weaker brothers; this would only lead to the "rigorism of the weakest
Christians...bound in the fetters of rigorism."

paulethi.doc
2/21/02
©J. Lyle Story
Story, p.8

L I B E R T Y
Freedom----------------------------------------------------Legalism
Love Love14

Christian liberty embraces the full spectrum from unrestrained freedom to legalism; the
balance between the two poles can only be maintained by an active and aggressive love.
Liberty means that a person is free and possesses genuine autonomy. Freedom, however,
is not simply a prized right, which allows a person to pursue merely personal interests.
Liberty is to be conditioned by an active responsibility that seeks what is good and
wholesome for others. Love is not an emotion but a decision of the will to benefit
brothers and sisters. Love also means the acceptance of the other members of the
community without religious judgment:
Rom. 14:1 Welcome those who are weak in faith,
but not for the purpose of quarreling over opinions.
Romans 15:7 Welcome one another, therefore,
just as Christ has welcomed you, for the glory of God.
In 14:1, Paul contrasts an unqualified acceptance of "weak in faith" with a qualified
acceptance of them for the purpose of quarreling over opinions. In 15:7, Paul enjoins
acceptance of the other members of the community in a way that reflects Christ's
acceptance of each person. Thus, in this one contingency issue, Paul embodies the
tension between love and freedom wherein love sets a believer free to seek the well being
of another. There is clearly a community-ethic that is to characterize Christian behavior
and giving (II Cor. 8-9), but this does not reflect a broad-based social ethic or program.
His concern in II Cor. 8-9 is for a gracious sharing in the community, a liberality of
sharing to all (II Cor. 9:13; Gal. 6:10; Rom. 15:26). Paul also expresses a concern for
needy non-believers in Rom. 12:13-14—a love for strangers (cf. also I Thess. 3:12; 5:15;
II Cor. 9:13; Phil. 4:5; II Tim. 2:24; Tit. 3:2, 8).

3. Christian morality is based upon the sub-structure of the Old Testament and
traditional wisdom.
While Paul affirms that the Torah has been actualized in Christ,15 he nonetheless
asserts that the Old Testament reveals the ongoing will of God. He also appeals to
several specific commandments of the Ten Words as yet binding upon the people of God.
To be sure, love is basic to the prohibition against murder (Rom. 13:8-10). That is to say,
murder constitutes a violation of love and the infinite value of each human being. But the
prohibition against murder is still in effect. Elsewhere, in the household codes, Paul
refers to the command to love father and mother as an ongoing standard for human
conduct, which was not abrogated by the coming of Christ.16 Paul draws upon various
vice lists,17 virtue lists18 and traditional wisdom, "do by nature what the law requires"
(Rom. 2:14-15). The Old Testament as Torah (instruction) was written for our
instruction (Rom. 15:4).19 In a general sense, the Old Testament serves as the
14 Dunn, p. 660.
15Rom.
10:4 tevlo" gaVr novmou CristoV" eij" dikaiosuvnhn pantiV
tw'/ pisteuvonti.
16Eph. 6:2 "Honor your father and mother" -- this is the first commandment with a promise: (NRSV)
17 Rom. 1:29-31; Rom. 13:13; I Cor. 5:10-11;I Cor. 6:9-10; II Cor. 12:20; Gal. 5:19-21; Col. 3:5, 8.
18

paulethi.doc
2/21/02
©J. Lyle Story
Story, p.9

substructure of Paul's thinking about morality and ethics.

4. Christian morality is given the dynamic of divine grace, a transformed life

and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Grace governs the entire saving event expressed through the kerygma; correspondingly,
grace must govern the attitudes and behavior of Christians in community:
Eph. 4:32 and be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as
God in Christ forgave you.
Eph. 5:2 And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a
fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.
Such unimaginable grace is to become the new norm for relationships in the community,
and demonstrated through care and concern for the poor (II Cor. 8:8-9). God's gracious
act of giving His Son prompts the necessary attention to the poor, even for the believers
to give beyond their ability (II Cor. 8:1-4). God's grace is expressed through justice and a
concern for equality (II Cor. 9:9-10). Because sin and death reign over the self that hears
the Law, people cannot attain righteousness by a perfect obedience to the Law. Hearing
only makes matters worse. There is only one solution--to be set free from this bondage
by being transferred to a dominion where the Spirit prevails and where Christ is Lord.
The just requirement of the Law can only be fulfilled, where one is not under law but
under grace:
Romans 8:4 so that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who
walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
As Cranfield notes, "The gospel was certainly not given in order that a new legalism
might be established more securely than the old . . .. The law's requirement will be
fulfilled by the determination of the direction, the set, of our lives by the Spirit, by our
being enabled again and again to decide for the Spirit and against the flesh, to turn our
backs more and more upon our own insatiable egotism and to turn our faces more and
more toward the freedom which the Spirit of God has given us."20 The same freeing
dynamic of grace is affirmed in Rom. 6:14, "For sin will have no dominion over you,
since you are not under law but under grace."
We find a clear paradox here, in that the Christian can do the requirement of the
Law only by ceasing to live under it. Leander Keck says, "Precisely the devout religious
affirmer of the law of God is exposed as being condemned to inevitable failure. Just as
the failure of communism becomes apparent to one who has lived with it and abandoned
it, so the failure of the Law is evident to one who is no longer under the Law but under
grace."21 In other words, because the good does not reside in the self, one cannot
automatically bring forth some inherent goodness. The good needs to be done, but its
accomplishment is frustrated by the power of sin and death. Paul does not blame the
body or the Law. Instead he insists that the problem lies with sin, which perverts
everything, including the Law. Through union with Christ in His death, the power of sin
and death is dealt with and the new dynamic of the Spirit allows for the release of new
life. Christians are transferred to a new sphere where the Spirit of grace prevails. It
appears that Paul, as a Jew, had thought that people must keep the Law in order to be
saved. But now as a Christian, the order is reversed--people must be saved by the grace
of God in order to keep the Law.
20C.E.B. Cranfield, The Epistle to the Romans, (ICC) (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1975), pp. 384-385.
21Leander Keck,

paulethi.doc
2/21/02
©J. Lyle Story
Story, p.10

The wonder and pattern of divine grace in the incarnational-event now becomes
the dynamic for the new life:
2 Cor. 8:9 For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was
rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that by his poverty you might become
rich.
The Incarnation exemplifies grace, which is then to become the proper norm of Christian
conduct and ethics. Thus, when Paul collects money for the poor saints in Jerusalem, he
appeals to grace as the dynamic motivation for generous giving.
Paul makes it clear that both the knowledge of the right and the power to effect
the right are the gifts of the Holy Spirit.
Gal. 5:16 Live by the Spirit, I say, and you will certainly not gratify the desires of
the flesh.
Gal. 5:25 If we live by the Spirit, let us also be guided by the Spirit.
The text of Gal. 5 makes it clear that guidance by the Spirit and the dynamic of the Spirit
are especially provided for proper and appropriate ethical conduct. This available gift of
the Spirit is not limited to a few Christians, but given to all Christians, i.e., because
Christians are "in Christ" the Spirit in terms of ethical behavior also leads them, primarily
on the pathway of love.
Godly attitudes and behavior are the vibrant expressions of a transformed life; this
principle may build on Jesus' teaching that good fruit comes from a good tree (Matt.
7:15-20). And the power that makes for a fundamental change is the dynamic grace of
God. This is what led to Luther's statement, "It is not good works which make a good
man, but a good man who does good works." External laws can orient people to the good
life but cannot impart the power to keep the laws, since they cannot break the power of
"sin in the flesh." The power spheres of sin are the flesh, the world and the devil. God
implants a new principle of life which overcomes the old nature, cleanses the human
heart, and empowers one to make the necessary changes. The new morality is the direct
outgrowth of the new life. Obviously, the people of God still live "in the flesh" and live
in "this age," and are exposed to the pressures of this world—and ethical effort is
demanded. However, in this process of moral progress, God promises the ongoing gift of
His Holy Spirit:
I Thess. 4:8—"Therefore, he who rejects this instruction does not reject man but
God who gives you His Holy Spirit."

5. Christian morality is grounded in the teaching and example of Jesus.

In I Cor. 9:14, Paul uses Jesus' instruction concerning financial provision for those who
teach the people of God:
1 Cor. 9:14 In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the
gospel should get their living by the gospel.
Evidently, Paul appeals to Jesus' saying, preserved in the Synoptics.22 Paul also appeals
to the ruling of the Lord Jesus with respect to divorce:
1 Cor. 7:10 To the married I give this command -- not I but the Lord -- that the
wife should not separate from her husband.
22Matt.10:10 no bag for your journey, or two tunics, or sandals, or a staff; for laborers deserve their food.
Luke 10:7 7 Remain in the same house, eating and drinking whatever they provide, for the laborer deserves
to be paid. Do not move about from house to house.

paulethi.doc
2/21/02
©J. Lyle Story
Story, p.11

This most clearly refers to Jesus' argument with the Pharisees concerning divorce (Mark
10:1-12). Jesus points here to the creation mandate ("in the beginning it was not so") and
interprets the divorce clause (also part of the Torah) as an accommodation to the
sinfulness and hardness of the human condition. In these two instances, Paul uses the
teaching of Jesus as the moral criterion for specific ethical issues. Further, Paul also
affirms that the ongoing exemplary model of Jesus is continued in and through His Body,
the Church.23

6. Christian morality reflects the tension between the radically new Christian
existence in the context of prevalent social institutions. Paul argues for the abrogation
of differences which had hitherto separated people (race, gender, socio-economic status)
on the grounds that the people of God are "all one" in Christ Jesus. The differences are
still there, but they should no longer matter with respect to the identity, attitudes and
behavior of the people of God:
Gal. 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek,
there is neither slave nor free,
there is neither male nor female;
for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Thus Paul argues that the Christian is a "new creation" (II Cor. 5:17; Gal. 5:16) and
people can no longer be regarded "according to the flesh," i.e., "from a human point of
view" (II Cor. 5:15-16). Previous distinctions, which had hitherto separated people cease
to exist (Col. 3:9-11; Eph. 2:14-16) when believers "put on Christ." Through personal
faith in Christ, all people have direct access to God, are heirs of Abraham and share in the
new inheritance (Gal. 3:26-29).24
However, in many ways, Paul comes
through as a conservative, who does not really challenge the social insitutions, such as
slavery; he does argue for a new relationship of brotherhood in the book of Philemon that
renders slavery null and void. However, at the conclusion of several of his letters, Paul
includes specific instructions to people of various groupings (husbands, wives, slaves,
masters, parents, children)—commonly called "Household Codes." In many ways, the
codes are patriarchal and reflect the norms of mores of the Middle East at that time. And
yet, those who are in superior positions are directed to reciprocate kind feelings and grace
towards those who are in subordinate positions. In I Cor. 7, Paul provides some ethical
directives regarding various status levels, relative to singleness, marriage, widowhood,
believing/unbelieving spouses, circumcision and uncircumcision, slave, free and virgin.
Paul's essential message is that the people of God are not to pursue a changed
status—since the Lord's Coming is at hand, "the time is short" (I Cor. 7:29). Paul's
conservative posture of "maintenance" of social status is directly related to his perception
of the Lord's imminent Coming, which will obliterate all such human changes.

7. Christian morality must also be reflected in a responsible work-ethic and

attitudes towards possessions and the poor. Paul's concerns for morality also extend to
responsible work by the members of the community, noted in the various "Household
23See I Cor. 2:16; II Cor. 13:3; I Thess. 1:6; I Cor. 4:16; II Thess. 3:7; Phil. 3:17; Rom. 15:7; Gal. 2:20.
24The freedom, which Paul advocates, was also misinterpreted by certain false teachers as warrant for
antinomianism (I Cor. 5:1) or asceticism (I Cor. 7:3). Instead Paul counsels responsibility to marriage and
sexual relations.

paulethi.doc
2/21/02
©J. Lyle Story
Story, p.12

Codes" and inhis comments in I and II Thessalonians. In I Thess. 4:11, Paul advocates a
quiet life, working with one's own hands and financial independence from others. This
injunction continues in II Thess. 3:10 in Paul's directive of social responsibility by
working. It may well be that a certain eschatological enthusiasm ("hype") had caused
some of the Thessalonian believers to abandon their jobs. Paul voices his concern that
members of the community are walking in a "disorderly" fashion (II Thess. 3:6, 11) and
thus, he instructs the community to withdraw its "friendly dealings" and "food" from
these who are behaving in an irresponsible fashion. In both passages Paul is concerned
with the witness to those "outside." The anticipation of the new eschatological situation,
created in Christ, must be accompanied by healthy organization and responsibility, which
are required by persons who live in this world. In broader fashion, Paul affirms that love
is the true context in which the Thessalonian believers are to work with their own hands
(I Thess. 4:9, 11; II Thess. 3:12).
Mutual love is not only expressed by one's own financial independence but by
sensitive attention and work for those whose basic needs are not met (Eph. 4:28; Acts
20:34-35). A governing norm for possessions is that of "sufficiency"; the corresponding
attitude is that of contentment (I Tim. 6:8; Phil. 4:11). By way of contrast, the Christian
is to avoid the anxious pursuit or love of riches (I Tim. 6:7, 9-10), the pursuit of "more"
for the sake of more (I Cor. 7:30-31). Further, Paul's directives are positioned within the
broader context of a social order that is on the verge of passing away (I Cor. 7:32-35).
Paul expresses concern for needy non-believers as well (Rom. 12:13-14) with his
injunction for hospitality (filoxeniva) of the stranger; the preceding text dealt with
the sharing with fellow Christians ("saints"). The enjoinder is further strengthened by
Paul's more general statements, "doing good for each other and for all" (I Thess. 3:12;
5:15; II Cor. 9:13).
Paul notes the incredible gift of God's grace, which then is to become the guiding
principle for giving to the poor. Paul motivates the Corinthian church to give to the poor
in the mother church in Jerusalem (II Cor. 8:9). Genuine love is reflected in the concern
and financial assistance for the poor; such giving reflects God's immeasurable grace (II
Cor. 8:6-7). God's grace enables people to give even beyond their ability (II Cor. 8:1-6).
He regards that such giving to the poor is a harvest of seed, which God has provided;
such a harvest also reflects God's concern for justice (II Cor. 9:9-10). Paul points to an
important principle of "equality" (ijsovth"), which is a guiding principle for giving
to the poor.25

8. Christian morality must be directed towards unity in the Body of Christ. In

Eph. 1-3, Paul provides the broad theological background of the work of the Cosmic
Christ, who unites everything and everyone in Himself. In 4:1, Paul progresses to argue
for the unified purpose of God in the Church:
The opening conjunction, "therefore" (ou\n) of 4:1, expresses a clear causal
relationship between the unity that has been effected by summing up all things in Christ,
the fullness that belongs to the community (3:19), the reality of the "one new man" (Jew
and Gentile--2:15), and the exhortation to preserve that unity found in 4:1-6.26 There is
nothing that lies outside the purview or authority of Christ's universal fullness, which has
25Cf. Also Rom. 15:26; II Cor. 8:15.
26The verb, "to entreat/exhort" (parakalew) is frequently found in Paul to introduce brotherly
exhortation (Rom. 12:1; Phil. 4:2).

paulethi.doc
2/21/02
©J. Lyle Story
Story, p.13

now been entrusted to the new community. This is the Christian response, Noblesse
oblige, spiritual rank and privilege impose moral obligations on the believers (Phil. 1:27)
for assuring the overall unity of the Christian community. Attitudes and actions are to be
constantly viewed against the wonderful position that belongs to the individuals in the
community. Christians are to constantly ask the questions as to whether their attitudes
and actions will build up or destroy the Body of Christ. This is certainly at the heart of
Paul's directives in I Cor. 12-14—"for the common good," "building up" (edification) and
is certainly related to the broad understanding of the term, "fellowship"
(koinwniva).

paulethi.doc
2/21/02
©J. Lyle Story
 Redaction Criticism: Definition and Example
(Matt. 18:10-14; Lk. 15:1-7)

Introduction
This brief over-view and example of redaction criticism at work will prepare us
for a more detailed analysis of the individual chapters (Matt. 18; Luke 15), specifically by
giving full attention to four individual parables. An analysis of the four parables forms a
natural lead-in to the chapter on Jesus' Revolutionary Paradigm of Grace. The four
parables together speak of the unmitigated grace of God that compels people to act in
grace towards others who are "lost" (Lk. 15:4—twice, 6) or "straying" (Matt. 18:12—two
times, 13). Our intent in this chapter is not to investigate the historical origins or
proponents of this discipline or the complexities and nuances; such a study would move
us into issues that lie outside our understanding the Jesus-Story Then and Now.

Definition
The term, "Redaction Criticism" is derived from the German word,
Redaktiongeschicte, meaning the "editorial history" or "story." It is both a literary and
historical discipline, which analyzes the way that the Evangelists composed and applied
an earlier source to fit the ongoing needs of the Early Church. It deals with the
theological and ecclesiastical motives of an author, which are revealed through the
collection, arrangement, editing and application of material to the Evangelists' church and
the community at large as it is faced with the need to re-apply the material for their own
faith-communities. This approach presupposes that the Evangelists are not disinterested
compilers of the Jesus material (as suggested by the proponents of Form Criticism).
Instead, they are theologians in their own right, who have a message to their respective
faith-communities. Redaction Criticism considers the theological message of each
Evangelist, this opens the reader to sense something of the literary and theological
distinctives of each Evangelist and their application to an early church life situation.
We may find an analogy in the way that a pastor will "tailor" her/his message to
the audience. For example, a pastor may give a basic message one way to the faith-
community on a Sunday morning service. The pastor is then asked to speak to prisoners
in an incarceration facility. The pastor is unable to preach the same message to the
inmates. If she/he does so, the audience may well feel that the pastor is "out of touch"
with life as it is in the penal facility Instead the pastor will take the same text, emphasize
certain aspects, provide different illustrations and application that would be helpful to the
inmates as they face very difficult situations in prison. Similarly, the pastor can take that
same text and provide a different "take" on the text when speaking to a children's class, a
high school setting, a Union Mission or an audience in a senior citizens' facility. The
same core message may be adapted and applied in ever changing life-settings. A good
communicator is able to adapt, tailor, illustrate and apply the message to help different
faith-communities in their own setting.
A good friend of mine, Dr. Dow Robinson worked among the Aztec Indians in
Mexico, specifically working hand in hand with several Wycliffe Bible Translators in
translating a Bible that would communicate to the needs of the Aztec Indians; translation
involves contextualization. I remember a discussion I had with Dow about some of the
difficulties in taking the Greek text and contextualizing the message in a far different
cultural and religious setting. One example is the verb and noun, "to circumcise" and
"circumcision." The Aztec Indians have no word or frame of reference for these two
words. The nearest word-family in their vocabulary is "to castrate" or "castration," which
is not what the writers of the NT meant. The faith-committee of Wycliffe Bible
Translators struggled long and hard to find an expression that would communicate the
biblical and theological meaning of this word-family. It is an important word-family in
both the OT and NT. They finally arrived at the expression, "to make a mark on oneself."
Were the Bible translators unfaithful to the Bible's "exact words" (ipsissima verba)?
Certainly not! They were deeply sensitive to the "very voice" (ipssissima vox), the living
and abiding voice of Jesus that could be meaningful to the Aztec Indians. There is no
way that the committee could provide a dictionary that would give the history and
theological significance of this word-family within the Jewish tradition. This example
may parallel the role of the Evangelists, their own faith-community contexts and the
needs of the faith community to which they wrote. Thus, there is a give and take between
the Evangelist, his faith-community and the needs of the community that receives the
message. In a parallel way, Dow Robinson is an individual who is able to express the
Jesus story as "The Gospel according to Dow," although he would never make such a
claim. Dow is also a part of a larger faith-community, The Wycliffe Bible Translators,
who write the message to an audience, who is in the process of becoming literate and
then conversant with their own language. Even a theologically important word,
expressed by "conversion," was not meaningful to the Aztec Indians. Here, Dow, along
with the committee decided on the expression, "to become a follower of the way," an
expression that is used to describe the early Christians in the book of Acts, and a term
that the Aztec Indians could understand. To be sure, the story about Dow is an extreme
example in that the Wycliffe Bible Translators are responsible for translating from Greek
to Nahuat (language of the Aztecs), while the writers of the Gospels are not faced with
the challenge of translation per se. However, their motives, which caused them to
contextualize the story for the audience is still the same; they help their readers
understand the message in their own life-setting.
As such, the four Evangelists can serve as hermeneutical models for all of us in
adapting the Gospel message to our own life-settings, e.g., the post-modern generation.
Norman Perrin states, "Redaction criticism . . . is concerned with studying the theological
motivation of an author as this is revealed in the collection, arrangement, editing and
motivation of traditional material . . . within the traditions of early Christianity."1
Redaction Criticism is carried out at the micro-level, looking for the ways in
which various paragraphs are related: emphases, key words, omissions, seams,
summaries, arrangements, modifications, additions, insertions, vocabulary and style. An
attempt is made at the micro-level to sense the unique thrust of each Evangelist in the
individual paragraphs. Redaction Criticism is also carried out at the macro-level, by
noting patterns and theological emphases by each Evangelist—as a whole. Redaction
Criticism is not the "scissors and paste" approach (in computer language with the buttons,
"cut" and "copy"), which was stressed by the Form Critics, with no theological emphasis
or message to a faith-community. For them, the Gospels are the unedited units, "pearls
on a string," that came to the Evangelists in oral and certainly in written form.
1 Norman Perrin, What is Redaction Criticism, (London: SPCK, 1970), p. 1.
An Example of Redaction Criticism at Work
The two versions of the Parable of the Lost Sheep (Matt. 18:10-14; Lk. 15:3-7)
are laid out in parallel format to note the similarities and differences, which will
subsequently be expressed through a more detailed analysis in the forthcoming chapters.2
Luke 15:1-7 Matthew 18:10-14
1 Now the tax collectors and sinners were 10 “See that you do not look down on one
all drawing near to hear him.2 And the of these little ones; for I tell you that in
Pharisees and the scribes were grumbling, heaven their angels always behold the face
saying, “This man receives sinners and eats of my Father who is in heaven.
with them.”
3 So he told them this parable:4 “What 12 What do you think? If a man has a
man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he hundred sheep, and one of them has gone
has lost one of them, does not leave the astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on
ninety-nine in the wilderness, and go after the mountains and go in search of
the one which is lost, until he finds it? the one that went astray?
5 And when he has found it, he lays it on 13 And if he finds it, truly, I say to you, he
his shoulders, rejoicing.6 And when he rejoices over it more than over the
comes home, he calls together his friends ninety-nine
and his neighbors, saying to them, ‘Rejoice
with me, for I have found my sheep,
which was lost.’ that never went astray.
7 Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy 14 So it is not the will of my Father who is
in heaven over one sinner who repents than in heaven that one of these little ones
over ninety-nine righteous persons who should perish.
need no repentance.

Comments
· Context is that of Jesus' defense
against the Pharisees and scribes for
why He has table fellowship with
tax collectors and sinners (vss. 1-
2)—Pharisees and scribes'
observation and subsequent
grumbling.
· In a broader literary context, the
"meal" is a thematic concern in Lk.
14-15: (14:1-6) eating bread on the
Sabbath and healing a man with
dropsy at the meal, (vss. 7-14)
lesson to guests and hosts at a meal,
(vss. 12-14) concern for the poor at
important meals—who to invite and
why; Parable of the Great Banquet
(14:15-24). The idea of a
2 Elements of repetition or continuity are underlined; elements of difference are italicized.
Comments
· Context is that of community life
and discipleship with a warning to
individuals within the community
to not look down on one who has
gone astray.
· In a broader literary context, Matt.
18 is followed by the evangelist's
seam in 19:1, "And it came to pass
when Jesus finished these words . .
." There are five such seams in
Matthew, which conclude Jesus'
teaching and activity in each of the
five blocks, each ending with a
similar formulaic phrase, "And
when Jesus finished these sayings .
 celebratory meal in 15:1-2 is
challenged by Jesus' critics and the
older brother, who refuses to
participate in the celebratory meal
for his brother (15:1-2; 25-32).
· Jesus counters disdain over the
outcast people with whom He
celebrates table-fellowship.
· Emphatic rhetorical question
introduces the parable, "What man
of you . . . does not leave and go in
search"? (v. 4).
Self-evident Answer: "Of course,
this is the way that any shepherd
would behave."
· Use of a conditional sentence as the
first element in the parable: "if he
has lost one of them"? (v. 4)
· Numbers of sheep are the same:
100, 99, 1 (v. 4)
· The sheep is lost (3 times)—one
who is outside of the covenant
community. The word "lost" is
found seven times in cha. 15. The
use of the perfect participle "lost"
(ajpolwlov") suggests the
state "from which recovery is
possible":3
3A.B. Bruce, p. 293. The middle form of the verb
"ajpovllusqai" denotes a position of
perdition. In Lk. 19:10, Jesus says that He has
come to save the ajpolwlov", those who are
. ." (7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1).
Each of the five sections contains a
combination of narrative and
teaching material and concludes
with this formula. This five-fold
structure, common in Judaism, may
reveal Matthew's purpose of
showing Jesus as the fulfillment of
the Law (Pentateuch—5 books),
"Do not think that I came to destroy
the Law or the Prophets. I did not
come to destroy but to fulfill."
(5:17).
· By way of inference, the more
established members of the fold are
not to exhibit pride and disdain over
some struggling with faith. They
are not to be comfortable in their
prideful position but always need to
be in pursuit of the straying
member.
· Emphatic rhetorical question
introduces the parable, "What do
you think . . . does he not leave the
ninety nine and go after"? (v. 12).
Self-evident Answer: "Of course,
this is the way that any shepherd
would behave."
· Use of a conditional sentence as the
first element in the parable: "if a
man has a hundred sheep and one of
them has gone astray?" (v. 12).
· Numbers of sheep are the same:
100, 99, 1 (v. 12).
· The sheep has gone astray (3
times)—not the ones who are
outside of the covenant community
but those who belong.
 · Joy is celebrated in heaven for the
repentance/finding of the lost one.
The joy is contagious and must be
shared with others (by human
figures and heavenly angels in all
three parables). Surely this is the
way that anyone would express a
response to such finding.
· Part of a trilogy of parables with the
following structure:
1) A Central Figure is introduced.
2) Something or someone of value
related to the central figure is Lost.
3) A Search is made with an
unusual expenditure of effort.
4) The object or person is Found.
5) The recovery of what is lost must
be Celebrated with Joy. Thus, the three
parables in Luke constitute Jesus' defense
of His table fellowship with outcasts—thus
The Searching Shepherd, Searching
Woman, Searching Father
· Emphasis on the acceptance of the
lost one, which must be celebrated
with joy—not critique (Pharisees
and scribes in vss. 1-2; the
discordant voice of the older
brother—vss. 25-32)
· The parable is summarized and
applied at the conclusion of the
actual parable (v. 7).
· Joy by the shepherd who has found
the straying one.
· Emphasis and stress of the "little
ones"—in a chapter where the term
can mean the disciples (v. 3), literal
"children" (vss. 6-9) or "straying
members of the community" (vss.
10-14)
· Overall emphasis of Matthew 18 is
that of community concerns: issues
of pride (vss. 1-9), need for active
restoration and sensitive and
gracious treatment of the straying
member, who is within the Church
(vss. 10-14), need for a sensitive
process of restoration, community
decisions, community prayer,
presence of Jesus (vvs. 15-20)
against the broad theological
context of the unimaginable grace
and forgiveness of God (18:21-35)
· Restoration of the straying one is
uppermost and must govern the
active searching for the erring
member of the community—and is
followed by the need for a sensitive
judicial process and the
magnanimous forgiveness and
grace of God
· The parable is summarized and
applied at the conclusion of the
actual parable (v. 14).

Thus, the Redaction critic notes the various elements within the two paragraphs
(micro) with their distinctive emphases against the broad perspectives of the two
Evangelists who address their faith-communities. We do not possess a triple-tradition of
this parable; therefore, we must proceed cautiously. However, it is not strained to see
that Luke's parable is probably earlier than Matthew's. Luke's parable accords well with
the "Gospel for the Outcast" (Lk. 9-19), in that it deals with the constant complaint of
Jesus' critics that He accepts the outcast and celebrates table-fellowship with them.4 The
constant critique leveled against Jesus is that He is a drunkard, glutton and friend of the
tax-collectors and sinners—the sneer from His opponents. Matthew's parable is directed
to the disciples and the faith-community. Matthew does not follow Luke's version in
terms of those who are lost; instead Matthew expresses concern that the more stable
members of the community might adopt a more censorious approach to the straying
member of the community. That straying one is to be sought out with grace, sensitivity
and humility; the community must be very careful not to treat a fellow member of the
community as a lost member, for whom no restoration is possible. The community is to
adopt the response of the angels in heaven ("joy") for the restoration of the straying
member (v. 10). If they restrict membership in the community, they will run counter to
the Divine will that is intent on restoration not destruction or exclusion (v. 14). The
community will have to answer to God for its censoriousness.
Limitations. Although the witness for the legitimacy of Redaction Criticism is
strong, nevertheless there are some limitations. It needs to be stated that there is a degree
of subjectivity in our ability to be sure about the distinction between traditional material
that an Evangelist has received and redactional material that the Evangelist intends to
express. Redaction Critics often arrive at an unwarranted certainty as to an Evangelist's
purpose. Frequently, there is often the danger of the use of "over-Redaction," i.e., finding
a theological point under every difference in wording (micro-level). The small
differences need to be read against the broad perspective, unique theological message and
community issues. Further, many critics over-emphasize the Evangelist's creativity in
creating new paragraphs to deal with his concerns. Finally, there is a clear danger in
overlooking the traditional material; after all, the Jesus-story, as a whole, provides the
historical framework for doing theology.
Summary. While there are some limitations to the discipline of Redaction
Criticism, these should not keep us from appreciating the role of the Evangelists who had
an important message to convey. The importance of Redaction Criticism should not be
minimized because of its dangers with over-use. The Evangelists are inspired authors,
who have a message to convey to a community. The Gospels are not just historical
accounts told in a "blow-by-blow" manner as with video clips, one after the other. To be
sure, there is a solid base in history. In Luke's prologue (1:1-4), he makes it abundantly
clear that he recounts the "eyewitness" accounts of others, who witnessed Jesus' activity
and teaching; however he does so by addressing Theophilus with his stated purpose, "that
you may know the exact account" (v. 4) of what Jesus began to do and to teach (Acts
1:1). The Evangelists are no mere chroniclers of historical data." The Gospels are 'case-
study' workbooks for theological truth, yielding not just theology taught but theology
lived and modeled."5 They are people of faith and passion, who speak to faith-
communities. They interpret the Jesus-story as they go, with a clear eye on the historical
truths coupled with a profound sensitivity to the needs of the Early Church. Theological
truth is conveyed through the various "stories" of the Jesus-event. Their theological
concerns possess immediate relevance for the Early Church communities. The historical
and theological truths work with each other in an inter-textual manner; they complement
each other. To understand the Gospels, we must work with both history and theology.
4Mk. 2:16; Lk. 6:39; Lk. 19:7; Matt. 11:19.
5GrantR. Osborne, "Redaction Criticism," Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, ed. Joel B. Green,
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992), p. 668.
The Gospels are stories told in real life-situations and have bearing upon other faith
communities then and now (contextual). In turn, they can help us to contextualize the
Gospel message in the 21st century as we seek to communicate the historical facts and
theological message to a post-modern community. This study can be helpful as we can
see the inspiring work of the Spirit of God, at work in the composition, theological
message to bring out the many nuances of the stories within their own literary, historical
and theological context. We can affirm the doctrine of inspiration as the superintending
work of the Spirit enables the writers to change, omit, expand and organize the various
paragraphs of the Gospels; the differing messages of the same stories allows us to affirm
the individuality of the Gospel writers—all led by the Spirit, who helps the editors to be
reminded of the events and their significance (cf. Jn. 14:26).6

For Further Reading

Norman Perrin, What is Redaction Criticism? (London: SPCK, 1970).
Robert T. Fortna, "Redaction Criticism, N.T.," in Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible,
Supplementary Volume, ed Keith Crim (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1976).
Robert H. Stein, "What is Redaktionsgeschichte?" JBL 88 (1969).
Robert H. Stein, "The Proper Methodology for Ascertaining A Markan Redaction
History" Nov. 13 (1971).
I. Howard Marshall, ed. New Testament Interpretation: Essays in Principles and Methods
(Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 2001).
G. Bornkamm, G. Barth and H.J. Jeld, Tradition and Interpretation in Matthew,
(Philadelphia: Westminster, 1963).
Hans Conzelmann, The Theology of St. Luke (New York: Harper and Row, 1960).
Willi Marxsen, Mark the Evangelist: Studies on the Redaction History of the Gospel
(New York: Abingdon, 1969)
D. A. Black and D. Dockery ed. New Testament Criticism and Interpretation (Grand
Rap;ids: Zondervan, 1991).

6 26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all
things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.
 Story, p. 1

The Resurrection

Introduction
The earliest Easter message is found in I Cor. 15:3-8, a "mini-Gospel," which
includes the successive appearances of the Risen Jesus:
3 "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ
died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures,
4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the
scriptures,
5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.
6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of
whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.
7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.
8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me" (I Cor. 15:3-8).
Since I Corinthians precedes the Gospels in the time of its composition, this
"mini-Gospel" tradition is earlier than the various Easter stories that we find in the four
Gospels. The summary Gospel tradition highlights the progression of resurrection
appearances and is positioned within a chapter that affirms the centrality of Jesus'
resurrection for the Gospel; indeed, without the resurrection, Christian faith falls.1 The
order of resurrection appearances differs from what is offered in the four Gospels; for
example, I Cor. 15 mentions no women in the list of witnesses, such as is found in the
four Gospels. But we must note that in the Gospels, women were in the front and center
as the first witnesses and apostles. They are commissioned by the Risen Lord. Perhaps
Paul's omission of women is due to the fact that women were not regarded as credible
witnesses—even in the law-courts. While the various traditions diverge, they all confess
the wonderful act of God in reversing and transforming the worst that humanity could do
to His Son. "Thus, according to the interpretation of the early Church, Easter is above all
else, God's acknowledgment of this Jesus, whom the world refused to acknowledge, and
to whom even his disciples were unfaithful. It is at the same time the intervention of
God's New World in this Old World branded with sin and death, the setting up and
beginning of his kingdom."2
Although no human person saw Jesus rise from the dead, all four evangelists
announce the centrality of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, which vindicated the
saving work of Jesus on the cross. At the outset, we need to draw a distinction between
resuscitation and resurrection. Jesus performed some miracles of resuscitation (e.g.,
Lazarus, widow of Nain's son) in which a person was brought back from the dead, but
would face death again. The noun "resurrection" (ajnavstasi") is not used of
these raisings; it is used of Jesus for Himself (Jn. 11:25) and spoken of by Martha of the
general resurrection at the Last Day (Jn. 11:24). The resurrection of Jesus is an event of
cosmic significance in that there is the introduction of a transformed existence, a new
order that serves as the eschatological foundation and pattern for the promised
resurrection of the people of God.3
1 In 15:12-19, 29-34 Paul uses many conditional sentences ("if. . .then") which highlight the consequences

of a message without the essential resurrection of Jesus (preaching is in vain, faith is empty, lying enemies
of God, faith is foolish, you are still in sins, no resurrection for believers, perishing, most pitiful condition,
baptism [for dead?], stupidity of apostolic hardship, danger and suffering, resigned laxity in morals).
2 Günther Bornkamm, Jesus of Nazareth, (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1960), p. 184.

rresurr.doc
22/8/2008
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 2

The four evangelists variously narrate the angelophanies and the Christophanies,
the persons to whom such revelation is made, the place(s) of revelation, different
sequences and theological emphases. The very fact of diversity and lack of uniformity in
the resurrection appearances speaks of authenticity. We can scarcely imagine the
confused and disoriented state of the female disciples and male disciples by the various
appearances (angels, Jesus) in a different condition, after their hopes and dreams had
been utterly devastated. Moreover, it is clear from all four Gospels that the resurrection
was not expected by any of the witnesses. Men and women came to the tomb to see a
corpse, to anoint the body with spices to delay its decomposition. They did not expect to
see angels or the risen Jesus. The angelophanies or Christophanies came as utter
surprises and were met with fear, terror, confusion, doubt, joy and worship.
One item is noteworthy; appearances were granted to those who were already
believers, even though there was no faith that Jesus would rise from the dead. While the
raised Lazarus was open to public view (Jn. 11:43-45; 12:9-11, 17), Jesus did not appear
to the general public for inspection purposes. His appearances did not constitute a
demonstrable proof that would compel faith in unbelievers. The initiative for these
appearances lies with the Risen Jesus, expressed in clauses such as, "He revealed
Himself" (Jn. 21:1, 14) or "He appeared to…" (Lk. 24:34).
The attempt to harmonize the exact sequence and persons of the four accounts is
staggering and any full resolution of the problems is, at best, tentative. For the purpose
of our study, we will take note of the various blocks of material in the four Gospels and
then note the distinctives and theological message of each.

Blocks of Material in the Four Gospels

Mark. Mark's account contains two units: the trip by several women to the tomb
(16:1-4) and the angelophany coupled with their response (16:5-8). The gospel
concludes with the words, "for they were afraid" (v. 8). The growing consensus of text
critics is that the "longer ending of Mark" (16:9-16) was not part of the original text.
This is a decision based on the date and quality of the earliest manuscripts.
Matthew. Matthew's narrative begins with the visit by two Marys to the tomb,
mention of the earthquake, angelophany and terrorized response of the guards and the
joyful response of women (28:1-8). It is followed by Jesus' appearance to the women
after they left the tomb (28:9-10), a paragraph that deals with the evil plot to spread lies
(28:11-15) and the Great Commission in Galilee (28:16-20).
Luke. Luke's account begins with appearance of two men (angels) at the tomb to
several women (24:1-12). It is followed by Jesus' appearance to two disciples on the
Road to Emmaus (24:13-35), which also includes a report of an earlier appearance to
Simon (24:34). Subsequently, Jesus appears to the disciples in Jerusalem (24:36-43),
followed by a commissioning scene in Jerusalem (24:44-49) and Jesus' ascension (24:50-
53).
John. John 20 contains four episodes: (1) the race between Peter and the beloved
disciple to the empty tomb (20:1-10), (2) the appearance of Jesus to Mary Magdalene
(20:11-18), (3) Jesus' appearance to the disciples and bestowal of the Spirit (20:19-23),
(4) appearance to Thomas and the other disciples (20:24-29). Chapter 21 includes Jesus'
appearance to seven disciples at the Sea of Galilee (21:1-14) and the recommission of
Peter (21:15-19) in Galilee.

rresurr.doc
22/8/2008
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 3

Distinctives of the Resurrection Accounts in the Four Gospels

Mark. Mark's Gospel highlights the witnessing role of the women to the empty
tomb. Three women are mentioned (Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James,
Salome); they come to the tomb to anoint the body of Jesus with spices. Usually, spices
were used to remove or mask the odor of a decaying corpse. At a later stage, after
decomposition, the bones were taken and put in a bone-box (ostuary), for the final state.
Mark is careful to note in ch. 15 that these women had been genuine witnesses of the
crucifixion (v. 40), the exact burial site (v. 47) and the empty tomb. The verb "to behold"
qewrevw ties three successive events in which women are involved as witnesses:
15:40 "There were also women beholding [the crucifixion] from a distance;
among them were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger
and of Joses, and Salome."
15:47 "Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses beheld where the body
was laid."
16:4 " When they looked up, they [the women] beheld that the stone, which was
very large, had already been rolled back."
Thereby, Mark confirms these women as official witnesses of the crucifixion, burial site,
and the empty tomb.
Mark also contains the discussion among these women, on their journey to the
tomb, about their inability to roll away the large stone that was in front of the tomb
(16:3). When they arrive, they discover that the large stone was rolled away (16:4).
Mark highlights Galilee as the place of revelation. The women are charged with
the task of proclaiming the wonderful news to the disciples and directing them to go to
Galilee where they will see Jesus:
Mk. 16:7 "But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you to
Galilee; there you will see him, as he told you."
This direction fulfills the Jesus' promise to His disciples in the Upper Room:
Mk. 14:28 "But after I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee."
While Mark contains no appearances of the Risen Jesus in Jerusalem, the
emphasis is upon Galilee4 as the place of revelation where the disciples will inaugurate
the Church's mission. The mention of Peter as one who needs to hear the message may
contain an implicit restatement of his commission, in light of his denial of Jesus.
The women leave in a state of fear and numbing awe and say nothing to anyone,
for they were afraid. While Mark does not highlight their disobedience and fear, the sure
promise of the Risen Jesus in Galilee and the subsequent mission of the disciples
beginning in Galilee counter their response.
Matthew. Matthew contains an apologetic narrative about the guards that
contrasts with the activity of God. In 27:62-28:10, there is a complex Jewish plot
involving Roman guards to discredit the resurrection of Jesus. The guards are posted and
seal the tomb to avert a possible theft of Jesus' body since His followers and the Jewish
authorities were aware of Jesus' Passion Pronouncements, including mention of His
resurrection. The resurrection narrative highlights the sovereign act of God that counters
the insidious human plot. The great earthquake, paralleling the earthquake at the time of
the crucifixion (27:51), also emphasizes the greatness of the event. The Divine presence
4Mark contains 13 references to Galilee, several of which highlight Jesus' mission in Galilee (1:14, 28, 39;
3:7; 15:40).
rresurr.doc
22/8/2008
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 4

is magnified in the awe-full appearance of the angel of the Lord, which renders the
soldiers as dead men (28:3). While the women experience reverential fear and great joy
(28:5, 8), the guards are seized5 with terror. Mark records that the women said nothing to
anyone (16:8), but Matthew notes that they ran to tell the good news to the disciples
(28:8). Matthew, like Mark, records the promise of Jesus' appearance to them in Galilee
(28:7). Matthew's account also contains the account of Jesus' meeting with them,
subsequent to their experience at the tomb (28:9-10). They seize Jesus' feet and worship
Him (28:9). However, some doubted. The promise of a later meeting with Jesus in
Galilee is again reiterated that the disciples must know and act upon the command, "go to
Galilee"(28:10).
A widespread and ironic lie is spread at the instigation of the Jewish leaders
(28:11-15). The Jewish leaders bribe the guards to report the lie that the disciples stole
Jesus' body (28:13). The lie is ironic in that this was the very reason for the Roman guard
and the official sealing of the tomb; these precautions were to prevent such a theft:
Matt. 27:64 "Therefore command the tomb to be made secure until the third day;
otherwise his disciples may go and steal him away, and tell the people, 'He has
been raised from the dead,' and the last deception would be worse than the first."
Now, the Jewish leaders manipulate "the press" to broadcast the very thing they wanted
to suppress. Moreover, the lying report was effective, spreading widely so that by the
time of the writing of Matthew's Gospel, the report was still circulating (28:15).
The last paragraph in Matthew serves to contrast human deceit and manipulation
with God's plan, and to fulfill Jesus' earlier promise of His appearance in Galilee (28:7,
10). The disciples went to Galilee, to a specified mountain6 where they saw Jesus
(28:16). At this point, the Risen Jesus affirms His all-inclusive role with them and their
mission:
"All authority has been given . . ." (28:18)
"make disciples of all the nations" (28:19)
"to keep all things which I commanded you" (28:20)
"I am with you always" (28:20)
The universal sovereignty and authority of Jesus are grounded in the vision of Daniel.
Dan. 7:14 "To him was given dominion and glory and kingship, that all peoples,
nations, and languages should serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion
that shall not pass away, and his kingship is one that shall never be destroyed."
Jesus' universal sovereignty embraces the sphere of heaven and earth in the language of a
new creation. Further, all the peoples of the earth, all are to obey all His commands and
are gifted with his perpetual presence. That mission is no longer bound by ethnic
restriction, but is to be opened up to all, irrespective of whether the message is received
or not:
Matt. 24:9 "Then they will hand you over to be tortured and will put you to death,
and you will be hated by all nations because of my name."
24:14 "And this good news of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the
world, as a testimony to all the nations; and then the end will come."
25:32 "All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people
one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats."
5 Analogous to the earthquake (seismov") in 27:51 and 28:2, the guards are "seized" (seivw),
"shake, cause to quake, agitate." BAGD, p. 753.
6 The text gives no mention of a prior command or specific place.

rresurr.doc
22/8/2008
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 5

28:19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name
of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."
Two particular means of disciple-making are highlighted, baptizing and teaching.
Baptizing is accompanied with the use of the Trinitarian formula, which brings together
the Father-Son (3:17; 11:27) and Son-Spirit relationship (3:11, 16; 12:28, 32), for
disciples are brought into the mediated relationship and fellowship with the triune God
(11:27). Teaching is a major concern for Matthew; indeed his Gospel is constructed
around five "books," which serve as a teaching manual for the early Church. In 5:17-20,
Jesus offers Himself as the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Now, as the Church fulfills
its teaching activity, it will lead to the obedience of "all of Jesus' commandments."
Further, as the new community fulfills its mission, it is promised the Immanuel ("God
with us") presence of Jesus (see 1:23; 18:20) will be perpetual, "to the very end of the
age."
Luke. Luke's narrative contains four consecutive events, which all occur on the
same day and there is also a different geographical emphasis—Jerusalem as the center of
the appearances and the beginning of the Church in Jerusalem. Luke's Gospel serves as
the preparatory work of all that "Jesus began to do and to teach" (Acts 1:1) for the
birthday of the Church (Pentecost), wherein Jesus continues to do His work in and
through the witness of the Church. This mission begins in Jerusalem, and then spreads to
Judea, Samaria and to the uttermost parts of the earth (Acts 1:8).
1) The first scene occurs outside the empty-tomb (24:1-12) and highlights the
divine pronouncement by two angels to several women from Galilee (23:55),7 "Why do
you seek the living among the dead?" (24:5). The role of these women as witnesses is
underscored by their previous connection with the crucifixion scene in that they see how
the body of Jesus was laid in the exact place (23:55), which guides their search in 24:3;
they know the exact place to look but only find an empty tomb. Galilee is mentioned but
with a different emphasis, which is found in Mark and Matthew; Galilee is the place of
prior witness, "Remember how he told you, while He was still in Galilee" (24:6). The
previous reminder of the Passion Pronouncement (24:7) serves to substantiate the
resurrection as the fulfillment of Jesus' word, which they remembered when it was
brought to their attention (24:8). When they reported the message to the apostles, their
words seemed to be an idle tale, which was not believed (24:11).
2) The encounter between two disciples and Jesus on the Emmaus Road builds on
the geographical note in that the road from Jerusalem is characterized by discussion,
gloom (24:17) and disappointed hopes (24:21). Their dejected statement, "We were
hoping," means that they were no longer hoping that he was the one who was about to
redeem Israel (24:21). Those hopes were crushed both by the crucifixion and the three
days since that bitter event. However, the road back to Jerusalem is altogether new, filled
with excitement and hope.
While these two disciples had believed that Jesus was a "prophet mighty in deed
and word" (24:19), Jesus directs them away from thinking about a prophet to the
"Messiah," who fulfills the promise of the prophets (24:25-26). Although Jesus presents
Himself as the Messiah, the subject of prophets (vss. 25, 27) and Moses, they do not
recognize Him. The same divine necessity for the Passion of Jesus that was voiced by
two angels to the women (v. 7) is now expressed by Jesus to two men in the language of
7In 24:10 the women are identified as Mary Magdalene, Joanna and Mary the mother of James and the
other women with them.
rresurr.doc
22/8/2008
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 6

Scripture (vss. 25-27).

Although unknown to them, Jesus serves as their interpreter of the Scriptures (v.
27), indicating the OT texts that spoke of the Messiah. The first part of the paragraph
reveals their blindness or non-recognition that is Divinely-willed; God keeps them from
recognizing Jesus' identity v. 16. Their blindness continues until they reach their
destination at Emmaus. They do not recognize Jesus even when He speaks to them about
a suffering and glorified Messiah, nor when they settle upon their destination. They only
recognize Jesus in the breaking of bread when "their eyes were opened" (by God) in v.
32.
It is important to note that Jesus is in a resurrected body—a transformed body.
He is still flesh and blood but at the same time, He possesses different abilities—the
ability to appear and disappear. In the Fourth Gospel, Jesus is not immediately
recognized by Mary; she thinks that he is the gardener. And yet, she comes to terms with
the reality of the resurrected Jesus.
Once Jesus is recognized, He disappears, and the two disciples make their way
back to Jerusalem to share their news with the eleven. Before the two can tell their story,
the eleven begin with their own good news. Jesus was raised from the dead and appeared
to Simon (v. 34), to which the two disciples add their own experience of traveling with
Jesus on the Emmaus Road and their recognition of Him at Emmaus in the breaking of
the bread (v. 35). Luke's Gospel, more than the others, emphasizes Jesus' table-
fellowship and His instructions and revelation during such gatherings.8 To the witness of
the women, Simon Peter and the eleven, is added the witness of these two men. While
the witness of the women produced unbelief in the apostles (v. 11), the witness of Peter
and the two disciples confirm faith in the Risen Jesus (vss. 34-35).
3) The third scene (24:36-43) concentrates on the physicality of the resurrection.
While the eleven, joined by the two disciples from Emmaus, are discussing the various
appearances, Jesus suddenly appears in there midst. The setting is similar to the previous
paragraph in that Jesus comes on the scene while people are discussing Him. He
pronounces the usual Jewish greeting, "Peace to you," expressed in two Greek words
(eijrhvnh uJmi'n "peace to you"). And yet two full Greek sentences reveal
their troubled response; they are "startled" (ptoevw), "terrified" (e[mfombo") that
they had seen a ghost, "troubled" (taravssw) and "doubting" (dialogismov")
and are accordingly rebuked by Jesus. Their response is contrasted with the faith and
witness that is expressed in 24:31-35. In many of the appearances either of angels or
Jesus, His disciples develop trust in the atmosphere of puzzlement, doubt and fear.
The physical reality of the resurrection is expressed in a number of clauses and
expressions:
· Jesus' command to see his hands and feet (v. 39).
· The contrast between a ghost and Jesus' resurrection body, which is corporeal,
"Touch me and see; for a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you see that I
have" (v. 39).
· Invitation to touch Jesus' hands and feet (v. 39).
· Request for food and ingestion of baked fish in their presence (v. 41-43).
The invitation to touch Jesus' hands and feet establishes a clear point of continuity with
Jesus' bodily existence in the crucifixion scene with the use of nails in Jesus' hands and
8 Many scholars see a Eucharistic allusion in this meal.
rresurr.doc
22/8/2008
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 7

feet that attached Jesus to the cross. Jesus' bodily experience is now different in that He
passes at will from place to place but His body is similar to His body, prior to the
resurrection. From John's Gospel we learn that the resurrection body still contains the
nail prints and spear wound (Jn. 20:19).
4) The fourth scene is a commissioning scene (24:44-49) which sets the course for
the disciples' ministry. Several features summarize Jesus' ministry in the book of Luke
and prepare for the Church's ministry in the book of Acts:
· The fulfillment of the OT witness (Law of Moses, Prophets and Psalms9--v.45)
and Jesus' Passion Pronouncements (v. 46). This is the third time that the
fulfillment theme surfaces in Luke's resurrection appearances (24:6-7, 25-27).
Luke adds the feature that special revelation was needed to penetrate Jesus'
insight into the special links, "He opened their mind to understand the Scriptures"
(v. 46).
· Certain prominent Lukan themes are heard: "to preach the forgiveness of sins,"
"in Jesus' name," "to all nations," "repentance" (v. 47).
· Luke's emphasis on the necessary "clothing" of the "promise of My Father,"
prepares the disciples for the realization of that promise on the Day of Pentecost
(Acts 1:8; 2:1-5). The imperative, "Stay in the city until you have been clothed
with power from on high" is a clear promise of the Spirit's coming at the proper
time, which follows their waiting.
· Jerusalem again is the center ("hub") for the disciples' witness that extends in
concentric circles around Jerusalem (Acts 1:8 is programmatic for the book of
Acts).
5) The Ascension (24:50-52) follows the last scene in that Jesus leads them from
their room to Bethany (opposite Jerusalem) and blesses them in priestly fashion (v. 50).
In Luke, after the necessary prelude of suffering, Jesus enters His glory (24:26), which is
realized as "He withdrew from them and was carried up into heaven" (24:51). This goal
of final glory was the subject of Jesus' discussion with Moses and Elijah on the Mount of
Transfiguration when Jesus spoke of His "exodus/departure" (e[xodo") that He was
about to accomplish in Jerusalem (9:31). The ascension serves as a glorious conclusion
to the book of Luke, while the ascension in Acts 1 serves as the introduction to the
programmatic ministry of the Church. Moreover, the same Gospel, which began with joy
(Lk. 1-2) now concludes with the "great joy" of the disciples when they return to
Jerusalem, renewed, vibrant, confident and expectant of the Father's promised Holy
Spirit. The Ascension does not mark the transition of Jesus in terms of some
disembodied risen state in heaven. NT Wright states,
The idea of the human Jesus now being in heaven, in his thoroughly embodied
risen state, comes as a shock to many people, including many Christians.
Sometimes this is because many people think that Jesus, having been divine,
stopped being divine and became human, and then, having been human for a
while, stopped being human and went back to being divine (at least, that's what
many people think Christians are supposed to believe). More often it's because
our culture is so used to the Platonic idea that heaven is by definition a "place of
spiritual, non-material reality so that the idea of a solid body being not only
present but also thoroughly or home there seems like a category mistake.10
9This is the first time the Psalms are mentioned in the fulfillment passages; however, they are frequently
used in the sermons of Acts (2:25-26, 34-35; 4:11, 25-26; 13:33-35).
rresurr.doc
22/8/2008
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 8

John. John, more than the other evangelists, interprets the Jesus-story from the
standpoint of Jesus' glorification, the crucifixion "lifting up" when Jesus draws all people
to Himself. The resurrection becomes the final moment of the glory of God. The Fourth
Evangelist offers four distinct episodes in which the Risen Jesus reveals Himself, effects
a dramatic change in the beholder, who is entrusted with a mission [implicit or explicit].
Each episode is marked by a crisis of faith as the individuals work their way from
confusion and doubt to genuine trust in the resurrected Jesus. These four episodes lead to
the stated purpose of the Gospel:
Jn. 20:30 "And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples,
which are not written in this book: 31 But these are written, that you might
believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you might have
life through his name."
Thus, the ascension affirms Jesus' embodied humanity, his absence from humanity for a
while, but also his presence among people in others ways. The Holy Spirit now conveys
the presence of the Risen Jesus in the Church, its mission in the world, and its
intercessory and witnessing role.
1) The first episode (20:1-10) narrates the race of Peter and the Beloved Disciple
to the tomb. While the beloved disciple reaches the empty tomb first, he remains outside,
while Peter, arriving moments later, enters the tomb (20:3-6). Several items stand out:
· The grave clothes and face cloth. The evangelist describes extensively the
grave clothes and face cloth that are neatly arranged. Presumably, a thief
would not have taken such care to leave the grave clothes in such an
undisturbed condition. The mention of such items reminds the readers of the
earlier account of the raising of Lazarus still in the clothes of death (Jn.
11:44).
· Faith. The beloved disciple believes (v. 8). A trusting commitment of the
beloved disciple and Peter is based upon "seeing," even though they do not yet
understand the Scriptures bearing upon the necessity for Jesus' resurrection (v.
9).
· Mission. The disciples depart to them [the other disciples] (v. 10), with an
implied response of sharing the good news with them.
2) The Second Episode (20:11-18) contains Jesus' tender appearance to Mary
Magdalene who had been on hand and had initiated Peter's and John's hurried trip to the
tomb (20:1-3), who apparently comes back to the tomb with Peter and John. However, she
remains at the tomb. At first she sees the two angels in the tomb sitting at the foot and head
of where Jesus had been laid (v. 12). Mary's grief is too deep for words and she expresses
her anguish to them, "They took away my Lord and I do not know where they have laid
Him" (v. 13). To the one, whom she presumes to be the gardener, she asks, "Sir, if you have
carried him away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away" (v. 15).
· Jesus' self revelation. Jesus' addresses her by name, "Mary" (v. 16), which
removes her blindness (v. 14). The reader is reminded of Jesus' earlier words
about His role as the Good Shepherd who calls His sheep by name, and who
recognize His voice (10:3-4).
· Mary's joyful response. Mary addresses Jesus as "Rabboni", translated as "my
teacher," when her blindness is removed in Jesus' personal self-revelation (v. 16).
Her response is not only verbal but also physical; she clings to Jesus ("feet"?--in

rresurr.doc
22/8/2008
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 9

Matt. 28:9). The use of the present imperative "stop clinging" (mhv mou
a{ptou) reflects the cessation of an activity already in progress, perhaps
because she is clinging to Jesus in the same way as before. It can hardly mean
that Jesus refuses a touch since Jesus will encourage Thomas to put his fingers
into his hands and side (20:27). Jesus then explains why such clinging to Jesus
in the old manner is inappropriate; Jesus is in the process of ascending to the
Father (v. 17). The relationship is altogether different as He prepares for the
coming of the Paraclete (14:25-26, 28; 15:26; 16:5, 7, 17, 28). Sight and touch
will give way to the all-important experience of trust without sight or touch.
· Mary's mission. Mary is given a mission to share the good news of Jesus'
resurrection and promised ascension in the process of realization (vss. 17-18).
3) The Third Episode narrates a meeting in which Jesus encounters the disciples
(vss. 19-23). It includes the following elements:
· Something unexpected occurs when Jesus enters a room behind locked doors,
where the disciples are gathered together for fear of the Jews (v. 19a). Jesus'
appearance in this room intimates the spiritual quality of His resurrection body
that is not bound by locked doors. Twice Jesus bestows the gift of peace (vss.
19, 21). Jesus also offers the visible point of continuity with his pre-resurrection
body—His hands and side, which had been wounded (v. 20).
· The disciples respond with joy upon seeing the Lord (v. 20) and the fulfillment
of Jesus' earlier promise:
Jn.16:22 "So you have sorrow now, but I will see you again and your hearts
will rejoice, and no one will take your joy from you."
· The disciples are both commissioned and empowered for their ministry. Similar
to the Jewish pattern of a shaliach "sent one," they are sent as representatives of
Jesus as He has been the "Sent One"11 from God (v. 21). They will serve as His
envoys in representative capacity. To empower them for their ministry, Jesus
breathes12 upon them and says, "Receive the Holy Spirit" (v. 22). In view of
Jesus' statement about His ascension (v. 17) and His former teaching about the
Spirit's coming, the reception of the Spirit may well assume that Jesus has
already ascended to the Father prior to this scene. This may well be implied in
Jesus' prior word to Mary, "I have not yet ascended . . . I ascend . . ." (v. 17). If
this is possible, then the text may suggest a pre-Pentecostal bestowal of the
Spirit. "And now we observe that just as Adam was formed and "in-breathed"
with the breath of life (Gen. 2:7), was given a task to perform (Gen. 2:15), so,
according to John 20, disciples are "in-breathed" and given a mission to
accomplish comparable to the mission of Jesus."13 Jesus then explains the nature
of their mission, the forgiveness of sins: "If you forgive the sins of any, they are
forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (Jn. 20:23). The two
verbs, "are forgiven" and "are retained" are examples of the Divine passive in
which God is the subject. For the disciples, the extension of forgiveness is only
11 Various forms of the verb "to send" ajpostevllw are used in Jesus' High Priestly Prayer to

describe Himself and the disciples as they are engaged in mission (17:4, 8, 18--twice, 21, 23, 25).
12 It is noteworthy that the verb "breathe" is the same verb pnevw, used in the LXX of Gen. 2:7, "The

Lord breathed on his [Adam's] face a breath of life."

13 Cullen I K Story, The Fourth Gospel: Its Purpose, Pattern, and Power, (Shippensburg, PA: Ragged

Edge Press, 1997), p. 372.

rresurr.doc
22/8/2008
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 10

possible because of the redemptive work of Christ for He is "the Lamb of God
who takes away the sin of the world" (1:29). They are emissaries to announce
what God has made real, but they do not possess of themselves the authority to
forgive sins. This mission of proclaiming the forgiveness of sins is intimately
related to their reception of the Spirit.
4) The Fourth Episode. The final episode centers on Thomas and his doubt of the
resurrection of Jesus. This scene leads to the climactic beatitude, which draws in all future
generations who would not be eyewitnesses, but who likewise need to believe. Moreover,
the scene prepares for the summary statement for the purpose of the entire book, "that you
might believe" (20:31). The revelatory scene is introduced by Thomas' statement that he
would not believe without seeing and touching, "Unless I see in his hands the print of the
nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not
believe" (20:25). This statement comes eight days later (v. 26) after Jesus' appearance to the
disciples. During this period the disciples repeatedly told Thomas of Jesus' appearance to
them and presumably their seeing Jesus' wounds (scars?). What Thomas demands is the
same experience that they had witnessed (with the additional need for touch, "thrust my
finger into the place of the nails . . .hand into His side" (v. 25). Thomas has often been
berated in the proverbial, "Doubting Thomas." To his defense, attention needs to be drawn
to his prior loyalty to Jesus, "Let us go that we may die with Him" (11:16) and His present
demand for an experience that was accorded to the other disciples.
· In the same setting, "behind locked doors" (v. 26; see v. 19), Jesus appears and
pronounces the same blessing of peace that He had earlier bestowed (v. 26; see
vss. 19, 21). Clearly this appearance is for Thomas' benefit since Jesus directly
engages him. The invitation that Jesus extends to Thomas is almost verbatim
from Thomas' earlier challenge in which he laid down the conditions for his
faith. “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place
it in my side" (v. 27). Implicitly, Jesus' invitation draws attention to His
witnessing presence when Thomas had made his challenging statements. Jesus
then says to Thomas, "Cease persisting14 in your unbelief, but believe."
· Thomas' response is spontaneous and personal, "my Lord and my God" (v. 28).
We do not read that Thomas actually followed through with the demanded
"touch" of Jesus' nail prints and side. His response clearly demonstrates that He
is no longer an "unbelieving one" but is now a "believing one."
It will be recalled that the final sentence of the prologue (1:18) contains the
name '(the) only-begotten God," a powerful ascription of deity to Jesus.
Now, at the end of the gospel, John's ascription becomes Thomas' personal
confession. Others have confessed Jesus as Lord (6:68; 9:38; 11:21, 32) but
Thomas alone confessed him as 'my Lord and my God" (20:28).15
· Following Thomas' confession, Jesus pronounces a beatitude upon all present
and future persons, who would trust in Jesus without such demonstrable proof:
"Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe" (v. 29). They will not be
given such eyewitness evidence, but are nonetheless summoned to put their trust
in Jesus without laying down such conditions for faith. John's purpose
14 The use of mhv "not" with a present imperative givnou "become" and the adjective a[pisto"
"unbelieving" denotes the cessation of an activity already in progress, similar to Jesus' word to Mary
Magdalene, "cease clinging to me" (20:16).
15 Story, p. 376.

rresurr.doc
22/8/2008
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 11

throughout the Gospel is that of leading the readers through signs and attendant
discourses to understand and believe and to grow in their experience. The FG's
purpose, so clearly stated in 20:30-31, is to present signs that will engender faith
leading to eternal life. The climactic sign, Jesus lifted up [on the cross] should
lead the readers to see and appropriate Jesus as the Lamb of God and the
Revealer of the Love of God.
The Postscript (ch. 21). Chapter 21 serves as a postscript, added by the same writer
to the conclusion of the Gospel found in 20:30-31, with other purposes in view. The
evangelist intends to correct some false impressions or distortions circulating through the
early Church's "rumor-mill."
· The first scene highlights the recommissioning of Peter. The fishing expedition
is told so as to introduce the important breakfast scene after which Jesus directs
His three-fold probing question to Peter, "Do you love me?" This is followed by
the pastoral charge to Peter for Jesus' flock. In the three-fold question, three-
fold-answer and three-fold pastoral charge, we find the positive counterpart to
Peter's three-fold denial (13:38; 18:15-18, 25-27). Peter is reinstated, restored
and recommissioned as a leader with pastoral responsibility.16 In this paragraph,
Peter's mission is that of feeding Jesus' flock. Jesus' entrusting His flock three
times to a disciple who has denied Jesus three times speaks volumes about
restoration, forgiveness and cleansing, in the sure confidence in a restored leader.
This leader is not cast away but recommissioned.
While Thomas expressed a certain way of "knowing" Jesus points to the new
reality of knowing, which is love. It takes love to experience and believe in the
resurrection. NT Wright states, "Precisely because it is love we are talking
about, it must have a correlative reality in the world outside the lover. Love is
the deepest mode of knowing because it is love that, while completely engaging
with reality other than itself, affirms and celebrates that other-than-self reality."17
We find this theme in Jn. 17:25-26: Jesus prays this way, "Righteous Father,
though the world does not know you, I know you, and they know that you have
sent me. I have made you known to them, and I will continue to make you
known in order that the love you have for me may be in them, that I myself may
be in them." Knowledge and revelation are inextricably linked with love.
Knowledge means to have love as its goal—to be possessed by the love of
Christ.
· The second issue contains the destinies of two disciples, Peter and the beloved
disciple, specifically what Jesus said and did not say about their respective
destinies. Peter's destiny is spelled out as a contrast between his earlier youth
and future "old age." His youth is detailed with verbs expressing his relative
degree of freedom: "you would gird yourself, you would walk about, you would
wish" (21:18). His old age is characterized by a lack of freedom: "you will
stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not
wish to go” (v. 18); this indicates a violent death (v. 19). When Peter asks about
16 Many interpreters and preachers have made expositions which focus on some distinction between
ajgavph and filiva (fivlo"), the verbs for "know" and the various terms for "feeding" and
"sheep." However, the terms are used synonymously; exposition should rather focus upon the purpose of
the passage
17 Wright, 73.

rresurr.doc
22/8/2008
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 12

the fate of the beloved disciple, Jesus responds, "If I wish him to remain until I
come, what is that to you?" (v. 22). Evidently, this statement was misunderstood
by some in the early Church to mean that John would not die before Jesus came.
The evangelist, near the end of his life, aware of this misguided rumor, seeks to
set the record straight of what Jesus did not say and what he said (v. 23).

Summary
The various episodes affirm continuity between the Jesus the early community knew
in His earthly life and the resurrected Jesus. The men and women, in various episodes,
recognize Jesus in His material state. Jesus eats with them, shows them his wounds (scars),
and intends them to know that He is no ghost-figure, but a real person. Women grasp His
feet and become witnesses of the resurrection. This witness is solid and stands as a counter
to the Jewish dismissal of a woman's "witness" in the courtroom. Jesus invites them all to
both touch and see. However, there is a discontinuity in that Jesus transcends normal
human limitations. He suddenly appears behind locked doors or on a road and then
disappears. The appearances need to be distinguished from subjective visions. The
resurrection appearances are real events and are to be differentiated from other visions and
revelations.18 There is no bifurcation between the earthly resurrected form and the glorified
Christ. Both Luke (24:39-43) and John (20:20, 27) are able to present the physical character
of the Risen Jesus as well as affirm the glorified Christ who has "entered into His glory"
(Lk. 24:26) or has "been glorified" (Jn. 7:39; 13:31; 20:22). Those experiences of the
Resurrected Jesus serve as the basis for the apostolic call (I Cor. 9:1; I Cor. 15:8). Their
experience transforms them from fear and doubt to courage, as they proclaim Jesus as the
Resurrected Lord, who claims a sovereign role as they carry out His mission (Matt. 28:18-
20).
The pattern for believers who die is like Jesus' embodied and resurrected existence.
He is the first fruits, with the clear indication from Paul—that the full harvest will occur at
the end of the world, when Christians are transformed into their new existence. And all will
be participants in the event of a transformed world—not simply a vague "spiritual existence"
in some nether world called heaven. The focus of the NT is not dying so that I can go to
heaven, but is expressed in the language of a new creation that will involved the kosmos as
we know it and people in their transformed existence. What has happened with Jesus will
happen with all believers. And it will involve this world.
In the earliest apostolic preaching, the resurrection validates Jesus as the Messiah
and Son of God:
Acts 2:36 "Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made
him both Lord and Messiah, this Jesus whom you crucified."
Acts 13:33 "this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus; as also it is
written in the second psalm,
'Thou art my Son,
today I have begotten thee.'"
Rom. 1:4 "and designated Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by
his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord."
At the very hour of His resurrection and ascension, Jesus inaugurates His reign as King and
Lord since this is the hour of His glorification (Lk. 24:26; Jn. 12:23; Acts 3:13; Rom. 6:4; I
Peter 1. 1:21). This hour is not only a historical event, but also an act in which the age to
18 II Cor. 12:1-7.
rresurr.doc
22/8/2008
© J. Lyle Story
 Story, p. 13

come has invaded the present, thereby superseding history. It marks the beginning of the
end and establishes the pattern for all believers (the full harvest) who are knit together with
Jesus (the first fruits), thereby promising them a similar resurrection:
Hos. 6:2 "After two days he will revive us;
on the third day he will raise us up,
that we may live before him."

rresurr.doc
22/8/2008
© J. Lyle Story
 p. 1

Faith in Romans 4

Introduction

Romans 4 serves as a "test-case" for Paul's affirmation that the

righteousness of God comes to human beings as a gift of grace, independent of
human performance or boasting (bragging); indeed, all boasting in human
performance receives a forceful death-blow. God is not beholden to anyone; no
one can claim divine favor. There is no favored nation clause for any group.
Grace and salvation are experienced through the response of trust. In a pointed
manner, Paul condemns Jewish particularism, which presumes that God is "the
God of the Jews only" (3:29). God is concerned with all of humanity and has
demonstrated that concern through the death of Jesus Christ "for all" (3:21-26).
The universal thrust of the Gospel, however, does not cancel God's concern for
the Law but reaffirms God's commitment to the obedience of faith. Paul will
argue that God has always sought the trusting response of people—and singles
out the prime candidate from the OT—Abraham, i.e., "as I want to show you
through the example of Abraham."
Romans 4 is expressed through the Rabbinic method of Midrash, an
exposition that announces a primary text (Gen. 15:6) and then analyzes each of
key words in the text, e.g., "reckoned," "believed."

The Larger and Immediate Context

1. Taken as a whole, Rom. 4 can be regarded as an illustration of the principle

found in 3:27-31:
The utter antithesis of faith is bragging, which Paul excludes from the
faith-experience:
Rom.3:27 Then what becomes of our bragging? It is excluded.
Rom. 3:27 Pou' ouj'n hJ kauvchsi"; ejxekleivsqh
The aorist here is constantive,1 and reflects an action which is conceived
as a whole, "boasting of any sort is eliminated/excluded."2 In 3:19, Paul makes it
clear that God intended that every mouth be shut, with no word of defense
spoken. The whole world lies before God, guilty, bankrupt and accountable for
that bankruptcy. There is absolutely no grounds for boasting. The word
"boasting" (kauvchsi") here means the human assertion of a claim upon
God ("bragging" in some way), some sort of action/activity that one can point to
as a reason or grounds for divine favor. The only possible result of such
boasting is despair. "As long as a man boasts in his own deeds, it is impossible
for him to trust in God's act of redemption. He can be justified, that is rightly
related to God, only when he ceases to boast, and believes."3
2. The second major point of the passage is that Jew and Gentile are on the
same kind of footing. There is only one God and only one way of receiving His
1 F. Blass, A. Debrunner, Robert Funk, A Greek Grammar of the New -Testament and

Other Early Christian Literature, (Chicago: The -University of Chicago Press, 1961), #332.
2 BAG, p. 240, i.e., "made impossible."
3 Barrett, p. 83.

Rom4obs.doc
02/04/02
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 2

salvation--by faith--faith for the Jew and faith for the Gentile. The discussion of
ch. 4 not only illustrates the universal scope of the Gospel but explains how
Abraham is the great unifier of both Jew and Gentile. In 3:28, Paul states so
clearly that it is by faith and faith alone, that God relates to humanity, whether
Jew or Gentile:
Romans 3:27b-30 No, but on that of faith. 28 For we maintain that a man
is justified by faith apart from observing the law. 29 Is God the God of
Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, 30
since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and
uncircumcised through that same faith. 31 Do we then, nullify the law by
this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.
Romans 3:27b-30 ajllaV diaV novmou pivstew".
28
logizovmeqa gaVr dikaiou'sqai pivstei
29
a[nqrwpon cwriV" e[rgwn novmou. h]
jIoudaivwn oJ qeoV" movnon; oujciV kaiV
ejqnw'n; naiV kaiV ejqnw'n, 30 ei[per ei|" oJ
qeov", o}" dikaiwvsei peritomhVn ejk
pivstew" kaiV ajkrobustivan diaV th'"
pivstew".

Paul targets Abraham, the founder of the Jewish race. The argument will
develop from the major to the minor. If Paul can exclude bragging from the most
likely human candidate, then the minor will certainly be true. No one else can
boast either. The Jew views Abraham as an ideal figure. The Jews look upon
Abraham with pride and believe themselves to be the children of Abraham. And
why not? Abraham is the progenitor of the chosen race, according the flesh,
jAbraaVm toVn propavtora hJmw'n kataV savrka
(4:1). Paul's argument moves out of an exclusively Jewish position to affirm that
Abraham is also the prototype of faith for the Gentile as well as the Jew. "With
unbelievable boldness, the apostle always attacked his opponents at the point
where they themselves felt most unassailable."4 Abraham becomes "typical" for
all those who through faith are declared to be in the right, i.e., "righteous."
In terms of structure, chapter 4 can be subsumed under the following flow
of thought that may capture the major thrust of the chapter.
1. Abraham, our forefather(4:1),..
2. Who was justified by grace, apart from works, similar to David (4:2-8),
3. Apart from circumcision...(4:9-12),
4. And apart from the law...(4:13-17a),
5. Demonstrated genuine trust (4:17b-22)
6. Which has relevance for all Christians (4:23-25).

1. Abraham, our forefather (4:1)

This introductory verse presents Abraham as the most likely candidate for
boasting ("bragging"), "according to the flesh," kataV savrka, "natural
physical descent." The expression "flesh" occurs elsewhere in Romans to refer
4 Ernst Käsemann, Perspectives on Paul, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1071), p. 80.

Rom4obs.doc
02/04/02
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 3

to Jewish descent and privilege:

Romans 1:3-4 periV tou' uiJou' aujtou' tou'

genomevnou ejk spevrmato" DauiVd kataV
savrka (from the seed of David according to the flesh), 4
tou' oJrisqevnto" uiJou' qeou' ejn dunavmei
kataV pneu'ma aJgiwsuvnh" ejx
ajnastavsew" nekrw'n, jIhsou' Cristou' tou'
kurivou hJmw'n,
Romans 4:1 Tiv oun ejrou'men euJrhkevnai
jAbraaVm toVn propavtora hJmw'n kataV
savrka; (Abraham our forefather according to the flesh)
Romans 9:3-4 hujcovmhn gaVr ajnavqema einai
aujtoV" ejgwV ajpoV tou' Cristou' uJpeVr
tw'n ajdelfw'n mou tw'n suggenw'n mou
kataV savrka, (my kinsmen according to the flesh) 4
oi{tinev" eijsin jIsrahli'tai, w|n hJ
uiJoqesiva kaiV hJ dovxa kaiV aiJ
diaqh'kai kaiV hJ nomoqesiva kaiV hJ
latreiva kaiV aiJ ejpaggelivai,
Romans 9:5 w|n oiJ patevre", kaiV ejx w|n oJ
CristoV" toV kataV savrka:(and of their fathers
according to the flesh) oJ w]n ejpiV pavntwn qeoV"
eujloghtoV" eij" touV" aijw'na", ajmhvn.
Romans 9:8 tou't· e[stin, ouj taV tevkna th'"
sarkoV" (the children of the flesh) tau'ta tevkna tou'
qeou', ajllaV taV tevkna th'" ejpaggeliva"
logivzetai eij" spevrma:
Romans 11:14 ei[ pw" parazhlwvsw mou thVn
savrka (my flesh = kinsmen) kaiV swvsw tinaV"
ejx aujtw'n.

Abraham has children (i.e., Jews) who are "according to the flesh"
kataV sarkav, "of natural or physical descent." But the implication of
this text suggests that Abraham also has other children, who are legitimately his,
in another way--through faith. If anyone can boast/glory (brag), then Abraham
can. But, if it can be shown that Abraham himself has no legitimate claim to glory
("brag"), then it logically follows, that no one else possesses such a right either;
bragging is removed from both his children "according to the flesh," kataV
sarkav or the children otherwise than kataV sarkav.

2. ...Who was justified by grace, apart from works (4:2-8)

The opening post-positive "for" gavr, provides an explanation through

a contrary-to-fact conditional sentence, "For if Abraham was justified by works
(which he was not), then he has something to boast about (which he does not
possess)." Paul hearkens back to the affirmation of 3:27, that all human boasting

Rom4obs.doc
02/04/02
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 4

is excluded. The very antithesis of faith is the human attitude of boasting

("bragging"), an attitude so frequently mentioned in Romans:
Rom. 2:17 "Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and
boast (brag) about your relationship to God"
Rom. 2:17 Eij deV suV jIoudai'o" ejponomavzh/ kaiV
ejpanapauvh/ novmw/ kaiV kauca'sai ejn
qew'/
Rom. 2:23 You who boast (brag) about the law, do you dishonor God by
breaking the law?
Rom. 2:23 o}" ejn novmw/ kauca'sai, diaV th'"
parabavsew" tou' novmou toVn qeoVn
ajtimavzei";
Rom. 3:27 Where then is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On
that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith.
Rom. 3:27 Pou' oun hJ kauvchsi"; ejxekleivsqh.
diaV poivou novmou; tw'n e[rgwn; oujciv, ajllaV
diaV novmou pivstew".
Rom. 4:2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to
boast about—but not before God.
Rom. 4:2 eij gaVr jAbraaVm ejx e[rgwn
ejdikaiwvqh, e[cei kauvchma: ajll· ouj proV"
qeovn.
Rom. 5:2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace
which we now stand. And we boast (rejoice) in the hope of the glory of
God.
Rom. 5:2 di· ou| kaiV thVn prosagwghVn
ejschvkamen [th'/ pivstei] eij" thVn cavrin
tauvthn ejn h|/ eJsthvkamen, kaiV kaucwvmeqa
ejp· ejlpivdi th'" dovxh" tou' qeou'.
Rom. 5:3 Not only so, but we also boast (rejoice) in our sufferings,
because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance,
character; and character, hope
Rom. 5:3 ouj movnon dev, ajllaV kaiV kaucwvmeqa
ejn tai'" qlivyesin, eijdovte" o{ti hJ qli'yi"
uJpomonhVn katergavzetai,
Rom. 5:11 Not only is this so, but we also boast (rejoice) in God, through
our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have no received reconciliation
Rom. 5:11 ouj movnon dev, ajllaV kaiV
kaucwvmenoi ejn tw'/ qew'/ diaV tou' kurivou
hJmw'n jIhsou' Cristou', di· ou| nu'n thVn
katallaghVn ejlavbomen.
Rom. 15:17 Therefore I boast (glory) in Christ Jesus in my service to God
Rom. 15:17 e[cw oun [thVn] kauvchsin ejn Cristw'/
jIhsou' taV proV" toVn qeovn:

The only legitimate grounds for boasting ("bragging") are: the hope of the glory of
God, tribulations and Christ Jesus. Elsewhere Paul boasts in people (e.g., I

Rom4obs.doc
02/04/02
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 5

Thess. 2:19). All other bragging is excluded.

Paul strikes a categorical blow at the current Jewish understanding of
Abraham as one who was justified on the basis of his works. In I Macc. 2:52,
Abraham's faithfulness in temptation is described as a means of justification,
"Was not Abraham found faithful in temptation, and it was reckoned unto him for
righteousness."5 Cranfield cites several references within Judaism:
According to Jub. 23:10, 'Abraham was perfect in all his deeds with the
Lord, and well-pleasing in righteousness all the days of his life'; and in
Kidd. 4:14, it is stated that 'we find that Abraham our father had
performed the whole Law before it was given, for it is written, Because
that Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments,
my statutes, and my laws (Gen. 26:5). He was one of the righteous ones
not needing repentance--'Thou therefore, O Lord, that art the God of the
just, hast not appointed repentance to the just, to Abraham, and Isaac,
and Jacob, which have not sinned against thee; but thou hast appointed
repentance unto me that am a sinner' (Prayer of Manasses (8)6

Some interpreters have understood the clause, "but not before God" (allaV
ouj proV" qeovn) as implying that Abraham still has grounds for boasting
vis-a-vis people. However, the thought is not only alien to the context, but it
contradicts the apodosis of the contrary to fact conditional sentence that says
that he has no grounds for boasting whatsoever. To introduce two different types
of boasting here violates the logical stream of Paul's thought.
V.3. The opening conjunction, "for" gavr, substantiates the conclusion
of v. 2 that Abraham possesses nothing to boast about before God. Three
supports are then given:
1. Abraham's trusting response to God's word (LXX of Gen. 15:6 (v.3),
2. The general reckoning procedure in human affairs (vss. 4-5),
3. David's beatitude--the non-reckoning of sin (vss. 6-8).
The link between these three substantiating affirmations is the verb
"reckon," logivzomai (vv. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7), used in the sense here of "to
calculate, take into account, put down to one's account, credit something to
someone."7
1. Abraham's trusting response in God's word (LXX of Gen. 15:6). The
point of the quote lies in Abraham's trusting response in the divine word/promise
(Gen 15:1, 4, 5), a verse which was central within Judaism. But in Judaism, even
faith was regarded as a meritorious work, i.e., Abraham's "faithfulness":
I Macc. 2:52--"Was not Abraham found faithful in testing/temptation, and it
was reckoned to him for righteousness"
Abraam oujciV ejn peirasmw/' euJrevqh pistov",
kaiV ejlogivsqh aujtw/' eij" dikaiosuvnhn.8

5 See Heidland for Rabbinic reflections on the passage, "logivzomai," TDNT, vol. IV,

pp. 291-292.
6 C.E.B. Cranfield, Romans (ICC), (Edinburgh, T & T Clark, 1975), p.277.
7 BAG, p. 476-478. cf. also MM for a list of parallels drawn \ from technical business

terminology.
8 cf. Cranfield, p. 229 for other support from rabbinic commentary on Gen. 15:6.

Rom4obs.doc
02/04/02
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 6

Thus Paul deliberately counters Jewish interpretation with a view

diametrically opposed to current understanding. For Abraham, faith was not a
meritorious work, but a trusting response in God's word/promise to do what He
said that He would do. While Abraham belongs to the old covenant, he does not
mark the antithesis to the Gospel (Moses) but he represents the situation of the
promise of God under the old covenant. As Käsemann notes, "It is the gospel
pre-given in salvation history, its historical concealment, whereas the gospel itself
is the promise eschatologically revealed and open to the day . . . The promise
entered history by concealing itself in the scriptures. The gospel, with its
universal proclamation and revelation of the depths of history, liberated the
promise in this concealment."9
2. The general reckoning procedure in human affairs (vv. 4-5). Paul
looks to the arena of human affairs through a contrast:
One who works  wage- what is due
not favor
One who does not work  no wage
but believes in Him favor, justifies the ungodly
Thus, human work is contrasted to the believing response--trust. Even
faith cannot be regarded as a work. Faith is sheer trust in the power of God to do
what He said He would. If the Genesis text had mentioned any work that
Abraham had done, then Abraham would have "worked," and the reckoning of
righteousness would have been not grace (cavri") but "wage" (misqov")
and "what is due" (ojfeivlhma). Further, to affirm that Abraham had no
wage, i.e., claim upon God, is parallel to the statement that he was ungodly (v.
5; cf. also 1:18; 5:16 for the same term, ajsevbeia).
We find in 4:5 a deliberate contrast with the Old Testament in that God
does something forbidden by the Old Testament:
"I will not justify the wicked (LXX: Thou shalt not justify the ungodly)"--Ex.
23:7
"He that justifies the wicked, and he that condemns the righteous, both of
them alike are an abomination unto the Lord"--Prov. 17:15
"Woe unto them . . . which justify the wicked for a reward, and take away
the righteousness of the righteous from him."--Isa. 5:23

If a man works a 40-hour week as a painter and then receives his check,
the check is not due to grace, but it is simply payment for his work with the
paintbrush. While he has been working, his employer gets deeper and deeper in
debt to this painter. He owes him his money when the 40 hours are finished. His
check is a wage, a payment of a debt for human work, but it is not given by
grace. Through the contrast, Paul sets up an either/or situation. Either
justification--right standing before God is due to human work or it is due to divine
grace; it cannot be both. Faith here is seen as the utter antithesis of works.
Barrett notes, "It follows that since Abraham had righteousness counted to him,
he cannot have done works, but must have been the recipient of grace."10 Paul
uses Jewish rabbinic exegesis known as gezerah shawa. According to this
9 Käsemann, p. 90.
10 C. K. Barrett, The Epistle to the Romans, (New York: Harper & Row, 1957), p. 88.

Rom4obs.doc
02/04/02
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 7

principle, when we find the same word, which occurs in two biblical passages,
each can be used to illuminate the other. This is what Paul does by linking the
three supports, all of which revolve around the idea of "reckoning"
(logivzomai).
3. David's beatitude--the non-reckoning of sin (vss. 6-8). Another key
figure from Jewish history supports Paul's claim that righteousness is reckoned to
people apart from works. Just as Paul used Abraham to contrast Jewish
particularism with the universal message of grace, so he uses the other notable
figure from Israel's past, King David; David was reckoned as righteous because
God did not count his sin against him. There is a noteworthy progression found
in Ps. 32:1f.--the reckoning of righteousness is equivalent to the forgiveness of
sins:
6 kaqavper kaiV DauiVd levgei toVn

makarismoVn tou' ajnqrwvpou w/J' oJ qeoV"

logivzetai dikaiosuvnhn cwriV" ejvrgwn –whom
God reckons as righteousness apart from works
7 makavrioi wJ'n ajfevqhsan aiJ ajnomivai --
"Blessed are those whose lawless deeds have been forgiven"
kaiV wJ'n ejpekaluvfqhsan aiJ aJmartivai : -
-"And whose sins have been covered"
makavrio" ajnhvr ouJ' ouj mhV logivshtai
kuvrio" aJmartivan -Blessed is the man whose sin the
Lord will not take into account"
Paul advances the thought of reckoning. Here he links the reckoning of
righteousness (Gen.15:6) to the forgiveness of sins (Ps. 32:1f.); he makes it
abundantly clear that forgiveness of sin and the reckoning of righteousness is
utterly "apart from works," cwriV" ejvrgwn. The blessed person is not
the sinless person, but the one whose sin is not taken into account. The
reckoning of righteousness is not dependent upon human works but is
dependent upon God's unique work. Paul applies gezerah shawa in reverse
order; Gen. 15:6 is used to explain Ps. 32:1ff.

4. Apart from Circumcision (4:9-12).

Paul then advances the argument to the issue of circumcision. In so

doing, he demolishes an Israelite claim or privilege. He does so by linking the
"blessing/beatitude" that David pronounced (vv.7, 8) to the time in which such
blessing was pronounced. God's acceptance of Abraham did not depend upon
circumcision. The Jew might object and say, "All this is very well, but Abraham
did observe the law, and circumcision is the mark of the man who keeps the law."
Paul says in effect, "Open your Bibles again and take note of the sequence of
events and the exact chronology." In Gen. 15, we read that Abraham believed
God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness. However, in ch. 17, we find
the account of circumcision as the seal of the promise. His circumcision came
close to 29 years after his initial acceptance. Then it was a seal, which
confirmed and validated the faith-experience as a signet ring or seal on a letter:
"And you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be

Rom4obs.doc
02/04/02
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 8

the sign of the covenant between Me and you." (Gen. 17:11)

However, Paul's purpose is not merely negative in nature, knocking away
the prop of circumcision from the Jew. Paul wishes to affirm that Abraham is the
great unifier of both Jew and Gentile, since he occupies a unique position. Paul
does not intend to take circumcision away from the Jew, but place this seal in its
proper perspective.11 The Jewish use and understanding of this rite must
change. Otherwise, the rite of circumcision comes into conflict with true faith,
which is trusting response to the divine work. The Jew looked at Abraham as the
great dividing point of humanity, between Jew and non-Jew. Paul regards
Abraham as the great unifier of all of humanity; all who believe find their
legitimate place in him. Abraham, our forefather (propavtora--4:1) is really
a father (patevra--4:12) of two groups of people:
"and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the
circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father
Abraham which he had while uncircumcised."
Paul says that there is clearly only one way, for Jew and Gentile to be reckoned
as "righteous"—only through faith.

5. And apart from the Law (4:13-17a)

Paul's next item on the agenda is the Law, another distinctively Jewish
possession, which became an occasion for Jewish boasting ("bragging"). Paul
demolishes this "possession" by means of a contrast between two triads:
Law  Violation  Wrath

Promise  Faith  Grace

Paul offers an either-or situation by which people live. Paul affirms the
fundamental reality of the divine promise, here the promise to Abraham of being
the heir of the world.12 And this promise comes only from God's grace and has
nothing at all to do with human activity or work. If the promise relates to human
work, then faith is nullified and the divine promise is meaningless. Barrett notes:
A promise is not a contract of payment to be made for work done. That
would be not a promise but a legal or commercial agreement. A promise
falls within the sphere of gift, that is, of grace (cf. 3:24). Again, if a man
has made a contract with his employer he knows that his employer as
well as himself is legally bound by the contract. He does not believe that
he will receive his pay; he knows that (provided he keeps his side of the
contract) he will receive it. If then it should be true that the way to be an
heir (in the terms of the promise) is to keep the law, we can only conclude
that the terms 'faith' and 'promise' have lost their meaning.13
Cranfield notes, "Abraham's circumcision is characterized as the seal, that is, the
11

outward and visible authentication, ratification and guarantee, of the righteousness by faith which
was already . . . well established in Judaism by Paul's time." Cranfield, p. 236.
12 The promise to Abraham includes: countless numbers of offspring, possession of the

land of Canaan, a blessing to all nations of the earth through Abraham or through his offspring
(Gen. 12:2-3, 7; 13:14-17; 15:7, 18-21; 17:8; 18:18)
13 Barrett, p. 95.

Rom4obs.doc
02/04/02
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 9

The promise that Paul appears to have in mind is from Gen. 22:7f.:
"In thy blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed
as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore;
and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; and in thy seed shall
all the nations of the earth be blessed."

Let me give an example. Let's suppose that a parent makes a promise to

one's children that they will take them to Busch Gardens next weekend. Their
children are incapable of making that promise happen. They can only believe
that their parent who is true to his or her word. When next weekend comes, after
the excitement of the week, they will get themselves ready, and help make a
picnic lunch. But their trust lies simply in taking their parents at their word. And
they cannot by their works force the event to occur. If they are able to realize the
promise by themselves, then the promise is not really a promise, and their trust is
not really trust.
Faith is a trusting response to the word of God, the divine promise. It
means that his people take God with utter seriousness, believing that God is a
God of His promise; faith means a trust in God to accomplish what He said He
would do. Therefore, to place the fulfillment of that promise upon people is to rob
faith of its object. To inject human performance, i.e., the Law, into the divine
promise is analogous to voiding out the divine check. It is cancelled; the two will
not mix.
Again, in v. 16, through the parenthetical clause, "Abraham (who is the
father of us all)," Paul affirms the unique role of Abraham as the father of two
groups of people, who are related to God in the same way, faith. He
substantiates this from the LXX of Gen. 17:5, "A father of many nations, have I
made you." Only grace and faith are compatible with promise, and thus, there is
continuity between Jew and Gentile, who alike must relate to God on the basis of
faith. Paul underscores "all his descendants" (v. 16), "father of us all," and "the
father of many Gentile nations" (v. 17), substantiating the earlier affirmation that
Abraham would be the "heir of the world" (v. 13).14
In Genesis, the patriarch's name first appears as Abram, <r*b=a^ "The
father is exalted". The changed name is then given and explained, <h*r*b=a^
"Abraham" = "Father of a multitude of nations." In Genesis, the multitude of
nations refers to the descendants of Ishmael and of the children born to Keturah
(Gen. 25:1ff.). However, Paul understands the term to refer to Gentiles, who are
Abraham's children by faith.

6. Demonstrated Genuine Trust (4:17b-22)

In this next section, in a very positive way, Paul elucidates the meaning of
Abraham's faith. Abraham trusted God. He took God at His word in an
impossible situation in spite of contradiction in the midst of human impossibility,
14 Elsewhere the promise is transposed into the eschatological sphere (Matt. 5:5; I Cor.

6:2); in I Cor. 3:21-22, "All things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life
or death or the present or the future—all are yours, and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God."

Rom4obs.doc
02/04/02
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 10

but guided and animated by the divine promise.

a. Faith is trust in God as the life-giver (17b). Paul thinks of the
quickening of Abraham's body and the womb of Sarah, which from a human
standpoint were dead (v. 19):
"God who gives life to the dead" --4:17b
qeou' tou' zJopoiou'nto" touV" nekrouV"
"his own body as good as dead"--4:19
toV eJautou' sw'ma hjvdh nenekrwmevnon
"and the deadness of Sarah's womb"--4:19
kaiV thVn nevkrwsin th'" mhvtra" Savrra"
Paul also draws a parallel between God's creatio ex nihilo and the
quickening of life within both Abraham and Sarah:
"and calls into being that which does not exist" (4:17)
God's creative power was evident in both occasions of nothingness.
b. Faith is a hope against hope (4:18), oJv" par j ejlpivda
ejp j ejlpivdi ejpivsteusen. For the writers of Scripture, hope
does not have the weakened sense of a wish, which we use in our Western
language and thinking, e.g., "I hope (wish) it doesn't rain today." For Paul, hope
is a faith-certainty that is directed to the future. We include an extended quote
from Cranfield,
Paul's point will be that Abraham believed God at a time when it was no
longer a human possibility for him to go on hoping--human hope's utmost
limit had already been reached and passed, and, so far as hope as a
human possibility was concerned, he had given up hoping. And, since
the promise of offspring recorded in Gen. 15:5 (the verse before the one
which Paul is here expounding and will quote again in v. 22) is not
something quite new but substantially a repetition of the promise recorded
in Gen. 12:2f, which (according to Genesis) was made something like a
quarter century earlier (cf. Gen. 12:4 and 17:1), a reference to the limit's
having been passed as far as Abraham's hope was concerned could
hardly be said to be inappropriate.15

Charles Wesley's hymn captures the thought:

"In hope, against all human hope,
Self-desperate, I believe...
Faith, mighty faith, the promise sees,
And looks to that alone;
Laughs at impossibilities,
And cries: I shall be done!"16
c. Faith is an honest faith (v. 19). Abraham's faith was open to the facts,
his own age and the deadness of Sarah's womb. It does not mean closing one's
eyes to the facts or contradiction between the divine promise and the human
impossibility. Abraham did not shut his eyes to the unfavorable circumstances.
But he took them all into careful consideration (katanoevw--"look at (with
(reflection), consider, contemplate, pay attention to"17). And yet he did not
15 Cranfield, p. 245.
16 Hymn 561, The Methodist Hymn Book, London, 1933.
17 BAG, p. 416.

Rom4obs.doc
02/04/02
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 11

concentrate his attention on the human impossibility, but responded to the

primary promise of God—seriously taking God at His word.
d. Faith is a growing faith (4:20-21), "yet with respect to the promise of
God, he did not waver in unbelief, but grew strong in faith, giving glory to God,
and being fully assured that what He had promised, He was able also to
perform."
How does it occur that faith grows weak or strong? We naturally think that
faith weakens when it sees the problems. Paul affirms the opposite. When our
possibilities and options fail, faith grows stronger. The reason for such growing
faith is that it does not rest upon human performance or contradictions, but upon
God and His promise. Faith grew in Abraham's because the object of trust was
not human power, but God who would fulfill His promise. The positive, "giving
glory to God" is a contrast to the former description of the Gentile crisis (1:21,
23), where the Gentiles did not honor God or give Him thanks. Here, Abraham's
faith seals God's faithfulness. Paul is concerned here with a faith in the
impossible, not simply because it is impossible, but because it is based upon,
controlled, and superintended by the divine promise.
Verse 22 concludes in chiastic form, what was stated in 4:2--the LXX of
Gen. 15:6.

7. Which has relevance for all Christians (4:23-25).

In this concluding section of Paul's excursus on faith, Paul delineates the

inclusive purpose of Abraham's example; he establishes the pattern for all
believers. Paul establishes this purpose through a contrast:
Rom. 4:23-24 The words, 'it was credited to him' were written not for him
alone, 24 but also for us to whom God will credit righteousness—for us
who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. 25 He was
delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our
justification
Rom. 4:23-24 Oujk ejgravfh deV di·aujtoVn
movnon o{ti ejlogivsqh aujtw'/, 24 ajllaV
kaiV di· hJma'" oi|" mevllei logivzesqai,
toi'" pisteuvousin ejpiV toVn ejgeivranta
jIhsou'n toVn kuvrion hJmw'n ejk nekrw'n,
The strong adversative, "but" ajllav underscores Abraham's role as
the great unifier. The event not only had meaning for him, for the Jew and
Gentile, all who believe in God as the life-giver. We should note here how Paul
links the themes of God as the life giver in creation (4:17), life-giver with
Abraham and Sarah in their deadness (4:19), and the life-giver of His Son,
manifested in the supreme event of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead (cf.
Rom. 1:3,4).
In 4:25, we should note a conscious allusion to Isaiah 52:13-53:12:
"But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall upon Him" (Isa. 53:6)
"Because He poured out Himself to death" (53:12)
The necessity of the resurrection as an integral part of justification is
underscored. Just as Jesus' atoning death was followed by resurrection, so

Rom4obs.doc
02/04/02
©J. Lyle Story
 p. 12

justification is assured and certain. For Paul, the cross and resurrection (cf. 1:4)
are understood together as a single event, a truth, which affirms that justification
and vindication constitute the new life of Jew and Gentile.

Conclusion

Faith is the only means, which God has provided for men and women to
receive the gift of righteousness. Faith means an attitude of humility without
boasting (bragging); faith cannot even look upon itself as a meritorious work (vss.
2-4). Faith and the benefits of faith are clearly dependent upon divine grace (v.
5). Faith becomes the means of the reckoning of righteousness and the
forgiveness of sins (vss. 6-9). Faith may be expressed through rituals such as
circumcision or baptism; however the ritual is merely a seal of the more
fundamental faith experience (vss. 9-12). Similarly, the Law has meaning for one
who is a believing person; it informs one of the divine will for human life. Faith
means that one receives the divine promise and God's commitment to bring His
promise to fulfillment (vss. 13-16) even as He brought His creation into being
from nothing. Through faith, one is joined to others, to the broad family of God
throughout the generations, be they Jew or Gentile (vss. 8-18). Faith also means
a faith-commitment to the future, to hope in the face of human impossibilities, to
growth in the face of difficulties (vss. 19-23), with the sure confidence in God's
supreme power, based upon His resurrecting power (vss. 24-24).

Rom4obs.doc
02/04/02
©J. Lyle Story
 Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 brill.nl/pent

Pauline Thoughts about the Holy Spirit and

Sanctification: Provision, Process, and Consummation

J. Lyle Story*
School of Divinity, Regent University, 1000 Regent University
Drive, Virginia Beach, VA 23464, USA
lylesto@regent.edu

Abstract
The Holy Spirit is vitally and dynamically involved in the sanctification of individuals and their
faith-communities. An examination of the Pauline terms and texts reveal that sanctification
through the Spirit includes: 1) God’s Provision in his gracious call, 2) The Process of sanctifica-
tion in Christian growth in moral purity and love, 3) The Consummation at the Parousia.
To that end, we will provide brief historical and theological arguments as to how the Spirit
works in sanctification, primarily within the holiness Pentecostal traditions. Often, various
writings highlight one aspect to the neglect of other emphases. The paper argues for the compre-
hensive role of the Spirit in the past event, present experience, and future hope of the people of
God and argues for a consistency between the three activities related to sanctification, including
the essential element of love.

Keywords
sanctification, Holy Spirit, holiness, indicative-imperative, love

1. Introduction

12 Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves
with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. 13 Bear with each
other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive
as the Lord forgave you.
14 And over all these virtues clothe yourselves with love, which binds them all
together in perfect unity (Col. 3.12-14).
In these words to the Colossian believers, Paul commands his readers,
‘clothe yourselves’, with garments, which are consistent with the new life they

* J. Lyle Story (PhD Fuller Theological Seminary) is Professor of Biblical languages and New
Testament in the School of Divinity of Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA, USA.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2009 DOI 10.1163/174552509X442165

68 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

have experienced. They are who they are (‘chosen people’) by virtue of God’s
choice (‘chosen’); they are also addressed as saints (‘holy’) and beloved (‘dearly
loved ’). In a clear and unmistakable manner, Paul affirms the Colossians new
existence and new position. As an outgrowth of who they are, Paul charges
them to live in such a way that corresponds to their new life. His ‘clothing’
language reveals the practice of the Early Church, wherein a new baptizand
would put on new clothes, symbolizing the cleansed and transformed life. In
Paul’s enumeration of the various ‘clothing’ items, he views love as the choic-
est garment of all, which binds the community together in perfect unity.
Divine choice—holiness—love—the three truths are inextricably combined.
For the purpose of our study, we note the Trinitarian-fellowship’s direct
involvement as primary agents in the sanctification of believers. In Rom.
15.16, the Holy Spirit is the agent of the believers’ sanctification. In 1 Cor.
1.2, believers are in a sanctified condition in Christ Jesus. In 1 Thess. 5.23-24,
God is the one who will sanctify the entire human person. 2 Thess. 2.13 speaks
of the engagement of the three different members of the Trinitarian-fellowship
since they are each vital in salvation:
‘brothers, beloved by the Lord’ ( Jesus),
God chose you to be saved
through the sanctifying work of the Spirit . . .
A similar interchange of terms is found in Rom. 8.9-10: ‘in the Spirit’, ‘Spirit
of God dwells in you’, have ‘the Spirit of Christ’, ‘Christ in you’, ‘Spirit of
Him who raised Christ Jesus dwells in you’. Thus, while we focus our atten-
tion upon Paul’s understanding of the person and work of the Holy Spirit in
sanctification, we cannot be exclusive in our understanding of the other mem-
bers of the Trinitarian-fellowship, who are similarly engaged.
We will use the terms, 1) Divine Provision, 2) Process, and 3) Con-
summation, to express the various aspects of sanctification. The discussion
builds upon the earlier terminology, indicative and imperative1 for the
first two items. More recently, this pattern is well expressed by Howard,2

1
Rudolf Bultmann, The Theology of the New Testament (transl. K. Grobel; 2 Vols.; New York:
Charles Scribners Sons, 1955), pp. 79-82. Helmut Thielicke, Theological Ethics (transl.
J. Doberstein; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1969 repr. 1966, Vol. I and II). Victor Paul Furnish,
Theology and Ethics in Paul (New York: Abingdon Press, 1968), pp. 207-27. Although Dunn
notes the indicative-imperative in terms of the Christian life, there is a noteworthy absence of
discussion of the Holy Spirit with respect to sanctification under the topic of ‘How should
believers live?. James D.G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1998), pp. 626-31.
2
Richard E. Howard, Newness of Life (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1975), pp. 67-176.
 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 69

Adewuya,3 and Greathouse,4 However, the ‘holiness’ word-family also looks

forward to the consummation at the time of the Parousia. These terms may
capture Paul’s thought in a clearer and more personal way than through the
grammatical terms (indicative-imperative). For example, an imperative might
well place an undue stress on human endeavor whereas ‘process’ is a term that
is open to divine activity in the process, e.g., ‘Now may the God of peace
sanctify (ἁγιάσαι) you’ (1 Thess. 5.23). Clearly, God is subject of the wish-
prayer (optative) although the wish-prayer emerges from Paul’s heart. Even in
the text of 2 Cor. 7.1, ‘bringing holiness [i.e. sanctification] to completion’,
Paul states that the Corinthian believers can only do so ‘in the sphere of (ἐν)
the reverence of God’, i.e. ‘in the sphere of life where they are surrounded by
the awe and wonder of God’s holy presence’. Moreover, in ‘bringing holiness
to completion’, they are involved in a process that God has initiated.
God’s provision of sanctification is inextricably bound up with the divine
commitment and engagement with the human process of bringing sanctifica-
tion to consummation at the time of the Parousia. God has preeminently
taken in hand to provide for the sanctification of his people and he is very
much involved in the life-long process of effecting holiness in their lives
(1 Thess. 5.23) through the ongoing provision and dynamic of the Holy Spirit
(1 Thess. 4.8). Thus, the word-family of ‘holiness’ terms belongs almost exclu-
sively to the Trinitarian-fellowship. Elsewhere, Paul uses other terms to express
the human response from the ‘saints’, ‘those who sanctified’, i.e. ‘set apart to
God’. The human response belongs to the process wherein imperatives and
exhortations follow on the heels of statements of divine provision, which also
look to completion at the Parousia.

2. Historical and Theological Considerations

It is beyond our purview to relate the Spirit’s role in sanctification to numer-

ous arguments concerning the Pauline center: salvation, ‘in Christ’, justifica-
tion, reconciliation, adoption, redemption, the new creation, and others.
Suffice it to say, that we understand the sanctification language as a metaphor
from the Judeo-Christian cultic life that expresses an aspect of the salvation
event and experience (past, present, and future), which is certainly the work

3
J. Ayodeji Adewuya, Transformed by Grace (Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2004),
pp. 19-39.
4
William M. Greatouse, Wholeness in Christ (Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill Press, 1998),
pp. 94-126.
70 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

of the Holy Spirit coupled with responsible response from humans. However,
since these movements are interconnected we do need to trace various under-
standings of the Spirit’s role in sanctification from the Reformation,
Wesleyanism, and the Holiness and Pentecostal streams. To say the least, this
period has been characterized by diversity at best, and fractious schism, accu-
sations of heresy, and name-calling at worst. Frequently, one aspect of Paul’s
‘sanctification-language’ is highlighted at the expense of other texts and con-
siderations.5 Sadly enough, Paul’s (and Wesley’s) commitment to the correla-
tion of sanctification and love—is countered by bitter polemics in the rise and
development of various leaders, movements, and denominations.

2.a. Reformation Thought

Donald Bloesch argues, ‘What has been removed de jure by Christ (justifica-
tion) must be taken away de facto by the Holy Spirit (sanctification)’.6 The
reformers (Luther and Calvin) emphasize justification, the legal metaphor,
which expresses a forensic and declarative verdict of being accounted right-
eous before the divine tribunal. It is both the basis and goal of the Christian
life. While the Arminians argued that justification is the forgiveness of sins,
the reformers argued that it is the eradication of sin and guilt through Jesus
Christ. Calvin moderates Luther’s view wherein he takes into fuller account,
‘the Christian life’. Sanctification is regarded as being engrafted into the right-
eousness of God, thereby making sanctification always dependent upon justi-
fication in the ongoing life of the Christian.7 As such, Luther’s perspective is
pessimistic, ‘In this trial and struggle, the righteous man always resembles
more a loser than a victor’.8 In this tradition, G.C. Berkouwer argues that
‘The heart of sanctification is the life which feeds on this justification’.9 He
also states that ‘Genuine sanctification—let it be repeated—stands or falls

5
For a summary of diverse traditions relative to sanctification, see Melvin E. Dieter
(Wesleyan), Anthony A. Hoekema (Reformed), Stanley M. Horton, J. Roberson McQuilkin
(Keswick), John F. Walvoord (Augustinian-Dispensational) in M.E. Dieter, et al., Five Views on
Sanctification (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987).
6
Donald G. Bloesch, Essentials of Evangelical Theology, Vol. 2 (San Francisco: Harper & Row
Publishers, 1979), p. 45. More recently, David Peterson argues for a similar Reformation pat-
tern. David Peterson, Possessed By God (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995).
7
S.E. Porter, ‘Holiness, Sanctification’, The Dictionary of Paul and His Letters (Downers
Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1993), p. 398.
8
Martin Luther, Luther: Lectures on Romans (ed. & Transl. Wm. Pauck; Louisville, KY:
Westminster John Knox Press), p. 127.
9
G.C. Berkouwer, Faith and Sanctification (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952), p. 93.
 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 71

with this continued orientation towards justification and the remission of

sins’.10 Correspondingly, the work of the Holy Spirit relates Christians to the
redemptive suffering and death of Christ, allowing ‘the work of the Spirit to
be founded through faith upon the forgiveness of sins: and any sanctification
whatever must spring from this forgiveness’.11 Similarly, Torrance argues that
sanctification is the continued unfolding, development, and maintenance of
justification.12 Kuyper notes, ‘It wounds the very heart of Reformed confes-
sion when the pulpit aims at sanctification without zeal for justification’.13
To be sure, the reformed tradition needs to be understood as a reaction and
aversion to the perceived ‘works-righteousness’ of the Roman Catholic Church.
However, the danger is to relegate sanctification to the ‘back-seat’ to justifica-
tion, thereby making the Christian life into a repeated circular movement
that ends in humility and repentance, with minimal expression of positive
growth, victory, and empowerment by the Spirit for Christian character and
charismatic service in ministry. There is a decided absence of victory for the
Christian. For example, Berkouwer’s extensive discussion of sanctification is
followed by an entire chapter on Humility and Sanctification, whereby any
Christian growth necessarily means a corresponding growth of sin and guilt-
consciousness.14

2.b. Wesleyanism

The Wesleyan movement began as an outgrowth of John Wesley’s conversion

experience, his contact with the Moravian pietists, and his subsequent evan-
gelistic work of preaching and writing. In part, Wesleyanism constituted a
reaction against the cold Calvinistic approach, creedal rigidity, and a deper-
sonalized attitude to the Christian life. Even before his ‘Aldersgate-experience’
in which he was ‘strangely warmed’, Wesley was fascinated with a saving faith
that could bring both holiness and happiness. Subsequently, Wesley sought
for a holiness that he believed was possible. In contrast to the Reformer’s com-
mitment to faith as the goal, Wesley argued for love as the end goal of the
plan of salvation. Wesley said that love is ‘the end of all the commandments of

10
Berkouwer, p. 78.
11
Berkouwer, p. 93.
12
Thomas Torrance, Kingdom and Church (Fair Lawn, N.J.: Essential Books, 1956), p. 101.
13
Abraham Kuyper, The Work of the Holy Spirit (trans. Henry de Vries; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1966), p. 270.
14
Indeed, Berkouwer argues that sanctification is not a ‘process’ or moral process, but it is
being holy in Christ, and having part, through faith in his righteousness (Berkouwer, p. 104).
72 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

God … the end, the sole end, of every dispensation of God, from the begin-
ning to the consummation of all things’.15 Genuine freedom is not simply the
reformed freedom from guilt, hell and its pangs, but the freedom to love with
the love of God shed abroad in the heart by the Holy Spirit.16 The Holy Spirit
communicates the experience and life of love through the life of Jesus in the
Spirit’s presence and power. The Spirit of Jesus is the Holy Spirit who will
finally restore the complete love of God in the hearts of all who believe. The
idea of purity is knit together with love and the promise of a new heart and
Spirit (Ezekiel 36) and a new covenant (Jeremiah 31), which then lead his
people to a will to love rather than to disobey. Wesley preached and wrote of
an assurance of a Christian’s relationship with God in love, in a similar way to
the experience of conversion when the Spirit bears witness of a new birth.
Love is the evidence of sanctification, made experimental through the Holy
Spirit.
In his extensive tract, A Plain Account of Christian Perfection, Wesley argues
for an entire sanctification in this age in his question ‘When may a person
judge himself to have attained this [entire sanctification/perfection]?’ He
answers,
When, after having been fully convinced of inbred sin, by a far deeper and clearer
conviction than that he experienced before justification, and after having experi-
enced a gradual mortification of it, he experiences a total death to sin, and an
entire renewal in the love and image of God, so as to rejoice evermore, to pray
without ceasing, and in everything to give thanks. . . . None therefore ought to
believe that the work is done, till there is added the testimony of the Spirit,
witnessing his entire sanctification, as clearly as his justification.17
He argued that ‘Scriptural perfection is pure love filling the heart and govern-
ing all the words and actions’, a perfection that demanded an increase in love;
thus Christians make progress through the Spirit who resides within. While
the reformers placed sanctification under the umbrella of justification, Wesley
positioned sanctification alongside of justification and viewed it as a still
higher salvation. For many later Wesleyans, justification appeared to be nearly
absorbed into sanctification. It is important to note that ‘entire sanctification’
did not mean ‘sinless perfection’ but a perfection of motives and desires in
which a person is able to live above willful transgression. Wesley accentuates

15
John Wesley, ‘The Law Established Through Faith’, The Works of John Wesley (London:
Wesley Conference Office, 1872, reprinted 1978), V, p. 462.
16
Wesley, ‘The First Fruits of the Spirit’, Works, V, pp. 88-89.
17
John Wesley, ‘A Plain Account of Christian Perfection’, in The Works of John Wesley (Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker, 3rd ed, 1978), XI, pp. 366-446.
 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 73

Paul’s expression that the core of Christian living is ‘faith working through
love’ (Gal. 5.6).
Wesley’s thoughts about sanctification find later expression in theologians,
stressing the mystical ‘in-Christ’ language (Schweitzer, Deissmann, Stewart)
and the language of the new creation (Hickling), ideas that were part of
Methodist teaching.

2.b. Holiness and Pentecostal Streams

The subsequent Holiness and Pentecostal streams continued to grapple with

Wesley’s teaching on the Holy Spirit and Sanctification. We can find three
major streams of thought relative to the role of the Spirit in sanctification.

2b.1. The Classical Holiness stream

Argued for two primary crisis events, which Synan terms, ‘The double-cure’18:
1) Conversion, 2) Sanctification. The work of the Spirit in sanctification was
reinterpreted by Wesley’s defender, John Fletcher, who linked ‘baptism of the
Holy Spirit’ with Wesley’s ‘entire sanctification’.19 Phoebe Palmer (1839)
understood that the shorter way to perfection was found in her ‘altar theol-
ogy’, which was understood as a faith-statement for the ‘second blessing’. The
later Keswick movement also linked the baptism in the Holy Spirit with ethi-
cal behavior. Charles Jones notes, ‘Passing over Wesley’s emphasis on the per-
fection of love as a process … (Palmer) stressed entire sanctification as a
present possibility … Wesley’s followers developed a discipline for seeking
perfect love; Mrs. Palmer’s, a discipline for the sanctified life’.20 While Wesley
stressed experiential love, Palmer stressed faith in one’s personal sacrifice,
based upon promises in Scripture.
Often, the role of the Spirit as the Fire-Baptizer was accentuated in terms of
the refining and cleansing role of the Spirit, most notably expressed through
B.H. Irwin, with numerous such ‘effusions’ following. Further, holiness advo-
cates stressed a withdrawal from the world in this inner sanctification, which
stressed rigorous standards of personal conduct and self-discipline. A key
Pauline text for the holiness stream is found in 1 Thess. 4:1-12, with particu-
lar directives for sexual and social ethics. It is interesting to note that while the

18
Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1972), p. 32.
19
John Fletcher, ‘The Last Check to Antinomianism’, The Works of the Reverend Fletcher, Late
Vicar of Madeley, (New York: Mason & Lane, 1836), II, p. 526.
20
Charles Edwin Jones, Perfectionist Persuasion (Metuchen, N.J.: The Scarecrow Press, 1974),
p. 4.
74 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

Social Gospel advocates directed their compassion to the poor, the holiness
advocates (among the poor) rejected such attempts for social justice and
decried the worldliness of the culture, by listing numerous ill-effects of cul-
ture, e.g., theater-going, etc.
J. A. Wood, building upon Wesley’s understanding, proved to be a father of
the Holiness movement. In his response to the question, Woods argues that
perfect holiness is attainable in this life with no apparent distinction between
that which is exhorted and the promised and consummate perfection of holi-
ness at the Parousia: ‘He who seeks a gradual sanctification, seeks necessarily
something less than entire sanctification; that is, he does not seek entire sanc-
tification at all’.21
The holiness movement was later embraced by the Nazarenes, Wesleyans,
Salvation Army, Church of God (Anderson, Indiana), and several later
Pentecostal groups.22 These bodies emphasized a progressive and entire sancti-
fication to be realized in this life, which is understood to be the baptism in
the Spirit. The Church of God (Anderson, Indiana) further subdivides sancti-
fication into cleansing, consecration, calling, and convincing evidence. The
supportive texts for linking the Holy Spirit with sanctification are selectively
drawn from Pauline texts, without probing into the full orb of Pauline
thoughts about the crucial role of the Spirit in sanctification (provision, proc-
ess, and consummation). As Dieter notes, the strong theme of the holiness
movement ‘was the strong primitivism which was present in all holiness con-
cepts of the church’.23 The holiness churches were determined to return to the
power and purity of the Early Church at Pentecost.

2.b.2. The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement

As a direct result of the impact of the Azusa-Street Revival (1906), leaders and
members of countless churches were forced to reckon with the power of the
Holy Spirit, with particular attention to the charismata of the Spirit. The term
‘holiness Pentecostal’ reflected the holiness movement of the late nineteenth
century (National Holiness Movement) and the Pentecostal revival of the
early twentieth century. The extensive movement combined and preserved
the Wesleyan tradition of sanctification, while advocating the Pentecostal

21
Rev. J. A. Wood, Perfect Love or Plain Things for Those who Need them, concerning the doc-
trine, experience, profession and practice of Christian Holiness (Chicago: The Christian Witness
Co., 1915), pp. 69-76.
22
Their statements on sanctification can be found on their websites.
23
Melvin E. Dieter, The Holiness Revival of the Nineteenth Century (Lanham, MD.: The
Scarecrow Press, 1966), p. 251.
 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 75

experience. In part, this was due to the fact that the majority of Pentecostal
leaders grew out of the holiness movement. The sanctifying activity of the
Spirit in the ‘second-blessing’ thus prepared and cleansed persons for the bap-
tism in the Spirit as a third work of the Spirit. J.H. King (1917-1946), one of
the earliest proponents for this movement wrote an influential book, From
Passover to Pentecost.24 Although King uses a very subjective allegorical-
hermeneutic, he argues for the doctrine of the Spirit’s entire-sanctification
(removal of ‘inbred sin’), which leads to the powerful baptism in the Spirit as
King reflects upon various narratives in the book of Acts. Other movements
and denominations played a key role in Pentecostal-Holiness movements,
stressing the ‘second work’: Church of God (Cleveland—A.J. Tomlinson) and
Church of God in Christ (C.H. Mason). These groups emphasized the Spirit’s
role in salvation, cleansing, and empowering the believer. It is interesting that
in the International Pentecostal-Holiness Church, their Doctrinal Amplification
contains a section on the Holy Spirit, with no mention made of the role of the
Spirit in sanctification; however, there are two further Amplifications concern-
ing both Sanctification and Entire Sanctification. Supportive texts for the
Spirit are drawn solely from the Paraclete passages in the Fourth Gospel.

2.b.3. Pentecostalism
In the early Pentecostal churches, a schism was initiated by W.H. Durham
(1914), when he promoted ‘The Finished Work’, which assigned sanctifica-
tion to the salvation experience, grounded on Christ’s finished work on
Calvary to be followed by the Pentecostal baptism in the Spirit. Followers of
the ‘finished work’ approach became organized, leading to the establishment
of the Assemblies of God (E.N. Bell 1914)25 and the International Church of
the Foursquare Gospel (1906-1923 with Aimee Semple McPherson).
Sanctification or the role of the Spirit in sanctification receives bare mention
in these movements. In the AG’s ‘16 Fundamental Truths’ (1916), there is no
fundamental truth that explains the nature and role of the Spirit, although it
does include truths relative to God the Father, and Jesus Christ; at the same
time, initial evidence (tongues) is one of the 16 truths. Sanctification is one of
the 16 truths, but is expressed as separation from evil, life of holiness, power
for becoming holy, with identification with the death and resurrection of
Christ.

24
J.H. King, From Passover to Pentecost (Franklin Springs, GA: LifeSprings Resources, 1914;
reprinted in 1976).
25
The development of the ‘Jesus Only’ movement within Pentecostalism will be outside the
sphere of our concern in this article.
76 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

Stanley Horton expresses the Pentecostal perspective of a two-fold work

of sanctification: 1) positional/instantaneous, 2) practical/progressive.26 The
Holy Spirit’s part is to be complemented by a believer’s part.27 He notes
that ‘the whole work of sanctification is the work of the Spirit which receives
by far the greatest attention in the New Testament. It takes precedence
over witnessing, evangelism, giving, and every other form of Christian serv-
ice’.28 At the same time, the AG holds the baptism in the Spirit as the second
major crisis experience. Wesley’s commitment to ‘perfect love’ in ‘sanctifica-
tion’ does not receive full treatment; however, Horton’s works do reflect a
commitment to the fruit of the Spirit as expressions of the sanctified life.
The Foursquare Declaration of Faith 29 does not relate sanctification to ‘The
New Birth’ (justification), although it does speak about the reception of
the Spirit of Christ. Sanctification is expressed in ‘Daily Christian Life’, in
the language of ‘daily sanctification’, with attention to the gifts and fruit of the
Spirit.
Before we look at three leading statements on Paul’s understanding of the
Spirit in sanctification, a brief excursus is in order to express the Greek terms
related to ‘holiness’ as they bear upon the work of the Spirit in sanctification.

3. Considerations on the ‘Holiness’ Word-Family

There are several terms in the Pauline corpus that belong to the ‘holiness’
word-family:
3.a. ἅγιος (hagios)—‘holy’: an adjective, used in the cultic sense, ‘dedicated to
God, holy, sacred, reserved for God and His service’, which also shades over into
the meaning of ‘holy = pure, perfect, worthy of God’. The adjective also is used
with respect to persons, such as prophets or ‘saints’, the Holy Spirit, angels,
Christ, God, or the Church.30 It is difficult to find references where the adjective
is used to the endeavors or aspirations of Christians.

26
Stanley M. Horton, Five Views on Sanctification, p. 113. See also idem, What the Bible Says
About the Holy Spirit (Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 1977).
27
Parallel statements are made by Harold D. Hunter, Spirit-Baptism (Lanham, MD:
University Press of America, 1983), p. 257.
28
Horton, Holy Spirit, p. 258.
29
www.foursquare.org
30
Walter Bauer, et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian
Literature (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 9. Hereinafter referred to as
BAGD.
 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 77

3.b. ἁγιάζω (hagiadzo)—‘make holy, consecrate, sanctify, purify, i.e. include in

the inner circle of what is holy, in both religious and moral uses of the word’.31
The verb is never used by Paul to refer to human endeavor; the Trinitarian-
fellowship is always the subject of the verb. He sanctified, sanctifies and will sanc-
tify the people of God.
3.c ἁγιασμός (hagiasmos)—‘holiness, consecration, sanctification; the use in
a moral sense for a process’.32 Greek nouns, ‘expressing action are formed
with – μος’.33
3.d. ἁγιωσύνη (hagiōsunee)—‘holiness’ as a quality or state,34 formed as a quali-
tative abstract with the addition of –σύνη.35
Other terms express the ἅγιος word family: derivatives such as ἁγνός, ‘pure
or holy’ and the καθαρίζω word family, ‘I cleanse’, which express intentional
behavior from the communities.
Since Paul is a ‘Hebrew of Hebrews’ (Phil. 3.5), it is only natural that his
understanding of the ‘holiness’ word-family finds its anchor in OT thought.
The Hebrew root q-d-sh implies ‘to cut’, ‘to separate’ or ‘to divide’. Thus, the
word-family expresses a cut or line by which the ‘holy’ is separated from what
is common and thus exclusively devoted to God as expressed by the prophet
Ezekiel:
Her priests have done violence to my law and have profaned my holy things; they
have made no distinction between the holy and the common, neither have they
taught the difference between the unclean and the clean, and they have disre-
garded my Sabbaths, so that I am profaned among them. Ezek. 22.26
Through a divine choice, God separates people, places, things and times—
separating them all from their ‘common’ state and purpose and devotes them
to a ‘sacred’ purpose.

4. Leading Statements of Paul’s Understanding of Holiness

The various Pauline texts dealing with the word-family (verb, adjective, two
nouns) surely must be positioned within the broad theological background of

31
BAGD, pp. 8-9.
32
BAGD, p. 9.
33
F. Blass, A. Debrunner, and R. Funk, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other
Early Christian Literature, (Chicago: the University of Chicago Press, 1961), p. 109. Hereinafter
referred to as BDF.
34
BAGD, p. 10.
35
BDF, 110.
78 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

the OT. We suggest the following affirmations concerning Paul’s use of the
word-family:

4.a. Sanctification is the Position of Believers Before God, Created by God,

which Forms the Basis of their Initial Call (God’s Provision)

In 2 Thess. 2.13, Paul affirms the interconnection of sanctification with

respect to past fact, present experience, and future realization—all in light of
the role of the Holy Spirit. After stating the grim tragedy of unbelievers’ judg-
ment (2.11-12), he pronounces the contrasting confidence of the Thes-
salonians. They are chosen, ‘beloved by the Lord’ (ἠγαpημένοι ὑpὸ κυρίου),
called, first fruits for salvation, with a sanctification by means of the Spirit,
and will participate in their joyous future (2.14). For Paul, salvation combines
past, present, and future; correspondingly, the Spirit’s sanctifying role is
important in the three temporal phases. Here, it is clear that sanctification is
the Spirit’s present role in believers that will be consummated at the Parousia,
when Christ will be glorified in his ‘holy ones’ (1:10). Fee notes that ‘it is of
more than passing interest that he should describe their conversion in terms of
‘sanctification’ or ‘holiness’ … Thus, ‘sanctification’ in Paul, as 1 Cor. 1.30
and 6.11 also make plain, is not a second work of grace’.36 In Romans 6, Paul
also argues that ‘holiness/sanctification’ is bound up within the Christians’
salvation experience and cannot be separated from this experience.
Sanctification is far more than personal growth in Christian behavior. For
example, in 1 Cor. 1.2, Paul uses the substantival ‘saints’ (ἅγιοι) and the per-
fect passive participle ‘having been sanctified’ (ἡγιασμένοι) in reference to
the Corinthian believers. These are the same believers who have been filled
with the Spirit, but are sadly characterized by schism, party-spirit, law-suits,
charismatic confusion, sexual immorality, and other personal and social disor-
ders. The terms ἅγιοι (‘saints’) and ἡγιασμένοι (‘having been sanctified’) can
have no reference to spiritual growth among the Corinthian Christians since
the moral fiber of their personal and communal life is almost non-existent.
Only by God’s call are they regarded as ‘saints’ and ‘sanctified’, i.e. ‘set apart
unto God’.37 Similarly, in 1 Cor. 1.30, the Corinthians are said to be ‘in Christ
Jesus’, who became ‘the wisdom from God, righteousness, sanctification and
redemption’. The community at Corinth can be regarded as ‘the Church’;

36
Gordon Fee, God’s Empowering Presence (Peabody MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994),
p. 79.
37
The pattern is also reflected in Leviticus: ‘set apart’ precedes demand.
 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 79

perhaps they should be called, ‘a fellowship of sinners called saints’. Later,

Paul calls the Corinthian believers to fully realize their bodies are called a
‘holy temple’ (1 Cor. 6.19).
In the Pauline corpus, God’s provision (indicative) clearly affirms the prior
activity of God in sanctifying the people of God. The Roman Christians are
‘called’: ‘called of Jesus Christ (κλητοὶ ‘Ιησου χρίστου), and Paul writes to
the ones called saints (κλητοι̃ς ἁγιοι̃ς) in Rom. 1.6-7.38 Paul also refers to the
people of God as a ‘holy temple’:
1 Cor. 3.17 If anyone destroys God’s temple,
God will destroy that person.
For God’s temple is holy, and you are that temple.
Eph. 2.21 In him the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy
temple in the Lord;
The statements of divine provision are also clear in:
1 Cor. 6.11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sancti-
fied, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of
our God.39
The Corinthians’ experience includes washing, sanctification, and justifica-
tion through the name of Jesus Christ as well as the Spirit. This experience
should lead them to avoid their former lifestyle, noted before by the expres-
sion, ‘and such were some of you’, pointing to the vice list of 6.9-11. Fee
notes that ‘the use of the same imagery to refer to the Corinthians’ conversion
(1 Cor. 6.11) is intended to emphasize that conversion includes the sanctify-
ing work of the Spirit’.40
The language of these texts builds upon the OT understanding of the
people of God as a ‘holy people’, and ‘holy temple’, and expresses their cor-
responding responsibility to reflect in their personal and community life, the
very nature of the holy God, who had called them into existence as individu-
als and a community (Exod. 19.5; Lev. 19.2).
Paul appropriates the OT understanding of the people of God as a ‘holy’
community, separated unto God by virtue of God’s initiating call (God’s

38
Rom. 1:1,7; 8:27; 15:25, 26, 31; 16:2; 1 Cor. 1:2; 6:1,2; 14:33; 16:1, 15.
39
The thought here parallels Paul’s expression in Rom. 8:29-30: ‘For those whom he fore-
knew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the
first-born among many brethren. And those whom he predestined he also called; and those
whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified.’
40
Gordon Fee, Paul, the Spirit and the People of God (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishing,
2001), p. 94.
80 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

provision). True, the people are ‘set apart from’ but even more, ‘set apart to’.
The full emphasis on the cult, the worship of God, the offerings, the moral
and ethical life, are all part and parcel of the calling, the life unto which the
people of God are called. Procksch states that ‘In 1 Corinthians, this thought
is individualized (6.19 τὸ σω̃μα ὑμω̃ν ναὸς του̃ ἐν ὑμι̃ν ἁγίου pνεύματος
ἐστιν, cf. 3:16). To the temple, there corresponds the sacrifice which is
brought in Christ and which has the character of holiness’ (1 Cor. 5.7).41
Correspondingly, in Rom. 15.16, Paul states that the Jewish Christians in
Rome should accept the ‘common’ or ‘unclean’ Gentiles, since they have not
been circumcised. These are the very people whom the Holy Spirit has sancti-
fied; their offering is sanctified, which includes both Jewish and Gentile
believers. The emphasis is clear, unambiguous and certain—believers are what
they are in God’s grace by virtue of his call, his act and his dynamic presence
in the Spirit’s sanctification (God’s provision).
In speaking about the nature of the new people of God, Paul appropriates
the language of a ‘holy people’ (am q-d-sh) and applies the OT term to the
people of God under the new covenant (Rom. 11.13-16; Eph. 2.12), who are
empowered by the Holy Spirit. As the new people of God, they are brought
‘near’ by the blood of Christ through the agency of the Spirit. They are built
upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus being the cor-
nerstone. The new community is empowered by the ‘one Spirit’ (Eph. 4.4),
thereby, a ‘holy temple in the Lord’ (Eph. 2.11-22), and summoned to be
‘like God in true righteousness and holiness’ (4:24).

4.b. Sanctification is a Process of Christian Growth in Moral Purity and Love

After affirming the divine provision, Paul generally follows with the language
of an ongoing process, including both imperatives and exhortations. Thus, the
language speaks about the human response involving choices of free-will moral
agents. By virtue of their call and position as ‘saints’, Paul summons the people
of God to conduct themselves in ethical purity. While ‘holiness’ is a matter of
the new status of the people of God, it is also taken for granted that a purpose-
ful ‘holiness’ will produce ethical results, changes in attitude, words and behav-
ior; humans are accountable for their choices. By their response to the gift of
sanctification, humans are exhorted to respond in way that is consistent with
their original call. They are to be fully engaged in the process. In numerous
texts, there is an inner link forged between God’s provision and the process.

41
Otto Prockcsh, ‘ἁγιος …’, The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (trans.
G. Bromiley; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), I, p. 105.
 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 81

2 Thess. 2.13 ‘God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work (ἐν
ἁγιασμῳ̃ pνεύματος) of the Spirit …’ (provision).
Rom. 12.1 ‘I appeal to you therefore, brothers and sisters, by the mercies of God,
to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy (ἁγίαν) and acceptable to God,
which is your spiritual worship’ (process).
Rom. 15.16 ‘to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service
of the gospel of God, so that the offering of the Gentiles may be acceptable, sanc-
tified (ἡγιασμένη) by the Holy Spirit’ (process).
1 Cor. 1.2 ‘To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those who are sanctified
(ἡγιασμένοι)42 in Christ Jesus, called saints, together with all those who in every
place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours’ (God’s
provision).
Col. 1.22 ‘he has now reconciled in his fleshly body through death, so as to present
you holy (ἁγίου) and blameless and irreproachable before him—’ (provision).
Col. 3.12 ‘As God’s chosen one’s, holy (ἅγιοι God’s provision) and beloved, clothe
yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience’ (process).
Eph. 1.4 ‘just as he chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world to be
holy (ἁγίους) and blameless before him in love’ (provision).
Eph. 5.27 ‘so as to present the church to himself in splendor, without a spot or
wrinkle or anything of the kind—yes, so that she may be holy (ἁγία) and with-
out blemish’ (process & consummation).
Appropriate ethical responses are regarded as sacrifices that parallel the cul-
tic service of the OT (Rom. 12.143). Ethical personal conduct honors the
divine agency of sanctification. That is to say, since God is the primary agent
in sanctification, Christians are intimately involved in the divine purpose;
they are summoned to ‘get with it’. They are not left on their own to slavishly
follow a prescriptive set of ethical norms. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are
directly involved as the primary agents of sanctification. Holiness implies an
ongoing relationship with God, which is lived out as Christians are ‘led by the
Holy Spirit’ (Rom. 8.14) into ethical behavior, and thereby promote the
health of the community. The very power of ‘holiness’, which raised Jesus
from the dead (credo in Rom. 1.4) is called the Spirit of holiness, who declared
with power the resurrected Son of God, and is now the very power, which
transforms attitudes and behavior (process).
As emphasized by Ayodeji Adewuya, Romans 8 is a key chapter in Pauline
letters, which unites the indicative of sanctification and the imperatives related

42
The perfect passive participle means that another has acted to place them in the ‘set apart’
position, ‘chosen, called’ (by God), quite apart from human endeavor.
43
The term ‘service’ (λειτουργία) belongs to the language of the OT cult.
82 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

to living out of one’s position.44 Numerous statements are made in Romans 8

about the ‘givens’ of Christian experience: no condemnation, benefits of rec-
onciliation, freedom, participation in Christ’s redemptive death, mutual ind-
welling (vss. 9-11). Of note, is the use of the term Spirit that is used 21 times
in Romans 8, primarily linked to the ethical life of Christians.
These ‘givens’ lead to the clear and logical result (therefore ἄρα of v. 12), the
life in the Spirit, which involves imperatives and exhortations (process). These
statements are contrasted with Paul’s previous statements about life in the
flesh (Rom. 8.5-8), which leads to death. Life in the Spirit means life—not
death, but this life engages the Christian to live in accordance with genuine
life. Christians walk according to the Spirit (v. 4) are exhorted to set their
minds on the things of the Spirit (v. 5) and are in the Spirit (v. 9). By the
Spirit they have put to death the works of the body (v. 13) and are led by the
Spirit (v. 14). Moreover, the Spirit bears witness that Christians are ‘adopted
children’ (v. 16), to the extent that the Spirit also ‘groans’45 (v. 26) for their
future privilege at the time of the consummation. It is the Spirit who is at
work with Christians, bringing about a life that is similar to Christ’s. The life
in the Spirit in Romans 8 parallels other passages, which speak to the
Christians behavior in the light of provision (fruit of the Spirit in Gal. 5.22-
26). All are aspects of the sanctifying power of the Spirit in personal and cor-
porate human experience.
Christians are sanctified through their experience of being ‘loved’ by God
and learn to express love in their relationships, empowered by the Holy Spirit.
The writer suggests the following thought-flow outline of Romans 8: Because
of your true position in Christ (vss. 1-8), live out who you are with confidence
(vss. 12-17), filled with the certainty of an eschatological hope (vss. 18-30),
assured of the eternal and effective love of Christ (vss. 31-39). Romans 8 looks to
the consummation of believers, when God’s unfathomable love will be finally
and fully expressed, when the ‘not-yet’ of the eschatological proviso of ‘already
but not-yet’ will be removed. They have experienced the unfathomable love of
Christ and have been empowered by the Spirit; these truths supply the incen-
tive or empowerment for sanctification. In a similar manner, Paul prays that
the Philippians’ ‘love may abound still more and more’ that they may be sin-
cere and blameless (Phil. 1:9-11).

44
J. Ayodeji Adewuya, ‘The Holy Spirit and Sanctification in Romans 8.1-7’, Journal of
Pentecostal Theology 18 (2001), pp. 71-84.
45
All creation ‘groans’ (v. 22) and Christians ‘groan’ (v. 23) along with the Spirit’s ‘groan’
(v. 26).
 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 83

Without a sense of divine love, there is no motive for sanctification.

Sanctification appears as Christian love both inside and outside of their com-
munity. In 1 Thess. 3.11-13, Paul’s wish-prayer includes a petition for love for
one another—that it may abound. He follows the petition that their love for
one another may abound with a goal that is clear—that their hearts may
be established without blemish at the Parousia. The experience of being loved
is knit together with salvation, sanctification, and the Parousia in 2 Thess.
2.13-14. Although Wesley’s understanding of sanctification as a ‘perfect’46
second work is open to question, nonetheless, he prioritized ‘perfect love’ that
is essential in sanctification. Similarly, Col. 3.12 expresses the joyous certainty
that the people of God are both holy and beloved (God’s provision), which
should then lead to various expressions of their new ‘clothing’; their new
apparel is to consist of the various forms of Christian love, e.g., compassion
and kindness (process). The considerable detail of the new life of ‘holiness’
(Col. 3.5-17) reaches a grand finale in Paul’s summary statement, ‘Whatever
you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving
thanks to God the Father through him’ (Col. 3.17).
Although the word-family of holiness (‘sanctification’) terms appear fre-
quently in Paul’s letters, referring to God’s call or provision, affirming what
God’s people are—‘saints, sanctified, a holy temple, a holy people’, the same
word-family frequently appears referring to sanctification as a process. The
implication is clear; in treating sanctification or holiness as a process, we are
not directed to a few but to a veritable host of exhortations, e.g., walk in love,
present your bodies as a living sacrifice, glorify God in your bodies, fruit of
the Spirit, forgive one another as God in Christ has forgiven you, have no
anxiety in anything, let the mind of Christ be in you, bear one another’s
burdens, and the list goes on. Usually, the imperatives or exhortations are
grounded in some expression of God’s transforming grace, his provision of
redeeming love, his grace in setting apart (sanctifying) a people who are called
and constituted a holy nation or people, and are to proclaim the mighty grace
of God who has called a people out of darkness into his marvelous light (also
in 1 Pet. 2.9).

46
It is important to note that the term, ‘perfect’ (τέλειος) is often best rendered as ‘mature’,
‘fully mature’, ‘fullgrown’, or ‘complete’. In this regard, many preachers and scholars often mis-
understand Matt. 5.48, ‘Be ye perfect (τέλειος) as your Father in heaven is perfect (τέλειός),
which in the context means ‘to be indiscriminate’ in terms of greeting, accepting, and loving
others; Luke’s version in his Sermon on the Plain reads, ‘Be merciful (οἰκτίρμονες) as your
heavenly father is merciful (οἰκτίρμων)’ Lk. 6.36—as it also expresses the need for indiscrimi-
nate love.
84 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

When Paul emphasizes the nature of the Church in Ephesians, he affirms

the vital relationship between holiness and love. The exhortations are placed
within the broad background that highlights the nature of the Church as a
holy community without blemish, due to the sanctifying and cleansing work
of the Trinitarian-fellowship. An entire paragraph (Eph. 5.21-33) is a remark-
able paradigm of the provision of divine sanctifying grace that will surely
energize the human response in terms of the imperatives or exhortations, such
as mutual submission (process). ‘Saints’ are to express their ‘holiness’ through
love for ‘all the holy one’s’ (Eph. 1.15), since they have already received the
‘down-payment of the Spirit’, and look forward to their full inheritance
(1.13-14). In 1 Tim. 1:5, the goal of sound instruction is ‘love from a pure
heart’. Further, Paul expresses the confidence that such love from a pure heart
is possible. Why such a vital link between holiness and love? Denney notes:
That is a notable direction for those in search of holiness. A selfish, loveless heart
can never succeed in this quest. A cold heart is not unblameable; it is either phar-
isaical or foul, or both. But love sanctifies. Often we only escape from our sins by
escaping from ourselves; by a hearty, self-denying, self-forgetting interest in oth-
ers. It is quite possible to think so much about holiness as to put holiness out of
our reach; it does not come with concentrating thought upon ourselves at all; it is
the child of love, which kindles a fire in the heart in which faults are burnt up . . .
Do not imagine that there is any other holiness than that which is thus created.
There is an ugly kind of faultlessness which is always raising its head anew in the
Church; a holiness which knows nothing of love, but consists in a sort of spiritual
isolation, in censoriousness, in holding up one’s head and shaking off the dust of
one’s feet against brethren, in conceit, in condescension, in sanctimonious sepa-
rateness from the freedom of common life, as though one were too good for the
company which God has given him: all this is as common in the Church as it is
plainly condemned in God’s sight. It is an abomination in God’s sight.47
The community of faith is the sphere wherein Christian holiness can be
worked out in the give-and-take of human relationships. Genuine holiness is
not to be found in a mystical type of holiness, which is solely concerned with
a cloistered withdrawal of the human spirit into an inner relationship with
the Holy Spirit. True holiness is found within the sphere of Christ’s body and
is to be channeled through that body. Holiness is lived out in the context of
the dual love-commandments: love for God and love of the neighbor, which
naturally cohere as one commandment. Through a faith-union experience
with Christ, one is incorporated into the Body of Christ; this is the sphere of
the Spirit wherein holiness as love is expressed.

47
James Denney, The Epistles to the Thessalonians (New York: A.C. Armstrong and Son,
1892), pp. 129-30.
 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 85

In convincing fashion, Adewuya argues that for Paul, sanctification is far

more than Western individualistic holiness but is communal holiness. ‘Such
communal holiness is to be conceived of in terms of a dynamic ongoing rela-
tionship with God—covenant relationship to be sure—lived out by grace, in
faith and practice throughout every sphere of life … although the relationship
with God is primary, the relationship with others is indispensable’.48 Adewuya
makes his case for the parallel between 2 Cor. 6:14-7:1 and the Holiness code
in the LXX of Leviticus 19, which is addressed to Israel as a corporate whole.
Thus, holiness is always positioned in relational terms—with God and with
the people of God, and their communal witness to a non-believing world. As
such, Paul’s directives concerning holiness in 2 Cor. 6.14-7:1 confront the
problem of Corinthian individualism and Western individualism in our day.
In 1 Thess. 3.11-5.23, there is a broad instruction (paraenesis), including
several related statements on the holiness word-family. Love, for example, is
viewed as the means by which genuine holiness will be attained, anticipating
as well the eschaton, ‘at the Parousia of our Lord Jesus with all of his holy
ones’ (i.e. angels, 1 Thess. 3.12-13). It is surprising that in such a brief letter,
Paul employs both ‘holiness’ (ἁγιωσύνη) as a ‘state of being in Christ focused
on the Parousia (3.13) and ἁγιασμός, an active process that focuses upon
God’s will in the believer’s ongoing life now (4.3, 4, 7).49 The imperatives,
which reflect a call to holiness, are a call to realize what is inherent in the call.
Is not the call ‘to be holy’ already potentially realized because one has been
graciously positioned in a holy state because of God’s very call? Sanctification
occurs through the ongoing provision of the Spirit (1 Thess. 4.8). Thus, the
initial call, ongoing process and ultimate goal are surrounded by the atmos-
phere of holiness, since saints are all grounded in the divine act that sets them
apart in a holy state or condition and the Spirit that empowers them to realize
their holiness. They are already set apart by God. God’s call to holiness ena-
bles them to realize what this call implies in a new life of obedience.
In 1 Thess. 4.1-8, Paul provides various particulars of the holiness-process
in the present age, expressed through three infinitive clauses, all of which are
concerned with sexual purity: to avoid sexual immorality, to control one’s
own body, to not defraud a brother, i.e. by violating his marriage (4.3-6).
Substantiation for sexual integrity is found in the affirmation, ‘For God did
not call us to be impure, but ‘in’ holiness (4.7). The preposition ‘in’ (ἑν)
expresses the place or ‘the sphere of holiness’, characterized by holy behavior

48
J. Ayodeji Adewuya, Holiness and Community in 2 Cor 6:14-7:1 (New York: Peter Lang,
2001).
49
I. H. Marshall, 1 and 2 Thessalonians (NCB; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), p. 106.
86 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

that is consistent with the call of the holy God who issues the call. The term
‘holiness’ (ἁγιασμός) is used three times in chapter 4 (4.3, 4, 7) to refer to
life in the here and now; the expression ‘in holiness’ (ἐν ἁγιασμῳ̃) indicates
the sphere in which ‘holiness’ (ἁγιασμός) is present. In addition, Paul also
states that God provides the dynamic for living the ‘holy’ life, through the
Holy Spirit, whom God continually gives to the believers (4.8). Paul does not
refer to one single event, when the Holy Spirit was given; rather the Holy
Spirit continues to be given50 to the believer as an aid in the sanctifying proc-
ess; the Holy Spirit enables the human response of living consistently with the
original call to be ‘set apart’. The Holy Spirit is intimately associated with the
lives and conduct of the ‘saints’.
Paul’s mention of ‘sanctification’ in Rom. 6.19 belongs to the broader con-
text of Romans 6 in which Paul discusses the Christians ethical responsibil-
ity.51 Although Paul apologizes for using the slavery image to depict Christian
slavery to Christ, he highlights one aspect of the slave’s loyalty, time, and
energy—now to be devoted to Christ. In a setting that depicts ‘life in the
Spirit’, Paul argues for Christian sanctification:
Rom.6.19 I am speaking in human terms, because of your natural limitations.
For just as you once yielded your members to impurity and to greater and greater
iniquity, so now yield your members to righteousness for sanctification.
6.22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of
God, the return you get is sanctification and its end, eternal life.
Through a contrast, Paul lays out two sorts of slavery, with two contrasting
results:
slaves of sin Þ resulting in death
slaves of obedience Þ resulting in righteousness
Paul is categorical. There is no middle ground offered as a legitimate possi-
bility. There is simply no instance in which a person is free from a master or
owner. ‘The man who imagines he is free, because he acknowledges no god
but his own ego, is deluded; for the service of one’s own ego is the very essence
of the slavery of sin’.52 Paul wars on two fronts: a) the legalist with a corre-
sponding bondage, b) the libertarian who promises a freedom that really spells
bondage.

50
The present participle ‘who continues to give’ (τὸν θεὸν τὸν δίδοντα τὸ pνευ̃μα τὸ
ἅγιον) points to the ongoing giving of the Spirit with an ever present supply.
51
Ethical sanctification is to be differentiated from the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Paul’s
concern is not for the Spirit’s power for gifted service but for holy living.
52
C.E.B. Cranfield, The Epistle to the Romans (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975), p. 323.
 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 87

Through a comparison in 6.19b (‘just as’ … ‘so’—ὥσpερ … οὕτως), Paul

highlights the former self dedication of the Roman Christians to impurity
and lawlessness so as to underscore the new self-dedication to which they are
summoned. The same energy they expended in their former lifestyle is to be
applied to the new master, which Adewuya notes as ‘progressive ethical
renewal’.53 If Christians are fully committed to their new service as they were
to the old master, they are to express that they are committed to well doing,
righteousness and sanctification, which:
For just as you presented your members as slaves to impurity
and to lawlessness … resulting in further lawlessness’
so now present your members as slaves to righteousness … resulting in
in sanctification’.
Paul reminds the Roman Christians of their former lifestyle and the clean
break that they have made with their past. Freedom from the one sphere of
power means the God-given ability to serve the new sphere of power. No one
can serve both the new life of righteousness and the old life of sin. Thus,
Paul’s purpose is that of encouraging his readers by appealing to God’s gra-
cious call and their response to that call:
But thanks be to God that you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the
heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed (6.17).
and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness (6.18).
For just as you presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness,
resulting in further lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to right-
eousness, resulting in sanctification (6.19).
For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness (6.20).
But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your
benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life (6.22).
In Paul’s thinking, holiness/sanctification is both a condition (God’s provi-
sion) and a process. As a condition, holiness belongs to the believer because
God has already set one apart for himself. Holiness is the declarative work of
the Trinitarian-fellowship. To be sure, ethical behavior must follow, but the
new behavior is grounded in the primary call of God. While sanctification
may include the primary experience of initiation into the Christian life, it also
signifies ‘the end’ (τέλος) towards which the justified strive, eternal life (Rom.
6.22, 23). In many texts, Paul expresses a concern for moral purity, which he
contrasts with lawlessness (vss. 19-23) and sexual immorality (1 Thess. 4.1-8).

53
Adewuya, Transformed by Grace, p. 38.
88 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

In 2 Cor. 7.1, Paul uses the language of the OT cult to implore his readers to
cleanse themselves:
Since we have these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from every defile-
ment of body and spirit, and make holiness perfect in the fear of God (2 Cor.
7:1).
Believers are said to be temples of the Holy Spirit and are consequently to
be separated from every unclean thing or practice. As Paul argues in 2 Cor.
6.14-18, people must live out the implications of their true status. The
Christian life is a means and process of ‘perfecting holiness (ἐpιτελου̃ντες
ἁγιωσύνην) in the fear of the Lord’ (2 Cor. 7.1). Thus, we are to continually
bring holiness to fulfillment with an eye that is fixed upon God in reverence
and wonder. In Rom. 6.2, 2, 11, 14, 22 and 1 Thess. 4.1-8, holiness is clearly
a process, which is worked out in the context of daily life, where there can be
no false division between the sacred and the secular. ‘If we wait for the descent
of the vertical on the horizontal, it is most unlikely that it will ever occur. If
we are willing to wait on God and to expect to find him in the doing of our
daily duty, we may be fairly confident that sooner or later the dimensions of
our ordinary experience will be enlarged to include awareness of that unutter-
able splendor’.54
Thus, Paul contends that holiness is to be lived out in the context of the
world and not through a life of ‘perfection’ found in a cloistered environment.
The world in its sinfulness is still God’s world and as such, is the object of
God’s love. The community of faith finds its strength in the worship and
instruction of the sanctuary and discovers its mission in the world. The life of
the community of faith is always lived out in the world, a truth, which Paul
emphasizes as he faces sexual immorality in the Church:
not at all meaning the immoral of this world, or the greedy and robbers, or idola-
ters, since you would then need to go out of the world (1 Cor. 5.10).
Even though Paul uses the language of the holy cult, ‘Cleanse out the
old leaven’ (v.13), he makes it clear that withdrawal from the world is
no legitimate option for the Church. He is concerned with the positive wit-
ness of the Church as a people ‘set-apart’, and yet, fully engaged with the
world with its sins and sinners. Through his experience in a Nazi prison,
Bonhoeffer expressed his new life as he was fully engaged with the non-
Christian world:

54
Stephen Neill, Christian Holiness (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1960), p. 77.
 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 89

During the last year or so I have come to appreciate the worldliness of Christianity
as never before. The Christian man is not a homo religiosus, but a man, pure and
simple, just as Jesus was man, compared with John the Baptist anyhow … it is
only by living completely in this world that one learns to believe … with all its
duties and problems, its successes and failures, its experiences and its helplessness.
It is in such a life that we throw ourselves utterly into the arms of God and par-
ticipate in His sufferings in the world and watch with Christ in Gethsemane.55
Thus, holiness involves the personal relationship with Jesus Christ, who him-
self lived on earth in active engagement in the world. The evidence of God’s
grace and love is a changed life that brings forth good works, specifically the
fruit of the Spirit (Titus 2.11-14), to a world that always remains the object of
God’s incredible love.

4.c. Sanctification will be Consummated at the Parousia

Holiness also has the future in view, in the light of the return of Jesus Christ
(1 Thess. 3.13; 5.23). Marshall notes,
Just as Paul can refer to believers as saints or holy ones, despite their lack of actual
holiness in conduct, so those who have been sanctified or set apart as God’s peo-
ple must increasingly show the appropriate characteristics in goodness and dedi-
cation to God’s service, and Paul prays that God will work in the lives of his
readers to this end.56
Paul positions sanctification against the broad background of the return of
the Lord Jesus:
And may he so strengthen your hearts in holiness57 that you may be blameless
before our God and Father at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints
(1 Thess. 3.13).
The preposition ‘before’ (ἔμpροσθεν) is used elsewhere in 1 Thessalonians58
and appears in a ‘reverential way … when one is speaking of an eminent person
and especially of God’.59 Therefore, sanctification (through love) is expressed in
view of the certainty of the Parousia of the Lord Jesus, when all persons, atti-
tudes and behaviors will be transparent before him. The attitude of reverential
fear is also expressed in 2 Cor. 7.1: ‘Since we have these promises, beloved, let

55
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison (London: SCM Press, 1971),
pp. 168-69.
56
I.H. Marshall, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, p. 161.
57
ἁγιωσυνήv—the state of being holy.
58
1 Thess. 1.3; 2.19; 3.9.
59
BAGD, p. 256.
90 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and of spirit, making holi-
ness perfect60 in the fear of God’. As noted, the text borrows from the language
of the OT cult; Paul urges his readers to cleanse themselves from impurity and
to perfect holiness, in the fear of the Lord. Paul assumes that his readers are
temples of God (2 Cor. 6.14-7:1); consequently they need to cleanse them-
selves from impurity by a conscious separation from the sphere of the unclean.
The wish-prayer of 1 Thess. 5.23 affirms the primary agency of God in the
sanctification of the whole believer at the Parousia. Paul expresses the wish-
prayer in chiastic form:
May the God of peace himself
A. sanctify (ἁγιάσαι61)
B. you
C. entirely (ὁτολει̃ς)
C’. sound and blameless (ὁλόκληρον)
B’. your spirit and soul and body
A’. may be kept (τηρηθείη62)
at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Paul prays that the process of holistic sanctification will be completed at
the Parousia. The sanctification has in view the entire human person.63 Paul is
also confident that such complete sanctification is assured, ‘He will do it’
(5.24). God will ultimately do what only he can do—perfect a believer in
sanctification.
The affirmation of complete sanctification at the Parousia is not intended to
lay a heavy burden upon his readers as if the entire weight is placed upon
human performance. The wish-prayer provides the assurance of God’s pri-
mary agency in sanctifying the believer, his keeping power of the believer,
who is empowered by the Spirit. The future goal is spoken of in the language
of confident expectation of a divine activity; the Trinitarian-fellowship is com-
mitted to this eschatological goal.
As an aid in the divine process, Christians are exhorted to cooperate with
the process, which God has set in motion by virtue of his holy call, his nature,
the ongoing gift of the Holy Spirit, the privileged new position of being

60
The present participle, ‘perfecting’ (ἐpιτελου̃ντες) communicates the ongoing process of
sanctification (similar to the noun ἁγιασμός the active process of holiness).
61
The aorist active optative, ‘may He sanctify’ (ἁγιάσαι) stresses the truth that God is the
Actor; the aorist passive optative ‘may be kept’ (τηρηθείη) stresses the certainty that believers
(spirit, soul and body) are acted upon, ‘they are kept’.
62
‘kept’ (by God).
63
The emphasis in the text is not upon a trichotomous view of the human person; rather the
intent is the holistic sanctification of the believer at the Parousia.
 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 91

‘saints’ and the eschatological goal of the Parousia. Thus, Christian behavior is
expected to be consistent with all of these truths.
In the present age, there is a real and powerful struggle in that the believer
lives in both ages: the present age and the age to come. The texts of Romans 6
and 1 Thessalonians 4 speak the language of struggle and a sanctifying process
and thereby, reflect the tension of the ‘already but not yet’. Paul indicates that
in the present age, believers struggle with appropriate behavior (process) to be
consistent with their call (God’s provision). He raises the rhetorical question
of the possibility of sinning all the more so as to experience more grace and
then responds:
Rom. 6.2 By no means! How can we who died to sin go on living in it?
Rom. 6.12 Therefore, do not let sin exercise dominion in your mortal bodies, to
make you obey their passions.
Other passages, which contain biographical material, reveal Paul’s awareness
of his own divided self (Romans 7; Phil. 1:6; 2:12-18; 3:12-15). Paul is ever
aware that he has not attained complete sanctification.
Phil. 3.12 Not that I have already obtained this or have already reached the goal;
but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own.

5. Implications

Sanctification is a clear statement of fact (divine provision), which embraces

the past, present and future experience of Christian believers. At the same
time, the call to holiness is a command and exhortation (process), which is to
be a goal, designed to motivate Christian attitudes, conduct and word. For
Paul, sanctification is an expression of God’s will for each Christian and each
Christian community (1 Thess. 4:3); however, sanctification is not the totality
of God’s will (‘God’s will’ not ‘the will of God’), but one aspect only of God’s
will for his people. All too often, sanctification and the ‘holy life’ are charac-
terized and preached as a legalistic burden, often couched in the language of
‘dos’ and ‘don’ts’, and can be communicated as something that some Christians
possess while others do not.
The various historical movements as they relate the Holy Spirit to san-
ctification often express theology in a Western partitive or compartmental-
ized manner in contrast to an aspectival approach. We argue that the Spirit
does not sanctify people as mere compartmentalized ‘souls’ but as entire
‘wholes’, in a comprehensive manner. Often, movements arise in reaction to a
92 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

prevalent mood or teaching and over-emphasize certain ‘parts’ of the Spirit’s

work in sanctification. Additions and subtractions are made and interpreta-
tion is followed by re-interpretation. Reactionary movements may go too far;
bitterness often arises as a result of charges of ‘heresy’, for an addition or sub-
traction in the Spirit’s sanctification of people and faith-communities. At
times, the Church’s interpreters preach certain texts in an entirely selective
manner; in the case of Paul, certain movements look to certain Pauline texts
to express but one element of Pauline teaching of the Spirit and sanctification,
to the exclusion of Paul’s full-orbed approach. ‘Perfect love’ lies unrealized
when warring factions do not fully listen to others, whereas Paul expresses the
hope for love that is poured out into human hearts through the Holy Spirit
that is given as a gift (Rom. 5.4).
Christians often measure themselves and others by fulfilling religious duties,
both the ‘do’s and don’ts’. Some promote a monastic mysticism and inner
spiritual experiences, separated from the Christian community and world. In
certain ‘holiness’ traditions, the list of prohibitions is far-reaching and fosters
a legalistic climate. Sanctification is no binding legalism but an activity of
God himself who works on behalf of his people to further his good pleasure
and ultimately, the genuine fulfillment of the human person in the glory of
God. To affirm sanctification means that God is on the believer’s side (also the
community); the call to sanctification means the empowerment for Christians
to live in a victorious manner by breaking the power of sin. It also means
genuine freedom and wholeness of life, with the confidence of the Parousia’s
consummation.
His effectual grace extends to a people who are dead in sin but by an act of
separation, God enlivens and causes genuine transformation. Whenever per-
sons turn to Christ, irrespective of their moral condition, people give evidence
of the separating power of God and his determined will to form a people for
himself. Further, the Trinitarian-fellowship (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) is
dynamically involved in the original call, the sanctifying process of the people
of God and the certain future of the people of God at the Parousia.
As ‘saints’, the people of God are to appreciate the holy nature of the new
community; in a corporate sense, the people of God constitute the new and
holy temple. Consequently, behavior that destroys the life of the community
is an affront to the inherent nature of the holy temple. The human response
to the holy God includes the practical outworking of life that aligns itself with
the nature of God. The key word for the sanctified life is consistency. There is
to be a consistency between the divine provision (indicative) and the process
(imperative or exhortation), which leads to the final consummation at the Parousia
(indicative). The people of God are to live with consistency and integrity; their
 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94 93

lives are to correspond with the nature of their individual and corporate call.
They are to live consistent with the triune God who has separated a people
unto himself. By no means does this mean human performance and deadly
legalism but a quality of life that reflects ‘otherness’. In particular, love is the
embodiment of the life of holiness. There is no ‘otherness’ without love.
In living a life ‘set-apart’, the people of God are to be ever mindful of the
lost and broken people around them. There can be no ‘holy club’, which does
not have a compassionate perspective upon society’s broken people. A life ‘set-
apart’ is also expressed through sexual integrity: faithfulness when married
and discipline when one is not married. Genuine freedom is achieved when a
person recognizes that one’s will has been turned over to a new master and
lord. In no way does sanctification imply a reckless freedom when all restraints
are gone, wherein people feel they have license to sin (Romans 6). Such a life
can only result in bondages that are addictive and destructive. This is not the
path of life in any sense.
The people of God are prone to take biblical concepts such as holiness
and think of them in terms of religious performance and duty. People con-
tinually look for security, which they think can be measured by religious
deeds. When holiness is divorced from a personal bond of love (divine and
human), it is separated from the original call and inner dynamic of the Spirit
of grace. Thus, God becomes only a ‘holy God’, who makes religious demands,
which people must meticulously follow. A relationship with God becomes
external and measurable by legalistic lists and expectations and the very gos-
pel of grace-full relationships degenerates into a human system of perform-
ance, with its deadly results: fear, failure, guilt, and conversely, religious pride,
hypocrisy and religious judgment. Invariably, people pronounce judgment
upon others in amazingly superficial and unjust ways; they see only what is
external.
Throughout the Bible, there is a clash between the moralistic idea of the
‘holy’ and the prophetic concept of the ‘holy’. Jesus Christ and his apostle
Paul both oppose the mentality of the taboo and the moralism of casuistic
law; they both resist the narrow moralism that concentrates upon the external
and visible religious taboos of ‘holiness’; they both affirm the need for genu-
ine repentance for genuine sin, and thus, they stress the need for people to
experience the grace of God, along with the constant ‘giving’ of the Holy
Spirit to the people of God as they live ‘sanctified’ lives.
The moralistic idea locates holiness in particular activities, in things, places
and times and offers the illusion to people that they can ‘achieve’ God’s holi-
ness by strict adherence to the external regulations. Religious judgment that is
based upon human perceptions distorts the love relationship with God and
94 J.L. Story / Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009) 67–94

the love relationship with others,64 a truth well expressed by Wesley. The pro-
phetic understanding of holiness points to the issue of the heart and its inner
motivations and its own inner being. The prophetic outlook helps people to
realize the human impossibility of achieving perfection by moral conduct;
Christian people are unable to wipe out their human guilt by their own per-
formance. Instead, holiness is given as a gift from God, not from people. He
graciously grants the new condition to those who confess their inadequacy
and failure. Ongoing dependence upon God is the only criterion for genuine
holiness.
The people of God are also to be aware of the glorious future of the con-
summation when the tension of living in two ages will be fully eased. At the
time of the Parousia of Jesus, sanctification will be complete when the human
will, the human battleground, will be fully absorbed into the divine will; there
will be no further need to ‘work at’ the consistency factor. Jeremiah had
prophesied of a new covenant in which God would put his will directly into
the human heart, bypassing the activities of speaking, hearing and obeying
(Jer. 31.31-34). Von Rad says, ‘If God’s will ceases to confront and judge men
from outside themselves, if God puts his will directly into their hearts, then,
properly speaking, the rendering of obedience is completely done away with,
for the problem of obedience only arises when man’s will is confronted by an
alien will’.65 Correspondingly, at the time of the Parousia, the fundamental
problem of consistency will be fully resolved, for there will be genuine integ-
rity between what one is and what one does and says. Finally, the people of
God are to be assured of the divine promise that he is faithful to perfect his
work of sanctification, ‘He will do it’ (1 Thess. 5.24).

64
‘Some believe in eating anything, while the weak eat only vegetables. Those who eat must
not despise those who abstain, and those who abstain must not pass judgment on those who eat;
for God has welcomed them. Who are you to pass judgment on servants of another? It is before
their own lord that they stand or fall. And they will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make them
stand. Some judge one day to be better than another, while others judge all days to be alike. Let
all be fully convinced in their own minds’ (Rom. 14.2-5).
65
Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1965),
II, p. 213.
 Jesus' "Enemy" in the Gospels

Introduction
René A. Gallo shared the following story with me in an interview, concerning his
childhood and adolescence in Honduras. His ancestors were "religious" people, involved
in a strange amalgam of Roman Catholicism and witchcraft. In the Central American
culture, the primary motive for involvement in witchcraft is the specific fear that if "the
Great Spirit" (a euphemism for Satan) is not placated, then family members would
experience disease and poverty. Conversely, it is believed that pleasing "the Great Spirit"
insures health, financial prosperity and social recognition.
Since his grandmother had no first-born son of her own, she dedicated Renév,
her first-born (grand)son to Satan, wrote out a "blood-covenant" sealed with blood,
signing over Renev to Satan before he was born, including his soul and very being and
deposited the blood-covenant in a "sacred" chest—to which she alone had access. She
believed that such a sacrifice would insure prosperity, health and recognition to be
granted to the numerous family members, at the expense of only one— René .
At the age of four, René began to hear "psychic" voices, see dreams at night, play
with "little dwarfs" in the daytime. Frequently, René wanted to communicate his
experiences with his parents, but each time that he began to tell of his experience(s), he
would become mute. While his father did not know of the blood covenant, his mother
had suspicions of such a pact, since she also was attracted to witchcraft and magic.
During this period of life, René 's parents experienced an improved social recognition and
financial prosperity. His mother was one of the advisors to the first lady of Honduras and
his father was a key administrator within the government.
At the ages of seven and eight, René began to experience demonic presences and
voices in much stronger ways in the middle of the day, in addition to his "normal"
nocturnal encounters. He produced signs of accurate divination, foretelling the future,
especially upcoming tragedies. René began to experience seizures, followed by incessant
trips to medical doctors and psychiatrists, hospitals and clinics; he underwent a full
battery of tests to determine the source of his seizures. Through the CT battery of tests,
epilepsy was ruled out as the root cause of his seizures. His grandmother, on the scene,
knowing the cause of the seizures, advised help from the witch doctors and psychics. His
parents went along with her counsel, and thus, René was treated by potions, incantations
and "baths," and received further instruction by the psychics and witch doctors. René was
told that he was "chosen" for a purpose and was thereupon instructed more fully in occult
activity and ritual. Correspondingly, he became more "familiar" with demonic presences
and was particularly instructed by the apparition of a "handsome man all dressed up,"
who would further his knowledge of the occult world and ways. In social life, these
demonic experiences never occurred; René appeared entirely normal in school and
athletic activity (soccer, baseball, basketball). However, when René was alone, the
demonic world was all too "familiar" to him. His seizures continued, and with them, the
financial and emotional collapse of his family began as René had to make numerous and
expensive trips to doctors and occult sources for help. The financial resources were
being poured into an endless hole, feeding a monster, who would not be satisfied.
From the ages of eight to sixteen, René was making trips to the witch doctors and
psychics at least twice a week. In addition, his grandmother provided further instruction
in experiencing "the Great Spirit," the use of potions, incantations, fortune telling, Tarot
cards, even the reading of playing cards. At the age of fourteen, René began to hear
preaching at school and would respectfully listen to the preaching of Jesus as the sole
mediator between God and humanity. The preaching made an impact on him; however,
he had also learned that the world of the occult easily accommodated itself to any one of
the religious systems that he had formerly encountered.
René also suspected that his upcoming sixteenth birthday was a critical event in
terms of his grandmother's blood covenant with "the Great Spirit." The suspicion was
later confirmed when René opened the "magic chest," subsequent to his exorcism when
René read the blood covenant. Three alternatives were open to him, which would
ostensibly break the powers of poverty and misery for his family: 1) he would become a
Catholic priest, 2) he would die, 3) he would become a curandero, a witch doctor. The
level of intense experiences seemed to be "ratcheted up." His seizures increased in
frequency and intensity; three to four seizures a day gave way to 1-2 seizures every hour.
Magical potions, baths and trips to the witch doctors and psychics were even more
frequent. His encounter with the "handsome man" become more frequent and instruction
in occult activity become more focused. René was also plagued by the inordinate desire
to be naked in public; nakedness alone had become normal. Paradoxically, the wealth
and prosperity that had been sought after, was now dissipated by the incessant bills and
fees to doctors, psychiatrists, clinics, hospitals, tests, witch doctors and psychics. It is
striking that there were occasions of seizure in the hospitals, during which time, brain
activity was registered as normal by the CT scan. The family positions, wealth and
recognition, were all but devastated.
René decided to become a curandero, a month before his sixteenth birthday and
was somewhat encouraged by his parents, who were at their wits end, in attempting to
bring health to their son. Renev became very hyper-active, aggressive, violent and
impossible to restrain. He also had to be taken to the hospital for an appendix that was
about to rupture. During the hospital stay, when he was "dying," a doctor came into
René's room and prayed for him and expressed the words, "You shall not die, but live
and tell of the works of the Lord." This doctor also broke certain curses and prophesied
concerning René and his future, particularly of his holistic health over the next two
months; such confrontation with demonic powers and related prophecies occurred while
René was in shock and being prepared for surgery. Prior to his surgery, René also had a
striking dream in which a clown spoke to him and assured him that God had a plan for his
life and that he would not be serving "the Great Spirit" any longer. Although he did not
know God at the time he regards this experience as a profound encounter with God.
When René returned home and was recovering from the surgery, he became
totally possessed by "the Great Spirit." He saw shadows moving into his body, became
more violent, had experiences of floating in the air and putting holes into the ceiling and
breaking all the windows in his house. A Roman Catholic priest was asked to come and
exorcise the demons but the priest left within five minutes, fearing for his own life due to
René 's strength. René experienced the demons speaking directly through him. During
this period, he would climb up on the roof of his house and expose his nakedness and
would manage to sometimes escape naked from his house—into the neighborhood. He
was also possessed by a preternatural strength; his parents would tie him up and lock him
in a room but René was too strong to be contained. The witch doctors advised the parents
to give up on their son since "the Great Spirit" had absolute power over René. He also
began to inflict himself with cuts, particularly when he was aggressive towards family
members, and would turn his aggression inwards instead. He became totally mute but
would bark like a dog or coyote; the only person with whom he could converse was his
grandmother.
On March 16, 1987, a neighbor woman, Sister Francisca came to the Gallo's
home; she had received a word from God that René would be delivered, that he needed to
go with her to a prayer meeting, and that she had been fasting and praying for him for
three days. Even in the face of resistant parents, she was insistent, and managed to pry
him away from his locked room. At the meeting, after the message, the woman speaker
called out that there was a person who was possessed by Satan, who needed deliverance.
She pointed to René and then there ensued an exorcism, which lasted about one and a
half hours. Similar to the Gadarene demoniac, René remembers calling out his name,
"Legion, for we are many." He remembers the shrieking of the demons when they left
and the peace, joy and soundness of mind and freedom when he came home that night.
He had a profound experience with the saving and delivering power of Jesus Christ.
Although he had formerly worn glasses, he found that the glasses made him see things
blurred. Instead, his sight was perfect without glasses.
During the next week, René stayed at his home but was frequently visited by
people from the church, particularly Sister Francisca. On the next Sunday, René went
back to the church and experienced the power of the Holy Spirit. However, on this
occasion, it was also clear that particular items needed to be dealt with. While his own
house had been rid of occult writings and documents, his grandmother's "magical chest"
still remained, which contained any number of blood covenants. When René went to
destroy the items, his father had threatened him, "If you open that chest, I'll kill you." In
spite of this threat, René managed to open the chest and destroy the contents by fire.
Strangely enough, his grandmother called on the telephone at the very moment when
René was destroying the chest's contents; she also "knew" what he was doing and
threatened him, saying that he would be destroyed for his destruction of the chest and its
contents.
Since these life-changing encounters, René finished high school and served in the
church for five years. During the first four years, subsequent to his deliverance, salvation
and experience with the Holy Spirit, he experienced several threatening messages from
the "Great Spirit," to the effect, that he wished to repossess René. But, the threats
dissipated and are now non-existent. He also experienced a call to full-time Christian
ministry and recently graduated with an M.Div. from Regent University's School of
Divinity.

A Colossal War
Similar to René's story, the gospels are full of narratives in which a colossal war
is being waged between God and Satan, between life and death, between freedom and
bondage, health and disease, between liberation and demon possession. In his own
personal life and subsequent ministry, Jesus' conflict with Satan and evil spirits is no
casual, incidental or secondary purpose or activity. Following Jesus' initial conflict with
Satan and demons (beasts1) in the Temptation narrative (Mk. 1:12-13), one of Jesus' first
public appearances in the Capernaum synagogue issues in a dramatic encounter with a
1 Test. Issach. 7.7; Test. Benj. 5.2; Test. Napht. 8.4
possessed man. Jesus' very presence evokes a violent and aggressive response.
Throughout his ministry, through narrative, teaching and responsiveness to people, Jesus
assumes an aggressive posture with respect to Satan and demon powers and their role in
possession, wrong human attitudes and choices, disease and death. At the moment of the
Crucifixion, the forces of darkness and the forces of life are positioned in a cataclysmic
confrontation. Death, disease and possession are clear and observable symbols of the
disorder, which has broken in upon the world—all traceable to human sin. The healing
of bodies, the exorcisms of possessed individuals, the forgiveness of sins, and the raising
from the dead—are symbols of the divine life that has invaded the broken world. The
healing of disease and the exorcism of possessed persons are signs of God's redemptive
grace and God's victory over the person and forces of evil. This victory has been won in
a climactic way in Jesus Christ's victory over sin and death on the cross.
Healing is holistic2 in nature and includes the different aspects of the human
person and is expressed under the broad umbrella term, "salvation," and is often
expressed in the OT:
"Heal me, O Lord, and I shall be healed;
save me and I shall be saved" (Jer. 17:14).
"Bless the Lord O my soul;
and all that is within me bless his holy name.
Bless the Lord, O my soul,
And forget not all his benefits;
Who forgives all your iniquities;
Who heals all your diseases" (Psa. 103:1-3).
In the various gospel stories, Jesus' conflict with Satan and evil spirits can be
looked at from a cosmological and a personal perspective. From a cosmological
perspective, Jesus is the Stronger One who has invaded the Strong Man's house and
bound him, and thus, is able to plunder his "furniture/possessions," i.e., set free those who
are in bondage to the enemy. From a personal perspective, Jesus frees individuals whose
wills are controlled by a hostile, alien and destructive power. He frees and grants new
life and health to those who have been possessed by demons.

The terms for Jesus' enemy and evil spirits

A number of terms and expressions are used to identify or characterize Jesus'
enemy and the enemy of humanity:3
Devil. The term "devil" (dia/bolov) means the "slanderer," and was used in the LXX
to translate the Hebrew ‫" ־־ ןָטָּׂשַה‬the Satan," who appears to be a member of the heavenly
court, who accuses Job and Joshua and who inspired David's taking of a census:
"One day the angels came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also
came with them, and Satan also came with them . . . Satan replied, 'Have you not
put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? . . . But stretch
out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your
2 In Psa. 146, there is a plethora of expressions, used to express divine concern for life in all dimensions:
"who keeps faith forever, who executes justice for the oppressed, who gives food to the hungry. The Lord
sets the prisoners free; the Lord opens the eyes of the blind. The Lord lifts up those who are bowed
down..sojourners, upholds the widow and the fatherless" (Psa. 146:6-9).
3 Other terms are used outside of the Gospels: "the Serpent" (Gen. 3:1); "he who has the power of death"

(Heb. 2:14); "the accuser of the brethren" (Rev. 12:10).

 face.'" (Job. 1:6, 10, 11)
"Then he showed me Joshua, the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord,
and Satan standing at his right side to accuse him. The Lord said to Satan, 'The
Lord rebuke you, Satan! Is this not a burning brand snatched from the fire?'"
(Zech. 3:1-2)
"Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel" (I
Chron. 21:1).4
In the prologue to the book of Job, "the Satan" appears to be a member of the divine
entourage, who impugns the integrity of Job's commitment to God; he acts as an accuser
or a prosecuting attorney on this given occasion. He is clearly subordinate to God, can
only act with divine permission, but does not appear to be a clearly definable person who
is God's arch-enemy. In Zech. 3:1-2, Satan appears again as an accuser, who challenges
the worth of Joshua ben Jozadak to function as a fit high priest, after the defiling exile.
This was a time in which God was restoring the civil and religious life of the people of
God, after the Exile. God seeks to cleanse Joshua (representative of the people of God in
their religious life) from "filthy garments and iniquity" (Zech. 3:4), while Satan accuses
his moral fitness for the priesthood. Satan poses a threat to Jerusalem's acquittal of guilt
(3:2), the priesthood (3:3-7) and the whole land (3:9). In I Chron. 21:1, "a Satan" incites
David to take a census.5 The OT texts do not emphasize the Satan's distinctive existence
and deep-seated enmity with God; they do express the negative role of accusation and
separation of the people from God.
In the gospels, the Devil (o( dia/bolov) is the adversary of Jesus who seeks to avert
Jesus from his Messianic task in the Temptation narrative.6 As the prince of this world,
he is able to dispose of the world's kingdoms and their glory (Lk. 4:6). In the Parable of
the Weeds, the enemy, who sows the noxious weeds among the wheat, is the Devil.7 His
manner of sowing is surreptitious and his purpose is that of creating a mixed community8
and the resulting confusion, voiced by the servants in the parable. Clearly his motive and
activity are contrary to Jesus' life-giving and expectant activity of sowing. In the Parable
of the Soils, the Devil takes away the word of God from those along the path, in whom
the word was not really sown9; the result of his snatching activity is that these people are
unable to believe and thus be saved. In the Parable of the Sheep and Goats, we learn of
an eternal fire, which is prepared for the Devil and his angels.10
In the Fourth Gospel, Jesus says that the Devil is the father of the murderous
Jews; the Devil causes murderous purpose to be carried out and speaks lies against Jesus,
the ultimate embodiment of truth.11 He fathers murderous purpose12 and fathers lies, both
aims express his nature—in the context of religious judgment by those who "appear" to
4 "Appoint an evil man to oppose him; let an accuser (Satan) stand at his right hand" (Psa. 109:6; 108:6
MT).
5 In II Sam. 24:1, we read, "Again, the anger of the Lord burned against Israel, and he incited David against

them, saying, "Go and take a census of Israel and Judah."

6 Matt. 4:1, 5, 8, 11 par.
7 Matt. 13:39.
8 In Matthew's Gospel, the community is mixed (Matt. 22:10); thus, the need for discipline (Matt. 18:15-

17).
9 Lk. 8:12.
10 Matt. 25:41.
11 Jn. 8:44
12 The indictment, "you are of your father, the Devil" expresses a genitive of origin.
be in the right.
In Jn. 7-8 a plethora of expressions and phrases highlight the Devil's hostile
activity through religious people:
7:1----Jesus avoids Judea because the Jews were seeking to kill him.
7:13—The people in Judea were afraid even to mention his name because of the
fear of the Jews.
7:19—Why do you seek to kill me?
7:25—The Jerusalemites are surprised at the boldness of one "whom they seek to
kill."
7:30—The temple police are sent to arrest him.
7:44—Certain of them were wanting to seize him, but no one laid their hands on
him.
8:37—You seek to kill me.
8:40—You seek to kill me.
8:59—Therefore, they took up stones in order that they might cast them at him.
Coupled with the murderous intent in Jn. 7-8 are the various expressions of hostile
confusion and lying by the "religious" people. The two chapters are characterized by a
dramatic confusion concerning Jesus, the embodiment and expression of truth:
7:12—He is a good man . . . no, he deceives the people.
7:15—How does he know the Scriptures since He has not learned in our schools?
7:20—You have a demon.
7:25-26—Paradox that Jesus is on the "hit list" and yet speaks openly.
7:27, 40-42—Confusion concerning the identity of Jesus in light of his
geographical origin.
7:31—When Christ comes, will he perform more signs than this one (implication
that Jesus is not the Christ).
7:35—Thoughts of Jesus' suicide.
7:46—No one has ever spoken in this way.
7:48—Has any one of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed in him?
7:52—A prophet does not arise out of Galilee.
8:24—Who are you?
8:41—Charge of Jesus' illegitimacy.
8:48—You are a Samaritan and have a demon.
8:52—We know that you have a demon.
8:53—Charge of being less than Abraham.
The evangelist has grouped the material so as to focus upon the divisive effect of Christ's
presence and words. Already before he appears at the feast, some are saying that he is a
good man, and others saying that he misleads the people (7:12). When he does appear,
some say, "Have the rulers concluded that this is the Messiah?" But at once, objections
are raised (7:25-27). The two chapters are knit together by the motif of dramatic
confusion, caused by Satan, concerning Jesus' identity, which appears to echo a theme
found in the Synoptic Gospels, "I have not come to bring peace but a sword."
The primary culprit for the deadly intent is the Devil, who seeks to foster hostility
to the point of actual murder as well as confusion, doubt and lying accusation. These
attitudes and behaviors are expressed by the self-assured religious critics. Their self-
assurance is voiced in the expressions, "Abraham is our father" (8:39), and "The only
Father we have is God himself" (8:41). In this same paragraph, Jesus consistently speaks
of the truth (8:40, 44, 45, 46), to which the leaders are closed; they have "bought into" the
Devil's lie and the Devil's perversion of the truth. That the Devil chooses and uses
religious people, feeds their false self-assurance, fosters confusion and lying, and furthers
hostility and murder—all in the name of religious "rightness."
The deceitful and murderous purpose is actualized, when the Devil puts it into the
heart of Judas to betray Jesus.13 In this regard, Judas is called "a devil."14
Satan. The term "Satan" (o( satana=v) is a transliteration of the Hebrew term "the
adversary/slanderer/accuser,"( ‫)ןָטָּׂשַה‬. He is the "enemy of God and all those who belong
to God."15 The term "Satan" is used interchangeably with "Devil" and "the Tempter"
(oJ peiravzwn) in the Temptation narratives, but is used in the context of
personal address.16 Jesus uses the term in his rhetorical response to the charge of being in
league with Beelzebul and using the power of the Prince of demons to effect his
exorcisms, "How can Satan cast out Satan?"17 In the Parable of the Soils, Satan is
pictured as the "birds," who take away the word that was sown along the path.18 They
become his prey since they are vulnerable and exposed. We may similarly understand
that Satan causes people to give in to persecutions and the deceitfulness of riches in two
other soils noted in the parable. The religious leaders likewise are infiltrated by Satan
since they are unable to receive the sown word (Mk. 2:23-28; 3:4; 7:6-23; 10:2-9; 12:13-
17). In Mk. 8:33, Peter is rebuked, "Get behind me Satan"19 and Jesus follows the rebuke
with an explanation for its severity; Peter is thinking human thoughts. It is noteworthy
here that Satan is "on the human side," willingly aligning himself with the human
position, which rejects the idea of a suffering and crucified Messiah. It is as if Satan
says, "They are doing the very things and thinking the very thoughts that characterize my
rule as 'the god of this age'—they are OK." Perhaps the reason for religious "tempting"
of Jesus (Mk. 8:4; 10:2; 12:15) can be traced to the Tempter's control of people.
Following the return of the seventy-two on their short-term mission trip, Jesus expresses
the joyful cry, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven" (Lk. 10:18).
Through the disciples' exorcisms, Jesus senses their triumphant victory over
Satan, which issues in His jubilant response. To some extent, one of Satan's spirits is
responsible for binding up a woman in a crippled condition for eighteen years;20
nevertheless, she remains a daughter of Abraham, who is subsequently healed and is able
to stand in an erect posture.21 "Thus, while not all sicknesses are the work of demons,
they may all be seen as the work of Satan."22 Directly or indirectly, Satan and demonic
powers lie behind the various human disorders. Satan also enters Judas,23 who thereupon,
initiates his betrayal of Jesus. At the time of Jesus' Passion, Jesus and Satan evidently
carry on some form of conversation to the effect that Satan has requested permission to
13 Jn. 13:2.
14 Jn. 6:70.
15 BDAG, p. 752.
16 See Matt. 4:10; Mk. 1:13; Lk. 4:8.
17 Mk. 3:23, 26; Matt. 12:26; Lk. 11:18.
18 Mk. 4:15.
19 Matt. 16:23.
20 Lk. 13:11, 16.
21 Lk. 13: 13, 16.
22 Foerster, "daivmwn," TDNT, vol. 2, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964), 18.
23 Lk. 22:3; Jn. 13:27.
sift24 Peter and his fellow-disciples like wheat.25 Apparently, Jesus has granted Satan's
request, witnessed by Peter's three-fold denial; he "caves in" to social pressure. While
permission is granted to Satan to wreak havoc and denial, Jesus' committed intercession
for Peter assures him of restoration, recommissioning and a ministry to others, following
his failure.26 Clearly Satan's role is that of separating Peter from Jesus through denial.
Although Satan continues his accusing role, "he has also lost his power to harm wherever
the power of Jesus is at work."27
Beelzebul. The name "Beelzebul" (beelzebou/l) is probably derived from the
Canaanite term, "lord of the dwelling" (baal zebul), as a term for a local manifestation of
a fertility God, "god of the exalted dwelling."28 The term is used as an abusive epithet
against Jesus by Jesus' religious critics, used in conjunction with Satan and the Prince of
Demons.29 It is an epithet that will also be hurled against the disciples when they are sent
out in mission.30 The name "Beelzebul" is also linked to the term, "the Strong One,"
expressed through Jesus' Parable of the Strong Man and the Stronger One (Mk. 3:27).
The false assumption that Satan is risen up against himself and is divided, would mean
that it is all over with him and that his end has come (Mk. 3:26); both statements are
untrue.
Jesus' question in Mk. 3:26 is rhetorical and serves as an explicit statement as to
how his exorcisms are not accomplished. In effect, Jesus says, "I am accused of using
demonic power for the expulsion of demons. But this clearly would involve the break-up
of the demonic world, in accordance with usual human experience of seditious activity.
Now it is clear that the empire of Satan still holds out (this assumption is necessary to the
argument): therefore I do not cast out demons by Beelzebul, but in some other way."31
Human experience usually shows that any kind of social organization ("kingdom,
city, or house") "will not stand" when there is factionalism ("in-house" fighting—"against
itself"). Jesus assumes that the empire and kingdom of Satan still stand (v. 26)—a view
shared by Jesus' critics. After all, sin, sickness, demon-possession and death continue to
be present realities. Since Satan is not interested in bringing about his own demise, the
exorcism by Jesus cannot be by Satan's power for Satan is not such a fool as to do
himself in.32
Satan's kingdom is strong; it is still standing and has a strong man within, but it
also shows very real signs of weakening, notably in Jesus' exorcisms. However, the point
of Jesus' argument is that the break-up and demise of Satan's kingdom does not occur
from internal factions, i.e., "in-house" fighting.
The parable affirms that ransacking of the Strong Man's house will not be
accomplished by internal dissension but rather from external aggression by the Stronger
24 The verb siniavzw means "shake in a sieve, sift," and is used here in a symbolic manner. BDAG,
759. It is used in the plural form, which includes the other disciples.
25 In a similar way, Satan was granted permission to "test" Job (Job 1:12; 2:6).
26 "But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back,

strengthen your brothers." (Lk. 22:32).

27 Foerster, "satana'"," TDNT, vol. VII, p. 157.
28 See I Kgs. 18:16-40; 8:13; also a possible link can be found with baal zebub, "lord of the dunghill/flies,"

the god of Ekron (II Kgs. 1:2-3, 6, 16).

29 Matt. 12:24; Mk. 3:22; Lk. 11:15.
30 Matt. 10:25.
31 C.K. Barrett, The Holy Spirit in the Gospel Tradition (London: S P C K, 1947), 61.
32 Manson, Major, Wright, Mission and Message of Jesus (New York: E. P. Dutton, 1938), 377.
One. In essence, Jesus says, "You should have realized that no one can enter the Strong
One's house and ransack his vessels,33 unless he first binds the Strong Man." This can
only happen through an exercise of superior strength by a still stronger man, one who is
able to overpower and tie up the Strong Man. In brief, Jesus is the Stronger One who has
come and bound up Satan/Beelzebul/the Strong Man. Strangely enough, the Strong Man,
though bound, still exercises power.
We may see in this parable a word of confirmation to the people who are asking
the question whether Jesus is Messiah, i.e., "the Son of David" (Matt. 12:23). The term
"Stronger One" is also a Messianic designation, since John the Baptist had promised that
"One Stronger than I is the Coming One34 who will baptize in the Holy Spirit and fire"
(Matt. 3:11).
In Jesus' parable, he may allude to one of Isaiah's Servant Songs wherein we find
a similar pattern of rhetorical question and answer concerning the "Strong One." "The
scene is Babylon where Jewish captives lament that they are forsaken, childless, and
bereft of any hope. Out of their despair, through the prophet, they register their
wrenching question, "One will not take prey from the strong one, will he?" In the Isaian
context, "the strong one" means the Babylonian captors. However, the divine answer is
sure:
"Even captives shall be seized from a strong man
and
plunder be taken from the fierce."
The influence of this and other Servant Songs is strong in Jesus' self-
understanding and mission. Indeed the language of a Servant Song (Isa. 42:1-4) is used
in the passage that immediately precedes the exorcism narrative (Matt. 12:18-21) and is
especially reflected in the quiet and unobtrusive way in which Jesus carries out His
ministry of healing. He may well indicate here, "I am the Servant of the Lord who
accomplishes the work of binding up the Strong One and dividing the spoil--ransacking
the house of the Strong One." Every occasion of exorcism, as in Matt. 12:23, is an
occasion of ransacking the property of the Strong One. The Strong Man exercises his
dominion over sin, sickness, possession and death. The mission of Jesus means that the
Spirit-anointed Messiah (Stronger One35) has come, overcomes and plunders the spoils of
the Strong Man. He frees those who are enslaved by Satan, and in so doing, he destroys
the power of the evil one. Satan's defeat, clearly evident in Jesus' exorcisms means
33 For the term "vessel" (skeu/ov) in connection with a person whom the Devil appropriates, cf. Testament of
Naphtali 8:6, "But him that doeth not that which is good
Both angels and men shall curse,
And God shall be dishonoured among through the Gentiles through him,
And the devil shall make him as his own particular vessel (skeu/ov),
And every wild beast shall master him,
And the Lord shall hate him."
34 The term, "the Coming One" is also a Messianic allusion:

Matt. 3:11 "I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than
I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry; he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.
See also Matt. 21:9 where the term "Son of David" is also linked with the "One who Comes in the name of
the Lord:
21:9 And the crowds that went before him and that followed him shouted, "Hosanna to the Son of
David! Blessed is He who Comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!"
35 Anointed as such in Mk. 1:7, 11.
freedom and wholeness for the demon possessed persons. But it is all the work of the
Messiah, who will also be the agent of the demons' final destruction.
The Evil One. The adjective, "evil" (ponhro/v) is used substantivally to refer to "the
Evil One" (o( ponhro/v) in connection with various sayings and parables:
"anything more than this [simple truth-telling] is from the Evil One" (Matt.
5:37)—in connection with oath-taking
"deliver us from the Evil One" (Matt. 6:13)—in the Lord's Prayer
"the Evil One comes and seizes that which had been sown" (Matt. 13:19, 38)—in
the Parable of the Soils
"I pray that you would . . . keep them from the Evil One" (Jn. 17:15)36
Other less common titles. Jesus' enemy is also called "the Tempter" (o( peira/zwn) in
the Temptation narrative (Matt. 4:3). Matthew is perhaps the clearest with respect to the
narrative's purpose, and expresses it with an infinitive clause, to be tempted (peira/sqhnai).
The verb or its compound (e0kpeira/zw) is used in different ways in the text:
Matt. 4:1 peirasqh=nai u(po\ tou= diabo/lou
"to be tempted by the devil"
Matt. 4:3 o( peira/zwn ei]pen au0tw=|
"the Tempter said to him,"
Matt. 4:7 ou0k e0kpeira/seiv ku/rion to/n qeo/n sou=
"You shall not test the Lord your God."
In Matt. 4:1, the infinitive is used to refer to the purpose of the temptation narrative; in
4:3 the participle is used to refer to the Tempter,while 4:7 reflects a certain defiant
challenge in which Jesus is challenged to force a test upon God.37 Several aspects of the
word family (peira/zw) are present in the narrative.
Satan is also called "Prince of Demons" (o( a1rxwn tou= daimoni/wn) in an epithet
against Jesus (Matt. 9:34; 12:24; Mk. 3:22; Lk. 11:15), the "enemy" (e1xqrov) in a parable
(Matt. 13:39) or a defeated enemy in Jesus' jubilant cry over the disciples' victory "over
all the power of the enemy" (Lk. 10:19), the Ruler of this World (o( a1rxwn tou= ko/smou tou/tou
—Jn. 16:11; 12:3138; 14:30).
Demons. The normal term, "demon" (diamo/nion39) refers to an "evil spirit" and is
used "of independent beings, who occupy a position somewhere between the human and
divine."40 The term is used in the gospel narratives to refer to the spiritual beings who
wreak havoc upon people in a wide variety of destructive ways. The spiritual being is
sometimes described as an "evil spirit" (ponhro/n pneu=ma)41 or "unclean spirit" (a0ka/qartov
pneu=ma).42 Further, in several of the passages, there is a curious alternation between the
36 See also I Jn. 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18-19.
37 BDAG, 646. Barrett notes, "As man he is tempted by the agent of God, that his faithfulness, his
dependence upon God, may be revealed; at the same time, in tempting Jesus, Satan is tempting God."
Barrett, 51.
38 The expression "now the ruler of this world shall be cast out" (Jn. 12:31) parallels the Lukan affirmation,

"I was seeing Satan as lightning fall from heaven" (Lk. 10:18).
39 Also dai/mwn in Matt. 8:31; Mk. 5:12; Lk. 8:29.

40 BDAG, 168.
41 Matt. 12:45; Lk. 7:21; 8:2.
42 Mk. 6:7.
singular and plural numbers referring to the demon-possessed one; in one instance, the
name "Legion" may refer to the plurality of demons or the name "Legion" may represent
an evasive answer from the demon(s) who does not wish to disclose its identity.43 In
short, the demons are obedient to Satan and are intent upon harming people in their
bodies, emotions, minds, spirits and their will. In the various accounts, it is clear that
demons can manifest their presence by speaking through persons and taking control over
a person's body. They can cause self-injury, torment and can enter animals and take
control over them as well.
Satan appears as a distinct personality, who seeks to entice Jesus and his followers
away from his Messianic vocation. He tempts people to compromise their integrity by
following an easier path than a divinely willed plan. Through the Temptation narrative, it
is clear that Satan entices people away from a relationship of daily dependence upon God
and seeks to cause presumption by the people of God and compromise their worship. He
seeks to hinder the proclamation and harvest of the Kingdom, which has come in the
person of Jesus;44 he is capable of shutting human hearts to the message of the Kingdom
and is intent upon wreaking distortion and confusion even when there is a responsive
people. Through possession, Satan is able to control the emotions, mental state and
behavior of people and infuse them with a supernatural strength and immunity from
physical pain. "The centre of personality, the volitional and active ego, is impaired by
alien powers, which seek to ruin the man and sometimes drive him to self destruction
(Mk. 5:5)."45
Satan is successful in his temptation to secure both the betrayal (Judas) and denial
(Peter) of Jesus, but even so, his ability is limited to the redemptive purpose that is at
work in the cross and in the restoration of a fallen leader. At times, possession by
unclean spirits results in various physical maladies. He serves as the origin of murder,
hatred and lying and seeks to perpetuate murder and lying through people, notably
through "religious" people. Satan is able to "enter" people and put malicious plans into
their hearts. Jesus' encounter with the Gadarene demoniac(s) reveals that the demons
(consequently Satan) know that they have a fearful and assured end, "Have you come to
destroy us before the time?" (Matt. 8:29). Nonetheless, in the present age, Satan controls
a unified kingdom, which still stands. Satan's power and influence are powerful yet
limited and can be minimized by direct aggression through exorcism or by the Word of
God. On at least one occasion Satan is granted permission to put the disciples into a
sieve and shake them; yet, his power is limited to Jesus' permission and can be countered
by the strengthening power of Jesus' intercession. He is confident that his people can
either resist Satan or be restored and in a stronger condition, after they have fallen.

Broad structure of the exorcisms:46

Although there are numerous accounts of exorcisms in summary report form,47
four main stories provide the narratives in which Jesus exorcises individuals and frees
43 Mk. 5:9; Lk. 8:30.
44 In I Thess. 2:18, he successfully obstructs Christian mission and travel; in I Cor. 7:5, he uses sexual
continence to bring about fracture in the marriage; in Acts 5:3, he prompts a pair to withhold finances and
subsequent hypocrisy. Although Satan is an enemy of the light and of God (Acts 26:18), he is also able to
disguise himself as an angel of light (II Cor. 11:14).
45 Foerster, 19.
46 Cf. Barrett for the pattern, 55-57.
47 Mk. 1:32-34, 39; 3:7-12; Matt. 9:32-34; 12:22 (par. Lk. 11:14).
them from their sorry condition. On the whole, the narratives reveal a certain structure
and pattern:
Details which emphasize the needy condition of the demoniac. An unfortunate
man in Capernaum is physically present in the synagogue, but nevertheless, belongs to
another sphere, "in an unclean spirit" (Mk. 1:23) and is not in control of his own life.48
The Gadarene demoniac49 is in a desperate condition; Mark provides three verses (5:2-5),
which highlight the grievous condition50 of the man: he lives a solitary existence in the
sphere of the unclean (tombs), possesses a superhuman strength, shouts, cuts himself with
stones and is incapable of being restrained through chains. In Mk. 9:17ff., details abound
concerning the pitiful state of the epileptic son: he is robbed of speech and experiences
violent seizures, being thrown to the ground, foaming at the mouth, gnashing of teeth and
becoming rigid and self-destructive (thrown into the fire or water to kill him).51 The
deformed woman has been bound by Satan for eighteen years (Lk. 13:11, 16) and unable
to stand erect. A Syro-Phoenician woman comes to Jesus on behalf of her demon-
possessed daughter, who is in a needy condition (Mk. 7:24-30). Although no specific
details are provided, presumably the daughter is in a condition serious enough that she
cannot make the trip with her mother; we have no details in the text as to the extent to
which she or her mother were subject to ridicule and embarrassment.
The demons recognize Jesus' identity in their confrontation with him and are
resistant to Him. The demons possess a certain demonic knowledge of Jesus, which they
forcibly express in the very presence of Jesus. The demoniac in the Capernaum
synagogue wails, "What do I have to do with you, Jesus of Nazareth? I know who you
are, the Holy One of God" (Mk. 1:24). The Gadarene demoniac cries out, "What do I
have to do with you, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I adjure you by God not to
torment me" (Mk. 5:7; "Son of God" in Matt. 8:28). The Greek idiom, "What do I have
to do with you?" is also found in other places in both testaments and is best understood,
"What do we have in common?"52 The answer is clear; the man in the sphere of the
unclean spirit has nothing in common with "the Holy One of God." The demons speak
the truth that the boundaries between the two spheres are clearly demarcated; they
intersect at no point. This truth makes the slander against the Holy Spirit so serious and
fraught with damning consequences. The demons' cry of torment is most directly related
to their awareness of their eschatological destruction, expressed in Matthew's Gospel,
"Have you come to torment us before the time?" (Matt. 8:29). The demons' recognition of
Jesus' identity is also expressed in other summary passages (Mk. 1:34; 3:11). The cry of
48 The sphere is similar to Elymas, the magician (Acts 13:8-12) and a woman with a divining spirit (Acts
16:16-18).
49 In Matt. 8:28—there are two demoniacs.
50 The use of the perfect infinitives Mk. 5:4, "pulled apart" and "shattered" intimate that further human

effort to bind him will be in vain. Cullen I K Story, The Beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ
According to Mark (USA: Xulon Press, 79.
51 The story of the Gadarene demoniac is congruent with Mark's grouping of several miracle stories, which

emphasize the extremity of need (distress at sea—4:35-41; Gadarene demoniac—5:1-20; Jairus'

daughter—5:21-24, 35-43; woman with a hemorrhage—5:25-34), the human impossibility of self-help, the
role of trust and the wholeness of life that Jesus bestows upon each "impossible" situation. There is a clear
comprehensive breadth to the works of Jesus in that they focus, in succession, on the world of nature (wind
at sea), the spiritual world (demoniac), human sickness and frailty (woman with the hemorrhage) and the
world of death (Jairus' daughter).
52 Cf. the use in II Sam. 19:22; Judg. 11:12; I Kgs. 17:18; II Kgs. 3:13 in the OT and Mk. 5:7; Matt. 8:29;

Lk. 4:38; 8:28.

recognition is squeezed from them, which also reflects the demons' defense of themselves
against Jesus. The expression, "I adjure you" (o(rki/zw) on the part of the demons is an
attempt to bind or put a curse upon Jesus and thus, compel him to do or say something.53
No doubt it is an attempt to gain control over Jesus, since they perceive his power and
attempt to ward of Jesus' attack by His very presence. "It is a strange event. The
possessed one, with an oath, has called on the Majestic One, the Most High God, for
protection against the One who is the Only Son of the Most High God (Mk. 5:9)."54
Jesus addresses the demon(s) in His own person/name and enjoins silence. In
response to the initial recognition by the demon(s), Jesus directly addresses the demons,
generally to rebuke the demon(s) and charge the demon(s) to silence.
"Be muzzled . . . come out of him" (fimo/w—Mk. 1:24)
"He was not allowing the demons to speak because they knew who He was" (a0fi/hmi
lalei=n--Mk. 1:34)
"But he gave them strict orders not to tell who He was" (e0pitima/w—Mk. 3:12)
"He rebuked the unclean spirit" (e0pitima/w & e0pita/ssw—Mk. 9:25)
On one occasion, Jesus inquires concerning the demon's name (Mk. 5:9). In another
instance, Jesus requests something of the history of an epileptic boy's illness/possession
(Mk. 9:21-22). "The confession which Jesus seeks to evoke is not, however, this witness
which proceeds from demonic knowledge. He forbids it."55
Jesus expels the demon(s) by a word of command. Coupled with the silence
charge is the command to the demons to depart from the tormented person:
"Be muzzled . . . come out of him" (Mk. 1:24)
"Come out of this man, you evil spirit" (Mk. 5:8)
"You deaf and mute spirit . . . I command you, come out of him and never enter
him again." (Mk. 9:25)
In this regard, the demons are commanded not to return to the same person.56 In another
instance, the demons plead for leniency (a "plea-bargain"), not to be sent out of the
region, but to inhabit pigs.57 Further, in this instance immediate obedience to Jesus'
command to come out of the man (Mk. 5:8) was delayed, although the first step towards
compliance is taken as the man cowers before Jesus.58
Three features stand out: 1) Jesus uses no mechanical or magical devices in the
exorcism, e.g., incense, music.59, 2) The texts do not say that Jesus was praying at the
53 Josh. 6:26; I Kgs. 22:16; II Chron. 18:15; Matt. 26:63).
54 Cullen I K Story, 80
55 Foerster, 19.
56 Matt. 12:43-45; Lk. 11:24-26.
57 Mk. 5:10-12. The book of Tobit provides an example of demons being associated with a particular

geographical locale: "And Tobias remembered the words of Raphael, and took the liver of the fish and the
heart out of the bag which he had, and put them on the ashes of the incense. And the smell of the fish
baffled the demon and he ran away into the upper parts of Egypt" (Tobit 8:3).
58 Cullen I K Story. 80-81.
59 Cf. Tobit 8:3 for the use of incense. Jubilees mentions the use of medicines in exorcism (Jubilees 10:10-

13, "And one of us He commanded that we should teach Noah all their medicines; for He knew that they
would not walk in uprightness, nor strive in righteousness. And we did according to all His words: all the
malignant evil ones we bound in the place of condemnation, and a tenth part of them we left that they might
be subject before Satan on the earth. And we explained to Noah all the medicines of their diseases,
together with their seductions, how we might heal them with herbs of the earth. And Noah wrote down all
things in a book as we instructed him concerning every kind of medicine. Thus the evil spirits were
time of the exorcism or using incantation against the demons, 3) Jesus does not use the
oath formula or invoke a "name," "I adjure you by . . .," which is expressed by the
demons. Instead he confronts the demons with his own person. Through his own person
and the power of the Holy Spirit, he directly enjoins silence, commands the demons to
leave and never to return. As Graham Twelftree notes, "Jesus appeared to rely on his
own charismatic personal force to subdue and expel the demons."60 Jesus is conscious
that he now breaks the power of the devil and his angels because he is the one in whom
the dominion of God is present on behalf of humanity."61 Jesus affirms the truth about
the source of his exorcisms. His exorcisms are accomplished by the Spirit of God in
conjunction with His Messianic Person and signify the presence of God's Kingdom:
28 "But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of
God has come upon you" (Matt. 12:28).
20 "But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of
God has come upon you." (Lk. 11:20).
It is not the fact of exorcisms per se that distinguishes Jesus from Jewish exorcists, but
the fact that he, as Messiah ("I"), is casting out demons by the Spirit of God.62
The actual exorcism is effective. Mark narrates the violent exit of the demon in
the Capernaum synagogue, "The evil spirit shook the man violently and came out with a
shriek" (Mk. 1:24). The demons left the Gadarene demoniac and were transferred to
some pigs, which thereupon rushed into the Sea of Galilee and were drowned. "Their
wild, unchecked, reckless plunge over the cliff into the sea was proof enough of the
destructive work which the demons had unleashed earlier in the life of the Gadarene
man."63 However, the real proof of the exorcism is expressed in the altered condition of
the man, "sitting, dressed64 and in his right mind" (Mk. 5:15)—each of these expressions
stand in stark contrast to the lengthy description of the man's grievous condition, prior to
the exorcism (Mk. 5:2-5). The exorcism of the Syro-Phoenician's daughter is confirmed
when the mother returns home, "She went home and found her child lying on the bed and
the demon gone" (Mk. 7:30); this is the only recorded instance where Jesus accomplishes
an exorcism at a distance from the afflicted person. The subsequent effect of Jesus'
command to the deaf and mute spirit is noted: "The spirit shrieked, convulsed him
violently and came out. The boy looked so much like a corpse that many said, 'He's
dead.'" But Jesus took him by the hand and lifted him to his feet and he stood up" (Mk.
9:26-27). In several of the exorcisms, violence characterizes the confrontation between
Jesus and the demon(s).
The effect of astonishment (fear) upon the witnesses is noted. Consistent with
numerous miracle stories, the effect upon the witnesses is noted. The onlookers in the
Capernaum synagogue "were all so amazed that they asked each other, 'What is this? A
new teaching—and with authority! He even gives orders to evil spirits and they obey
him" (Mk. 1:27).65 When the townspeople see the dramatic and powerful change in the
60 Graham Twelftree, "Demon, Devil, Satan," Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (Downers Grove:
InterVarsity Press, 1992), 169-170.
61 Foerster, 19.
62 A similar thought is present at the baptism of Jesus. The presence of the Kingdom does not rest with

Jesus alone, since He is now thirty years old, or the Spirit alone, since the Spirit of God was active in
Israel's history. Since He is anointed by the Spirit and confirmed by the voice from above (Mk. 1:10-11), it
is not surprising that Jesus' first word in public proclaims, "The Kingdom of God is at hand" (Mk. 1:14-15).
63 Cullen I K Story. 81.
64 We can only presume that someone (disciples?) provided clothing for the once naked man.
Gadarene demoniac, they respond with fear, no doubt in response to the numinous
mystery (mysterium tremendum), and they plead with Jesus to leave their region (Mk.
5:15, 17). In response to the exorcism of demons causing a man to be blind and mute,
"the crowd was amazed and said, 'Nothing like this has ever been seen in Israel" (Matt.
9:33). The exorcism of another blind and mute demon likewise causes a response of
amazement: A miracle has occurred but the response to it is varied. The crowd asks,
"Can this be the Son of David?"66 The Messianic title “Son of David” occurs eight other
times in Matthew’s Gospel.67 While the crowd does not make a clear verbal confession,
nonetheless the question of Jesus’ identity as “Son of David” is raised.

The disciples and exorcism

In Mark's Gospel, the call-narrative (1:16-20; 2:13-14) and the formal
appointment-narrative (3:13-19), contain a clear link, found in the verb "to do/make"
(poievw). In 1:17, Jesus says, "I will make" (poih/sw) you to become fishers of men."
In 3:14, Mark states, "And he made (e0poi/hsen) twelve . . . ." It is the creative activity of
Jesus in "making" disciples that binds the two narratives together. That is to say, the
purpose of the call is realized in the formal appointment of the twelve. The verb,
"make/do," is also used when the disciples report back to Jesus of all they had done on
their short-term mission trip, "And the apostles gathered together around to Jesus and
announced to him all the things 'they had done' (e0poi/hsan) and taught" (6:30). Such
activity includes their exorcisms of possessed persons.
The initial call of the disciples (1:16-20) is formalized into an appointment as
"apostles." As Mark records this appointment, he notes the three-fold purpose of their
formal appointment: 1) to be with Him, 2) to be sent out to preach, 3) to have authority
over unclean spirits (Mk. 3:14). The first purpose is significant; it is a call to
relationship—they must be with him, learn from him by word, example and relationship
before they could be sent out in mission (cf. 6:6b-13). Their work is similar to the work
of Jesus: ministry of the word and manifestation of authority in exorcism. The
miraculous activity, including exorcism is paired with the proclamation of the Kingdom's
advent. In 6:7, the twelve are given authority over unclean spirits and therefore to cast
out demons—which they do (6:13).68 Such victory over unclean spirits is accompanied
by the declaration, "the Kingdom of God has come upon you" (Mk. 1:13-14; cf. Lk.
10:9). In Matt. 12:28, the coming of the Kingdom of God is associated with three things:
1) the Messianic person of Jesus, "But if I . . . ," 2) the activity of the Spirit of God, "by
the Spirit of God" 3) exorcism, "cast out demons." In addition, the disciples also "heal"
(6:13) and "teach" (6:31). The first purpose of the formal appointment was to "be with
Jesus," which is then realized after the return of the disciples from their missions trip;
they return to "be with him again" (6:30). Jesus serves as a participating mentor to the
Twelve; he is always personally involved in doing the work of his unique mission, yet he
is ever so conscious of teaching the disciples who would "do and teach" (Mk. 6:30) what
66 The question is rhetorical, "This one can't be the Son of David, can he?"
67 1:20; 9:27; 15:22; 20:30; 20:31; 21:9, 15; 22:42; there are seven other occurrences of the proper name,
"David" (1:1, 6, 17--twice; 12:3; 22:43, 45).
68 In 9:18, the disciples were unable to cast out the spirit from the "epileptic" son. Although they had been

granted such authority and Jesus expects their efforts will be successful, nonetheless, in this instance they
had failed, due to a lack of faith. Perhaps this was a particularly difficult case to which they could not
adequately respond with faith.
he had done and taught. Such "doing and teaching" includes their conflict with evil
spirits. The three blocks of material in Mark are bound together in a clear fashion and in
a sequential manner; these are the "high points" that connect the other narratives as the
disciples are observers and participants in his ministry. The close manner in which
exorcism is paired with declaration of the Kingdom's presence, removes the exorcisms
from the notion of incantation and magic. Just as Jesus came to "destroy the works of the
Devil" (I Jn. 3:8), so the disciples are charged with the same purpose and are granted the
same authority; their exorcisms will signify the presence of the Kingdom in their sender.
In Lk: 10:17-20, there is a revealing interchange between Jesus and the seventy-
two, following their short-terms mission-trip. The disciples had been sent out in pairs to
preach the Kingdom's presence and to heal; although exorcism is not mentioned in the
charge (10:1-12), it certainly can be implied by virtue of the disciples' report of the
subjection of demons to them, after their trip. It is noteworthy that the seventy-two are
flushed with the excitement and joy over the subjection of demons to them in Jesus' name
(10:17). Jesus responds with a jubilant cry, expressed in four clauses:
"I was beholding Satan falling from heaven like lightning.
I have given you authority to trample on snakes and scorpions
and to overcome all the power of the enemy;
nothing will harm you" (10:18).
In the context, Satan's fall like lightning from heaven is the immediate effect of the
disciples' success in casting out demons; the exorcisms done in Jesus' name signify the
inbreaking Kingdom of God (cf. Matt. 12:28 = Lk. 11:20). Barrett notes, "The defeat of
subordinate members of the Kingdom of evil is a proof of the sovereign activity of God,
that is, of the defeat of Satan."69 The overcoming of the lesser demons is a sign of the
overthrow of their chief. Mention made of Satan in heaven is aligned with the OT
passages, where Satan is a member of the heavenly court, from whence he can fall.70 For
the image we can find parallels in two texts:
"How you have fallen from heaven,
O morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
You who have once laid low the nations!
You said in your heart,
I will ascend to heaven . . .
But you are brought down to the grave,
To the depths of the pit" (Isa. 14:12-15).
"But they were not strong enough and lost their place in heaven" (Rev. 12:18).
In a broader way, Satan's fall is directly related to the eschatological salvation,
which has been effected through Jesus' person, words and works. Thus, the disarming of
Satan is linked with Satan's fall from heaven and the cessation of his accusing
prerogative.71 The seventy-two, sent out on mission, extend the same mission through the
same power in Jesus' name. Through Jesus, and then through the disciples' mission, we
find the beginning of the end. "Something is achieved through the mission of Jesus and
the disciples; and that which is thus begun must go on to its inevitable end in the
69 Barrett, 64.
70 Job 1:6ff.; Zech. 3:1ff.
71 Foerster notes, "The binding of the strong man and the fall of the accuser from heaven refer to the same

thing. Mk. 3:27 and Lk. 10:17f. elucidate one another." 160.
complete subjection of the forces of evil and the full manifestation of the sovereignty of
God."72 Through these clauses, Jesus affirms the disciples' success in the subjection of
demons to them and assures them of the extent of their victory73 and their ongoing
protection from Satan and his demonic forces. Although, the disciples are prepared for
rejection in their missions-trip, Jesus nonetheless assures them of their ultimate security
and protection.
And yet, Jesus qualifies their exuberant joy; the true grounds for their joy is to be
found in their position, "their names are written in heaven" (Lk. 10:20).74 They are
destined for the unending bliss of the coming Kingdom. The disciples' joy is based upon
their successful exorcisms. Jesus says that their joy is not to be based on exorcisms
(activity) alone75 but rather in their saving position (sphere and position). It is a position
of incredible privilege and not a cause for superficial triumphalism. The exorcisms "are
no doubt a sign of the approaching salvation, but they are necessarily of less import than
the fact that the disciples are elect participants in the salvation itself."76 Exorcisms are
not the "end-all" but signs of the end, i.e., the final subjugation of the force(s) of evil.
In Mk. 9:38, we find evidence of a stranger who exorcised in the name of Jesus
but was not part of the twelve or seventy-two. The sons of Zebedee, surnamed "Sons of
Thunder" reveal a strain of intolerance and exclusion, expressed through their
unsuccessful attempt77 to forbid exorcisms by another.78 It is interesting that "the name of
Jesus" was used in the exorcism,79 although Jesus does not appeal to a "name" in his own
exorcisms. The book of Acts reveals a comical, painful and humiliating attempt of
certain Jewish non-Christian exorcists, who had unsuccessfully tried to use Jesus' name in
their exorcism:
"'Jesus I know, and Paul I know, but who are you?' and so handled them that they
fled from the house naked and wounded." (Acts 19:16).
Jesus rebukes the Sons of Thunder for their intolerance. Jesus does not accept exclusion
or competition by the "strange exorcist" but enjoins inclusion, sympathetic toleration, and
expresses to His disciples that one who exorcises in His name may actually be on Jesus'
side.80 Further, Jesus may understand that it may be important to accord a time-delay to
the strange exorcist to decide for Jesus.

72 H.D.A. Major, T.W. Manson, C.J. Wright, The Mission and Message of Jesus, (New York: E.P. Dutton
and Co., Inc., 1956), 550.
73 The expression, "tread upon serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing

shall hurt you" may find a parallel in Psa. 91:13, "You shall tread upon the lion and the adder; the young
lion and the serpent you shall trample under foot"; cf. also Deut. 8:15 and the picture of Satan as the
serpent.
74 For the Book of Life or of the Living (Psa. 69:29; 87:4-6; Exod. 32:32; Dan. 12:1; Phil. 4:3; Heb. 12:23;

Rev. 3:5; 13:8; 17:8).

75 In Lk. 10:20, the term "spirits" is used interchangeably with "demons" (v. 17).
76 Barrett, p. 64.
77 The imperfect tense, "we tried to prevent" (ejkwluvomen) is a conative imperfect, which expresses

an attempt that was made and then given up after unsuccessful effort.
78 On another occasion, they sought to call down fire from heaven upon a Samaritan village because they

refused to accept Jesus with hospitality (Lk. 9:54).

79 Cf. also Matt. 7:22f. for activity of false charismatics "in Jesus' name."
80 A similar attitude of enjoined inclusion occurs with respect to prophecy occurs in Moses' words, "Are

you jealous for my sake? Would God that all the Lord's people were prophets, that the Lord would put his
spirit upon them!" (Numb. 11:27-29).
Satan's role in the Passion
The Gospels also express the role of Satan in the Passion narrative, expressed by
Paul, "None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have
crucified the Lord of glory" (I Cor. 2:8). The entire Passion narrative is set in motion by
Satan's "entry" into Judas (Lk. 22:3). In Luke's version of the Temptation narrative, the
Devil left Jesus until an "opportune moment" (a1xri kairou= Lk. 4:13) should present itself.
Now the Devil's opportune moment is at hand, and is followed by the insidious
possession of Judas, who enacts the plan with the religious authorities, who are likewise
controlled by Satan. The religious leaders continue Satan's murderous purpose and deceit.
Satan also received the requested permission to "shake and sift" Peter and the other
disciples. In the midst of Jesus' agony concerning the upcoming crucifixion "an angel
from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him. And being in anguish, he prayed
more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground" (Lk. 22:43-
44). What is it that causes such anguish? Although Jesus is secure in his Abba-
relationship with his father, nonetheless the upcoming Passion expresses Jesus' decisive
struggle with the mystery, power and person of evil. At the time of his arrest Jesus says,
"But this is your hour and the hour of the power of darkness is yours as well" (Lk. 22:53).
Even the closing scene of Jesus' earthly life is narrated against a cosmic background,
involving a supernatural darkness, rending of the Temple's thick veil, an earthquake,
opening of tombs and the raising up of saints who enter the city of Jerusalem (Matt.
27:51ff.). The confrontation between Jesus and the Devil in the Temptation narrative is
exponentially magnified at the time of the crucifixion, involving a cosmic struggle
between Jesus and the powers of evil and death.

Theological significance of Jesus' conflict with Satan and demons

The sayings, narratives and parables do not provide a comprehensive Satanology;
however, the units of text demonstrate Jesus' understanding and the early community's
sense of the important issues and their relevance for the Church engaged in an ongoing
conflict with the person and forces of evil. The various passages portray that the power
of evil is deeply personal and works towards the destruction of people in all dimensions
of life; no sphere of life remains untouched. Specifically, Satan's objective is the war
against Jesus who lives life the way it was meant to be lived and offers the gift of new
life to those who put their trust in Him. Through Jesus' path of obedience (no to the
Tempter and yes to God), unto his redemptive death, Satan attempts to disrupt the
redemptive plan. This plan is realized in Jesus and thereby granted to others as he brings
"salvation," i.e., wholeness of life in all dimensions.
Jesus' exorcisms are not isolated or incidental invasions into the kingdom of
Satan; rather, they express the present and powerful reality of the Kingdom's presence.
They also mark the beginning of the end, the annihilation of Satan, a sobering realization
which the demons acknowledge.81 As Jeremias notes, "Every occasion on which Jesus
drives out an evil spirit is an anticipation of the hour in which Satan will be visibly
robbed of his power. The victories over his instruments are a foretaste of the eschaton."82
Thus, in Matthew 8, as the Gadarene demoniacs confront Jesus, they cry out in terror:

81 Mk. 1:24 and he cried out, “What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy
us? I know who you are, the Holy One of God.”
82 Joachim Jeremias, New Testament Theology,(New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1971), 95.
 29 And behold, they cried out, "What have you to do with us, O Son of God?
Have you come here to torment us before the time?" (Matt. 8:29).
They sense clearly that Jesus is the instrument of their final destruction.
As the anointed Messiah, exorcism becomes a manifestation of his Messianic
activity. In Mark 1:27, when Jesus casts out demons in the Capernaum synagogue, the
people are amazed at His exceptional authority over demons. The context suggests that
he possesses such power by virtue of his identity, "the Holy One of God" (1:24).
The authority vested in Jesus comes from the Spirit of God (Matt. 12:28).
Matthew's text links together Jesus' Messianic person, exorcism and the instrumental role
of the Spirit, which in concert, signify the presence of the Kingdom of God. Luke's text
says that He exorcises demons by the "finger of God."
We need to sense the tension inherent in the idea of Satan being bound and yet
strong. Jesus won a victory in the Temptation but this does not mean that Satan's power
is finished. Luke's account states that the Devil left Him until "a more opportune
moment" (Lk. 4:13). Likewise in the Parable of the Strong Man and the Stronger One
(Matt. 12:29), Jesus clearly infers that that there is an essential unity of Satan's evil
kingdom and Satan's power remains strong ("already but not yet"). Even after the Cross,
Resurrection, and Ascension--when the victory is complete, the grip of Satan, even
though broken, is still powerful. Therefore, a tension appears similar to that which
appears when the claim, "the Kingdom of God has come upon you" (Matt. 12:28), is set
in contrast to the prayer, "Let your Kingdom come" (Matt. 6:10). These tensions will not
be resolved till the Parousia. To be sure, victory over the Evil One occurred during the
ministry of Jesus and his disciples. In the Messianic ministry of Jesus and the disciples
sent out in mission, a death-blow has been dealt, "I saw Satan fall from heaven like
lightning" (Lk. 10:18). His words affirm that victory is happening and the end of Satan's
power is now in sight. The judgment on Satan is decreed and his temptations and power
against Jesus cannot prevail. Judgment in full, however, has not yet been carried out.
Only with the Parousia will there be an end to all evil.
Jesus' conflict with Satan and is role as an exorcist belong to the bedrock of the
Gospel tradition. 83 Exorcism is not simply introductory to the Kingdom of God, but is a
powerful sign of the presence of the Kingdom, bringing wholeness of life to those who
are possessed by the power of Satan.

Implications
The people of God need to be alert to the reality of Satan's destructive power and
sensitive to the way in which they can cooperate with the Spirit of God to bring new life
to those individuals who are possessed. On the cosmological level, there is a life and
death struggle that has been waged and continues to be fought, since the people of God
live in two ages, "the already but not yet." On the personal level, the Church needs to be
83A warning to Herod is found which notes almost incidentally Jesus' exorcisms:
Lk. 13:32 And he said to them, “Go and tell that fox, ‘Behold, I cast out demons and perform
cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I finish my course.
We also find the record of the strange exorcist who uses Jesus' name but is not one of the twelve:
Lk. 9:49 John answered, “Master, we saw a man casting out demons in your name, and we
forbade him, because he does not follow with us.”
In a similar way, Paul uses the name of Jesus Christ to perform exorcism:
Acts 16:18 And this she did for many days. But Paul was annoyed, and turned and said to the
spirit, “I charge you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And it came out that very hour.
alert to persons, who are in need of deliverance, freedom and relief. The fact that Jesus
entrusted His disciples with a mission similar to His (Mk. 3:15) and that the early Church
continued with a ministry of exorcism (Acts 5:16), confirms the role of the Church in
delivering people from the power of the Strong One.
 The Occasion for I Thessalonians

Bridge Passage (I Thess. 2:17-3:13)

A Clear Progression

ANXIETY (2:17-3:5)

1. a0porfanisqe/ntev "having been orphaned"—unusual expression describing Paul (v. 17)

2. e0spouda/samen "we made every effort" with the adverb perisso/terov "all the more" and the
modifying noun and adjective, e0n pollh=| e0piqumi/a| "with much desire"—almost superlative
force here all used to express Paul's desire "to see" i0dei=n them (v. 17)
3. ste/gw used in 3:1, 5—a word of internal pressure, "when we (I) couldn't stand the pressure
any more"—then Timothy was sent.
4. ei0v keno\n ge/nhtai o9 ko/pov h(mw=n "our labor/effort might have been useless" coupled with the
note of apprehension with mh/ pwv "lest"—a clear fear of failure (3:5).
5. to\ mhde/na sai/nesqai e0n tai=v qli/yesin tau/taiv "that no one be shaken by these trials"—fear for
Thessalonians' stability (3:3).
6. Real issue for Paul—he doesn't know how things had gone or how Timothy was received.

RELIEF (3:6-8)

1. a1rti de\ "but now"—a temporal contrast from the time of Paul's anxiety (3:6)
2. e0lqo/ntov Timoqe/ou pro\v h(ma=v a0f 0 u(mw=n "Timothy has just now come to us from you"—the
internal pressure has just been relieved (v. 6). In addition, the Thessalonians wish to see
Paul again.
3. [Timoqe/ou] eu0aggelisame/nou "Timothy has brought the good news" of their faith, love and an
affectionate memory of Paul (v. 6).
4. pareklh/qhmen "we were encouraged"—Timothy, who had been sent to encourage the
Thessalonians (parakale/w) in 3:2 now becomes the means by which Paul is encouraged (v.
7).
5. zw=men "we really live" that contrasts with Paul's previous fears (v. 8)

THANKSGIVING (3:9)

1. Rhetorical question: ti/na ga\r eu0xaristi/an duna/meqa tw=| qew=| a0ntapodou=nai "For what
thanksgiving can we render back to God?" "How can we thank God enough? Words fail
 us" (v. 9).
2. e0pi pa/sh| th=| xara=| h{| xai/romen di 0 u9ma=v "at all the joy with which we rejoice" (v. 9)
↓

PRAYERS (3:10-13)

1. deo/menoi e0iv to\ i0dei=n u9mw=n to\ pro/swpon "praying that we might see you again" (3:10)
2. nukto\v kai\ h(me/rav u(perekperissou= "night and day beyond all measure": genitives of time and
double compound adverb builds intensity.
3. katarti/sai ta\ u(sterh/mata th=v pi/stewv u9mw=n "to supply/restore the things lacking in the
Thessalonians' faith" (3:10).
4. Two wish-prayers (3 optatives):
a. kateuqu/nai th\n o(do\n h(mw=n pro\v u(ma=v "may he make the way straight for us to come
to you" (3:11)
b. pleona/sai kai\ perisseu/sai th=| a0ga/ph| "make your love increase and abound" (3:12)
c. ei0v to\ sthri/cai u(mw=n ta\v a)me/mptouv e0n th|= a(giwsu/nh| e!mprosqen tou= qeou= kai\ patro\v h(mw=n
e0n th=| parousi/a| tou= kuri/ou h(mw=n )Ihsou= "may he strengthen your hearts so that you
will be blameless and holy in the presence of our God and Father at the Parousia
of our Lord Jesus." (3:13)
 1

The Revolutionary Paradigm of Grace

Introduction

Paul Tournier, the noted Christian psychiatrist expresses the paradoxical inversion
of human values with the words of Jesus, followed by his own comments:
'So the last will be first, and the first last' (Matt. 20:16). How many times I have
thought about it when a man has been sobbing in my consulting room as he has
given expression to disappointment with himself, his faults and failures, his
despair and his feelings of inferiority! He is nearer to the Kingdom of God than I
who listen to him; and I come nearer—to the Kingdom, as well as to the
man—only in so far as I recognize that I am as guilty, as powerless, as inferior
and as desperate as he is. Only then also can I help him, for I am delivered from
all spirit of judgment, I am his companion in repentance and in waiting for grace.1
The Bible witnesses to a profound reversal in terms of the sinners and the righteous and
the way in which God's grace comes to them. For example, God chooses a murderer to
lead His people out of Egypt (Ex. 3:10); thereupon he flees into exile (Ex. 2:13-15).
There are numerous leaders, judges, kings and prophets, who feel themselves to be
insignificant and guilty—and yet, God's grace goes out to such leaders to reassure them
in their unique situations and vocations. 2 Moses witnesses to the divine love that is
based upon the divine love, i.e., "God loves you because he loves you" (Deut. 7:7-8).
In this chapter, I will argue that Jesus embodies and communicates grace to both
the sinners and righteous persons. Although both groups are in desperate need, the
specific messages to both groups are targeted to the pressing needs that are group-
specific.
Jesus comes into the human scene as the grand reversal and paradox of commonly
held religious norms. He, who is equal with God and is God, now is incarnate "in the
likeness of sinful humanity" (Phil. 2:6-8). And he chooses people for disciples who, in
and of themselves, would not amount to much—several "blue-collar" men--fishermen,
tax-collectors, and he is at home with immoral people and society's "low-lifes."
Moreover, Jesus publicly thanks God for the reversal of human values: "I thank you,
Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and
understanding and revealed them to infants" (Matt. 11:25). Jesus chooses many poor,
weak and despised persons—he is at home with the social and religious misfits, i.e., the
marginalized. In so many ways, he prefers publicly acknowledged sinners (by morality
and vocation) to the "righteous." Before Jesus, there are not two clearly defined groups
of people—the guilty sinners and righteous persons. Jesus only recognizes one class of
persons—the guilty—which includes everyone. To the one who owns up to guilt—his
word is that of grace and compassion. To the one who is "righteous"—there is only the
human response of repression; when sin is repressed, it leads a person to hardness. Jesus
does not intend to awaken guilt to condemn but to extend grace, since grace is given to
the one who is humble and receptive of grace. And religious people (then and now) have
1 Paul Tournier, Guilt and Grace, (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1962), 112.
2 Moses in his feeling of inadequacy of speech (Ex. 4:10); Gideon with a feeling of insignificance (Judg.
6:15); Samuel as a child (I Sam. 3:10); David's humble response to the kingship due to his youth (I Sam.
16:6-13); Jeremiah's response in view of the hostile response (Jer. 4:19; 20:9; 6:14); Amos' unimportant
role as a shepherd (Am. 7:10-17); Paul a murderer is overpowered by the Risen Jesus (Acts 9).
 2

always had a difficult time believing and then admitting that God prefers the weak, the
humble, the guilty, the broken and those who live with shame. In his unbelievable grace,
God receives all of those who are ashamed of themselves, their actions, their words, their
lifestyle, their attitudes and their words. And he intends to free people from the personal
and social contempt that is all too easy to feel and express. He breaks the vicious and
predictable cycles wherein the abused person becomes the abuser, wherein the persecuted
becomes the persecutor, and wherein the accused becomes the accuser. His word is a
word of grace and compassion, freedom, celebration and joy. The so-called "righteous"
are not free from guilt and shame but have repressed their personal guilt; those who are
so-called "sinners" live with guilt and shame, and for that very reason, are ready to
receive genuine pardon and grace. They come to God with an open hand.
We will explore illuminating texts and themes in the gospels that Jesus highlights
as he deals with both the "sinners" and the "righteous." While all are in need of grace,
yet he tailors his grace-message to meet the unique needs of people as "sinners" and the
"righteous ones."

Jesus' Grace for "Sinners"

1. Grace means table-fellowship, involvement and acceptance of sinners without

conditions.

One of the repeated sneers against Jesus was that he was a "friend of tax-collectors
and sinners, a glutton and drunkard" (Matt. 11:19; Lk. 7:34). Such charges against Jesus
were occasioned by very real social contact between Jesus and the "low-lifes."
In Mark 2:15-17, we find one such paragraph wherein Jesus is critiqued for his table-
fellowship with publicly acknowledged sinners. Mark uses the word "many" to signify a
large group of tax-collectors and sinners; he also desires that his readers see an implicit
link between the call of one tax-collector (Levi) and his table-fellowship with many tax-
collectors and sinners. This prepares the readers for the ensuing controversy. By his call
of Levi and his table-fellowship with these "low-lifes," Jesus has crossed over the Jewish
boundary lines, which would separate the "holy" and the "unholy." Tax-collectors and
sinners were not even to be taught the statutes of God, since their vocation and lifestyle
placed themselves outside the covenant people of God.3 Table-fellowship in Jewish
practice was a sacred rite, and if entered into with "unclean" people, would thereby
render one unclean (cf. Mk. 7:1ff.). Table-fellowship was introduced by a table blessing,
which united those who ate the same bread into a holy table-fellowship, a very intimate
human communion. The meals that Jesus shares with the religiously ostracized are
"acted parables" of the Kingdom of God. Joachim Jeremias says, "In the East, even
today, to invite a person to a meal was an honor. It was an offer of peace, brotherhood
and forgiveness; in short, sharing a table meant sharing life. In Judaism in particular,
table-fellowship means fellowship before God, for the eating of a piece of broken brfead
by everyone who shares in the meal brings out the fact that they all have a share in the
blessing which the master of the house had spoken over the unbroken bread."4 Table-
fellowship is a way of demonstrating and expressing solidarity. Thus we find precedent
3 See Eta Linnemann, Parables of Jesus: Introduction and Exposition (London: S.P.C.K, 1966), 74.
4 Joachim Jeremias, New Testament Theology (New York: Scribner's, 1971), 115.
 3

in Psalm 1 wherein "sitting" means involvement and approval of a certain lifestyle; the
one who sits in the seat of the scoffer is a participant in scoffing. Conversely, the one
who sits in the seat of the righteous approves and practices what is right. "Blessed is he
who does not sit in the seat of scoffers" (Psa. 1:1). Whoever sits at table-fellowship with
sinners aligns himself with the scoffers of the Torah. Thus, Jesus' radical action
precipitates the accusation of Jesus' opponents to His disciples. Why did Jesus' critics
accuse the disciples about Jesus and not directly deal with Jesus? Did they intend to
erode the disciples' newfound loyalty to Jesus?
Jesus' response is expressed in the form of antithetical parallelism, in which he
compares his needed presence with sinners with the needed presence of a physician with
the sick. The words within the parentheses are certainly to be implied due to the
parallelism of the lines:
Physician's presence with the sick
Those who are well have no need of a physician
but
those who are sick (have need) (of a physician)

Jesus' presence with the sinners

the righteous did not come to call I
but
the sinners (came to call) (I)" (Mk. 2:18)

Jesus likens himself (I) to the physician who goes to the place where people are
sick—where the need is genuine (real and felt). It is absurd for a person to go to medical
school, internship, and then set up practice, and then refuse to have dealings with the sick
and diseased. It is just as absurd for Jesus to refuse to have dealings with publicly
acknowledged sinners. Table-fellowship and Jesus' acceptance of sinners are essential
elements of Jesus' interaction and ministry with the people. His involvement with them
was not to become like them in their sin but to express his role as a physician, and is
expressed in programmatic form through an "I came" (h^lqon) statement.
This table-fellowship is also expressed through the Zacchaeus story (Lk. 19:1-10).
Jesus is regarded as a prophet from Nazareth and is welcomed with a banquet, thrown by
Zacchaeus; this feast follows Jesus' own self-invitation to Zacchaeus, the chief tax-
collector. His self-invitation, acceptance of the invitation, and dining with this person
unleashed all kinds of religious resentment, not only from the Pharisees, but from the
general population as well ("they were all grumbling" Lk. 19:7). Jesus makes the
unequivocal statement, "For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost" (Lk.
19:10). With irony, Luke states that Zacchaeus was "seeking" (e0zh/tei) to see Jesus (Lk.
19:3), the real seeker is Jesus who comes to seek (zhth=sai) the lost (19:10) Similarly, the
trilogy of parables (Lost Sheep, Lost Coin and Lost Son) in Luke 15 is evoked by Jesus'
table-fellowship with tax-collectors and sinners (15:1-2). The image of seeking is well
expressed by the shepherd (Lk. 15:4-7), the woman (15:8-10), the father who searches for
the lost son as well as the resentful older brother (15:11-32).
Luke frequently presents Jesus as a dinner guest hosted by others (5:29--Levi
feast; 10:38--Mary and Martha; 19:5--Zacchaeus). On three separate occasions, Jesus'
host is a Pharisee (7:36ff.; 11:37; 14:1). But as he sits at table among them, on each of
 4

the three occasions, Jesus directs the attention of the Pharisees away from their concerns
for laws and rituals to the plight of the poor and needy, the sinful and the sick, whom the
Pharisees neglect and disdain (7:39; 11:38-39; 14:1-4). Thus, even when he associates
with the religious leaders, the evangelist shows the purpose of Jesus' coming to be for all
humanity (2:30-32) with a ministry pointed to "the poor . . . the captives . . . the blind . . .
and the oppressed" (4:18). The final commission given to the disciples embraces all of
these groups, for it is to "all nations" (24:47).
The Parable of the Two Debtors is encased in the paragraph concerning the sinful
woman (7:36-50). As occurs more than once in Luke's Gospel, the story forms a
culmination to a context that proclaims the mission of Jesus to the "outsider." Here, as
elsewhere, he tampers with the religious, racial and social taboos of Jewish particularism,
which assumes that God is only concerned with the Jews. A slave of a Gentile centurion
is healed by Jesus' word (7:1-10). Jesus then proceeds to halt a funeral procession, touch
the coffin,5 and raise up a deceased young man, the only son of a widowed mother (7:11-
17). And, as he defends the ministry of John the Baptist, Jesus is recognized to be the
friend of tax-collectors and sinners (7:18-35). A slave, a Gentile, a widow, tax-collectors
and sinners--the unique "agenda" of Jesus' ministry to outsiders is amazing to ponder.
The climax appears, however, in the story of the sinful woman. Her tears of repentance
and devoted service to Jesus reveal her gratitude for what she has received from Him.
What other parable has a more graphic or lengthy setting than this one! And the story has
a fitting sequel in the reference--immediately following--to those women who continued
to provide for the mundane needs of Jesus and his disciples out of their own personal
resources (8:1-3).
In terms of the immediate context of the parable, Luke has narrated the Son of
Man's activity of eating and drinking contrasted with the Baptist's ascetic lifestyle, and
the damning judgments pronounced on both by their critics: Lk. 7:34 The Son of man has
come eating and drinking; and you say, ‘Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax
collectors and sinners!’ Jesus' practice of feasting advances into the setting for the
following parable. When Jesus feasts at the home of a Pharisee, he is not critiqued for
gluttony or drunkenness (v. 34). He is, however, judged for an evident lack of prophetic
power, being a friend of sinners (v. 34, 39) and his authority to pronounce the forgiveness
of sins (v. 49).
As listeners and readers encounter the parables, it is made plain that God stands
behind these parables in actual experience and relationship—not in mere systematic
theological categories. He is, for example, the king, the master, the fisherman, the owner
of the vineyard, etc. To say the least, the stories are diverse. Apparently Jesus could
sense the extensive diversification of God's dealings with humankind, such as with
homeowners, widows, tax-collectors, peasants, farmers, children playing make-believe.
And God is portrayed in his kindness, mercy and goodness. Jesus does not affirm that the
world is basically good, but he does imply that God is a God who has planned from
eternity that his benevolent nature be seen in human life. In the Parable of the Four Soils,
God provides food and gracious care for His people. Moreover, his people are the
instruments through whom His grace will be given to others: "Blessed are those who
hunger and thirst . . . for they shall be satisfied" (Matt. 5:6). In the Parables of the
Treasure Hidden in the Field and Pearl of Great Price (Matt. 13:44-45), God is the one
5Touching a coffin incurs one day's defilement (Numb. 19:21-22); by touching a corpse, Jesus would
contract uncleanness for a week (Numb. 5:2-3; 19:11-20).
 5

who offers such unheard-of "lucky-finds." Behind the Parable of the Good Samaritan
(Lk. 10:25-37), lies God, with a vested interest in humanity—a God who comes to people
on a rescue mission out of groundless compassion.6 The Parable of the Friend at
Midnight (Lk. 11:5-8) is not intended to be a mere admonition on true friendship, but
reveals a compassionate God who does not need to be awakened before he responds to
his people when they earnestly and continually pray for the Holy Spirit (Lk. 11:13).
Consistently, the argument moves from the lesser to the greater, "how much more
will God. . ."7 In the Parable of the Fig-Tree (Lk. 13:6-9), God does not owe anything to
humanity; nevertheless, God is long-suffering. In the ministry of Jesus, God offers
humankind a new chance; indeed he is the God of the Second Chance. For through his
ministry there can be a new beginning—a beginning that people are only able to make by
a positive response to him, based on God's prior offer. God maintains the positive goal
he has in view, just as the gardener maintains the vineyard and fig-tree with the
expectation of the final harvest. In the Parable of the Lost Sheep, God takes the initiative
and does not wait for the sheep to come to its senses. The human situation is not one in
which "all's well that ends well." It is just the opposite. People refuse to take the
redemptive work of God seriously. The human race has already advanced to the edge of
the abyss and except for the grace of God and the restraining arm of God—humankind
will be lost. The Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard (Matt. 20:1-16) affirms that
God has his own ways, which are contrary to human ways (Isa. 55:8-9). Nonetheless, he
finds a way to inspire people to participate in and to partake of his redemptive purpose in
Jesus Christ.
Taken as a whole, the parables proclaim a God who acts. They do not present a
concept of God but reveal the activity of God as a searching shepherd or woman (Lk.
15:4-10), a farmer who plants and harvests seed (Matt. 13:1-9, 18-23), a king who invites
people to a wedding-banquet (Matt. 22:1-14). Something wonderful and unheard of is
taking place in the world in space and time. The parables are about a God of goodness
and mercy who manifests himself in the face of human callousness. At the same time,
the parables affirm the supremacy and superiority of God. Although the universe and the
world are hostile, it is the activity of God that makes life meaningful, not fortuitous
chance.
The parables make it clear that the opposition and enmity of others is not merely
directed against disciples but is directed against God himself. Nevertheless, the
difficulties and obstacles encountered will not hinder God from achieving his redemptive
purpose. God has so arranged this world that despite all of the forces of distrust and
destruction that people bring upon themselves, God's goal of redemption never falters.
In many ways, Jesus shows that narrow concepts and exclusive human views are
much too limited for God. His desire is inclusive; God wills that all should be saved.
Human egoistic thinking often conveniently classifies humankind into groups, which are
restrictive in nature. But the parables of Jesus make sense only if we see a divine purpose
at work in the world for all of humanity. Some parables are replete with details about the
consummation and its joy. In the parables of the consummation of the age, Jesus offers
the opportunity of harmonious and joyful fellowship with himself—not the
sumptuousness of the meal. While people often take "sonship" and "daughtership"
lightly, Jesus makes his audience aware of how far God transcends human love by
6 This does not mean that we are warranted to make the parables into extended allegories.
7 light and heavy Qal Wȇh!ômer
 6

offering the almost unbelievable joy of fellowship with him. Fellowship with God is not
a sentimental experience or a psychological state; it is a true miracle of God's grace.
Human beings are made sons and daughters of God with Christ as Lord. Humanity
receives no ongoing contract with God as a Cosmic Employer. The son in the far-off
country does not inherit the farm, but he is offered a home with joy and celebration. At
one time, he lived a life of his choosing, but then found through various reversals that life
lived recklessly and selfishly could never satisfy his soul. And so he made his way home.
People can and do feel at home here on earth. Nevertheless, God's goal lies in the
direction of another world that bursts the narrow boundaries of human thought and
language that is limited.
Jesus intends to become the physician of the "broken" people through his table
fellowship with sinners and his holistic acceptance of them without placing conditions
upon them. Conversely, the Pharisees admonished the sinners to desist from sin and they
would also inflict banishment from the synagogue until the guilty persons had "cleaned
up their act" and mended their ways. The social pressure against publicly acknowledged
sinners was intense; it also involved economic sanctions. Through Jesus, we find his
picture of God; he is not the severe judge, who is waiting for infraction so that he can
exercise his judgment; rather he is the gracious Father who extends himself and grace
towards people who turn themselves to him. Jesus' critics reveal their picture of God as
the severe judge, when they, like the older brother in Luke 15, refuse to come in and
joyfully celebrate Jesus' table-fellowship with sinners. God demonstrates his
unconditional grace to people through Jesus' involvement with sinners. Jesus reveals
God's acceptance of sinners. Jesus becomes the physician of sinners because of his
involvement and acceptance of them; thereby he reveals God's acceptance of them,
without conditions, e.g., Jesus' story of the searching father does not include a
probationary period for the wayward son, to prove himself (Lk. 15:11-32). The lost son
is met with compassion and the flurry of festive activity, to celebrate the transition from
being "lost" and "dead" to "found" and "alive" (Lk. 15: 32). The sinners found
acceptance guaranteed to them, which is simply granted by returning home, such as the
son in the far country found. By way of contrast, the older brother (Lk. 15) reveals a
joyless, legalistic and severe understanding of God. Surely, the older brother would have
put the younger son on restriction, demanded payment of the lost money, insuring that the
son lived with the servants, put on curfew, etc. Such attitudes and expectations of the
older brother clearly reveal a view of God, which is stern, harsh, demanding, exacting
and legalistic. As Miroslav Volf notes, "Relationship is prior to moral rules; moral
performance may do something to the relationship, but relationship is not grounded in
moral performance."8

2. Grace is linked to the forgiveness of sins, healing and faith.

Grace is not only related with table-fellowship and acceptance, but embraces the
forgiveness of sins, healing and faith—well expressed through numerous narratives. In
Mark 2 (par.), there is a pronouncement story, which climaxes with the statement, "'But
in order that you might know that the Son of Man has authority to forgive sins,' He says
to the paralytic . . . " (Mk. 2:10-11). The primary thrust of the paragraph is concerned
with Jesus' authority to forgive sins (four times in this paragraph—2:5, 7, 9, 10), which is
8 Miroslav Volf, Exclusion and Embrace (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996), 164.
 7

also expressed so emphatically in the purpose statement, "But in order that you may
know that the Son of Man has authority to forgive sins." One of the items that stands out
in this paragraph is the way that Jesus responds to the four friends; he responds to
them—not to the paralytic, with something different than from what they had brought
their friend before Jesus. There is a cause-effect relationship between Jesus' perception
of the faith of the four friends and His determination to forgive the paralytic's sins. They
demolish a roof and bring their friend before Jesus for one reason—healing of his
paralysis; initially Jesus does something different—he forgives sins. And the immediate
antecedent of their faith is the persistent and dogged determination of the friends to get
the paralytic before Jesus, even if it means tearing up a roof. They do not give up, even
though there is no door or doorway open to them. In this context, faith is contagious and
vicarious; it operates on behalf of another. Everyone anticipates the healing; Jesus
publicly declares what he was doing and could do for the person; he imparts the
forgiveness of sins, and then, to substantiate his authority to forgive sins, he heals the
paralytic. The entire story reveals the forgiving involvement of God.
Jesus' pronouncement of forgiveness provokes the protest that Jesus is assuming the
divine prerogative, "It is blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" (Mk. 2:7).
The Scribes are correct; Jesus' confers what God alone has the authority to confer. In the
OT, there are occasions wherein forgiveness is conveyed through a prophet, "The Lord
also has put away your sin" (Nathan to David in II Sam. 12:13).9 The Jews in Jesus' day
were aware of a sacrificial system wherein people performed in certain ways, responded
with remorse and penitential behavior. But in Mk. 2, the paralytic did not ask for
forgiveness, Jesus is responding to the faith of others and there is no prayer for the
particular sins that the man might confess. Instead, Jesus simply announces and bestows
the forgiveness of sins. Forgiveness is bound up here with the faith of others; in Lk. 7
faith is linked to the vulnerable expression of gratitude by the prostitute. As for the
prodigal son in Lk. 15, it is noteworthy that repentance is not singled out as the event that
occasions the finding or acceptance into the family-fold. The text does affirm that the
son "came to himself/his senses," (ei0v e(auto/n de\ e0lqw/n Lk. 15:17). 10 It is true that the son's
return is motivated by his destitute condition; out among the swine, he has indeed come
to the "end of his rope." However, as the son's monologue continues, the son is not
thinking with remorse about how he has injured God, violated his father or given himself
to prostitutes. He is motivated by his empty stomach, and the memory of the adequate
provision of his father's servants. Even in his intended confession, his approach is
pragmatic.
However, there may be more in the text. Severe hunger and abject poverty begin
to make the son wise even in his self-concern that may become purified as he begins the
journey home. However, the audience is not told of this change in attitude. His
confession begins with the address, "Father," 11 which may explore the relationship which
9 Cf. also Isa. 44:22, "I have swept away your transgressions like a cloud." (cf. Also Isa. 43:25; Exod.
34:6).
10 In the Hebrew setting, we should expect a term like ‫בּוׁש‬, turn, turn back, repent. Bailey calls attention to

the Codex Bezae with the identical words h1lqen ei0v e(auto\n, which, in the context of the ungodly judge, does
not mean repentance. "He merely wants to get rid of the woman who is giving him a headache, so he
changes his mind." Kenneth E. Bailey, Poet and Peasant and Through Peasant Eyes, (Grand Rapids:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1990), 175.
11 vocative case (15:18, 21).
 8

the son once enjoyed. He is open about his sin, above and below, "against heaven" and
before his father. It is well known from Rabbinic writings that heaven often substitutes
for God. Biblical texts reveal their own supporting evidence, including the surrogate
"Kingdom of Heaven" (Matt.) for "Kingdom of God" (Mk., Lk.).12 Perhaps the light of
repentance is filtered through his words, however incomplete they may be; the
concluding words of the first two parables do include such mention, "joy before the
angels of God over one sinner who repents" (15:7, 9).13 Certainly, the repentance motif is
not uppermost—if present, it is only minor; the father's joy over the recovered son reigns
supreme.

3. Grace is intended to lead to the response of repentance and trust.

While grace comes to sinners as an unexpected and underserved activity of God, it

nonetheless is intended to evoke repentance and trust in the recipient. In the first two
parables of Luke's trilogy (Lk. 15), Jesus makes mention of the "sinner who repents"
(15:7, 10) in his response to his critics. Similarly, with the paralytic (Mk. 2:5) and the
prostitute (Lk. 7:48, 50), faith/trust is honored—in connection with healing and the
forgiveness of sins. Jesus honors trust in him—often in connection with needs for
healing and exorcism. In Matt. 11:21 (par.), Jesus upbraids the cities for rejecting him
with the indictment that they failed to respond with repentance to Jesus' mighty acts of
salvation. Trust in Jesus is characterized as repentance and a corresponding sense of
humility. The son who returns (Lk. 15:18f.) says that he is no longer worthy to be called
a son, but only hopes for treatment as a hired servant. Similarly, the centurion appeals to
Jesus with a deep-seated humility, "I am not worthy to have you come under my roof; but
only say the word . . ." (Matt. 8:8, 10). Jesus honors this humble response in a
superlative manner, "I have not found such faith even in Israel" (Matt. 8:8, 10). Trust is
regarded as the basic expression of repentance in that a person is no longer able to rely
upon one's own possibilities, but simply to deliver oneself to the forgiveness, support,
acceptance and help of Jesus. Trust is expressed through an outstretched and open hand.
What is repentance but a movement back to the God of Israel and covenant
relationship and a forward movement to Jesus and his ministry, who ushers in the new
age of salvation. In Luke 3, John the Baptist states that that repentance for the
forgiveness of sins is linked to Isaiah's message about preparing the way for universal
salvation (Isa. 40:3-5), which, in turn, is linked with specific decisions that people need to
make: the crowd (Lk. 3:10-11), the tax-collectors (Lk. 3:12-13), the soldiers (Lk. 3:14).
These acts of repentance lead to the promise that Jesus, the coming one, will baptize them
in the Holy Spirit and fire (Lk. 3:16). Jesus' Parable of the Wicked Tenants (Matt. 21:33-
46), is thoroughly grounded in Isaiah's Song of the Vineyard (compare Matt. 21:33 with
Isa. 5:1-2), which also presses the audience to repentance, even though no such response
is forthcoming (Matt. 21:45-46). In other passages directs the attention to his ministry,
which ushers in the coming Kingdom and also fulfills the prophecy of the OT,
"something greater than the temple is here" (Matt. 12:6).
There are occasions wherein sinners gave expression to their repentance. For
example, Zacchaeus says, "Behold, Lord, the half of my possessions I give to the poor,
and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount"
12 Mk. 10:30; Ezra 9:6; Rev. 18:20; Matt. 19:23-24.
13 Heaven's residents participate in the joy of recovery.
 9

(Lk. 19:8). Similarly, the prostitute in Luke 7 expresses her gratitude to Jesus in an
entirely vulnerable manner without any sort of embarrassment. And Jesus says that
Simon the Pharisee should recognize that her lavish demonstration is but an expression of
the profound gratitude for the forgiveness of sins. In all spheres of Jesus' ministry with
the "broken," Jesus accepts people and allows for changed behavior to be the outgrowth
of the accepting relationship, whether it means giving up a vocation, altering social
conduct, demonstrating love, following in discipleship—all of these are expressions and
signs of repentance. Such responses are signs of something personal and profound that
has taken root in a person's heart. Thus for example, Jesus honors the faith-response of
the healed Samaritan leper and says, "your faith has saved you" (Lk. 17:18). The faith-
response is understood in the text to be his gratitude that must be expressed to God (Lk.
18:15) and to Jesus (Lk. 18:16). While the nine Jewish lepers went their way in a healed
condition, the Samaritan leper has experienced real salvation, in that his healing is really
incomplete unless he returns to the source of his healing and express his gratitude for
what God and Jesus have done for him.

4. Received grace also leads to love and joy

While grace is intended to lead to repentance and trust (#3), it also will be followed
with love and joy. A person receives grace and the forgiveness of God at the very point
of turning to God as in a return home. It is an occasion of intense love and joy which
must be shared (cf. the repeated theme of joy in Lk. 15). At the same time, the
experience of the grace and forgiveness of God must mean opening oneself up to another.
There is no such thing as a privatized experience of God's grace, which makes no impact
on other human relationships. By their very nature, forgiveness and grace must be shared
with others. Thus, the unthinkable sin is expressed by the Parable of the Unmerciful
Servant (Matt. 18:23-35); the unconscionable sin is that the forgiveness by the king has
had absolutely no effect on the first servant; it is as if the release of the astronomical debt
has made no difference in the way that the servant treats a fellow servant; the servant
does not even seem to remember that the wording of the plea of his fellow-servant was
his own wording (Matt. 18:26, 29). This leads Jesus to draw a comparison between the
fate of the unmerciful servant and the fate of the one who withholds forgiveness from
another (Matt. 18:35). Indeed, the whole array of community relationships, which are
noted in Matt. 18 are to be regarded against the vast backdrop of the unimaginable grace
of God. We find that the person, who stands aloof from others and withholds forgiveness
and grace, loses the very mercy and forgiveness of God; perhaps this grace was not really
understood or appreciated in the first place. In the Lord's Prayer, the disciples are taught
to pray, "Forgive us our debts as we also have forgiven (Matt. 6:12 par.);14 divine
forgiveness must make a difference in human forgiveness. Divine grace must make a
difference in terms of human grace. Goppelt says, "This correlation between God's
forgiveness and forgiving one's neighbor was not a relationship of reciprocity, but a
circulatory system. The circular flow between God's forgiveness and human forgiving
was destroyed whenever the latter collapsed."15 Forgiveness did not consist in simple
words but the active renewal and restoration of human relationships on an ongoing basis,
"I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven!" (Matt. 18:21f.). Just as Jesus
14Cf. also Mk. 11:25ff; 5:23f.
15Leonard Goppelt, Theology of the New Testament (ed. Jürgen Roloff; transl. John E. Alsup; Grand
Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1981), 134.
 10

accepted others in an unconditional manner, so he enjoins an unconditional acceptance of

others. It involves the personal involvement with others in intensely practical ways.

Jesus' Grace for the "Righteous"

Jesus' grace not only reaches out to the "sinners" but to the "righteous" as well.
For the people who are "publicly righteous," Jesus tailors his grace-full message to those
who need to understand and appropriately respond to his person, words and works. He
seeks to help his critics abandon their presuppositions and religious claims that constitute
a barrier to relationship with God and others.

1. With grace, Jesus explains the failure of the "righteous."

At the same time that Jesus accepts society's "broken" persons, he provokes the
"righteous" persons and brings their problem to a head; he creates a genuine crisis for
them. In the Parable of the Searching Father, the joyous party that is held for the younger
son reveals the heart of the older brother, who is working out in the field. The older
brother sums up his past conduct and reveals that he really regards his relationship with
his father as an employee to an employer, "Lo, these many years I have served you, and I
never disobeyed your command; yet you never gave me a kid, that I might make merry
with my friends" (Lk. 15:29). This brother also stands aloof from his younger brother, is
very angry and refuses to go in to the celebration of joy (15:28); he distances himself
from his brother through the words, "But when this son of yours, who has devoured your
wealth through prostitutes" (15:31). He is unable to bring himself to say the words, "This
brother of mine." His relationship with his father is based on performance and contract
and does not reflect a genuine son-father relationship. The "righteous" are able to say,
along with the rich young ruler, "all these things I have observed from my youth" (Mk.
10:20). The "righteous" also pray in ways similar to the Pharisee in the Parable of the
Pharisee and Publican, "Lord, I thank you that I am not like other men, robbers,
evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector" (Lk. 18:11). Jesus' acceptance of
the publicly acknowledged sinners evoked a real crisis for the "righteous." And Jesus
explains the crisis and hopes for a positive response from the "righteous."
Why did this crisis develop? It appears that the relationship to God is far different
from a relationship of an employee to an employer. Such things as "score-keeping" and
relative merit count for nothing. The supports and flimsy props upon which personal
existence, are based are knocked out from under the "righteous." The relationship that
Jesus offers is that of grace, mercy and forgiveness—to a Father who only deals with his
people on the basis of grace. Jesus' accepting treatment of the "sinners" is an incredible
threat to personal life that is based upon performance and reward. The relative
achievement and performance that one might be able to point to with pride are rendered
superfluous; they mean absolutely nothing to God. God is a Father who seeks out
relationship with people, which is based solely on their response to Jesus and his message
of grace, mercy, forgiveness and acceptance.
In the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (Matt. 20:1-16), Jesus informs his people
that God is utterly free to extend the grace of the Kingdom, while he maintains justice and order.
Correspondingly, people must abandon their "work-ethic" and live in the light of God's mercy.
 11

The parable is not about business practice. Indeed if employers today were to treat their
employees as the parable's householder treats his workers, they would face costly suits or
undergo endless court-battles. The parable, however, is about God and the utterly free way that
he relates to humans who are accustomed to a system of work-payment.
The parable is closely related to its context on either side, for it is a parable of contrast.
The contrast appears between the "first" and the "last." Indeed, Jesus' parable is literally
surrounded by texts which affirm either "first ones will be last and last ones first" (19:30) or "the
last ones will be first, and the first, last" (20:16). The contrast revealed in the reversal of
positions is so unusual that it needs the reiteration, which it receives. The surprising element is
the free, unmitigated, undeserved, and unencumbered grace of God that shines forth in an
amazing way in the treatment of the workers by the owner of the vineyard.
The parable appears appropriately where it is—after the question of the "reward-
obsessed" Peter (19:27) and before the self-seeking ambition of two other disciples who desire
for themselves the choice position on the right hand and left hand of Jesus in the Messianic
Kingdom (20:21-22). Peter's question breathes the air of the principle of recompense for self-
renouncing discipleship. The more labor in discipleship, the more pay; less labor, less pay. To
be sure, faithful discipleship to Jesus will receive a just reward. Thus, Jesus' assurance to Peter
of a fitting recompense for the committed service of Jesus' followers is both firm and explicit
(19:28-29). Such recompense will be spelled out in still another parable, the Parable of the
Talents (Matt. 25:14-23) including the master's affirmation, "Well done..." (25:21, 23). But at
the same time, disciples need to be reminded that another principle exists in the divine economy,
i.e., the standard of divine grace. It is grace that defies all human standards, grace that is free of
all legal norms except the law of boundless love such as the parable suggests.
In an equally fitting way, the parable directs its message to the disciples who sought for
themselves seats of honor beside Jesus in the Messianic Kingdom. It is not at all difficult to find
in the two ambitious disciples and in their fellow-disciples who were "indignant" at them (20:24)
a reflection of the vineyard workers who complained to the owner that they were underpaid for
the work they had completed.
It is significant that the householder makes a specific financial agreement, only with the
group hired at 6:00 a.m. During the workday, there are five different groups that are hired:

Time of Hiring Wage/Promise Hours Worked Work Conditions Actual Wage

early, 6:00 a.m. a denarius 12 heavy load and heat of 1 denarius
the day
9:00 a.m. "go into the vine 9 1 denarius
yard . . . whatever
is right I will give"
12:00 p.m. he did the same 6 1 denarius

3:00 p.m. he did the same 3 1 denarius

5:00 p.m. "you go into the 1 cool evening breeze 1 denarius
vineyard

The point of tension in the parable is created by the unusual command concerning the
order of payment. If the workers had been paid in the order of their hiring, everybody would
have gone home content—able to enjoy the evening, and nobody would be the wiser. With this
novel feature, Jesus lets "the first be witnesses of the extremely generous payment of their
comrades."16
 12

The generosity of the householder causes the minds of the 6:00 a.m. workers to go wild
with expectation. If payment is given at the rate of one denarius per hour, then they should
receive at least twelve denarii. The workers who have worked for twelve hours feel a sense of
double injustice: (1) Equal wages for workers who have worked for one hour or twelve hours is
unfair, (2) The working conditions have been much different. The response of the householder is
threefold.
(1) The owner is free to do what he wills with his money. He can be gracious, in that he
possesses the full right of disposal of his property as he sees fit (Matt. 20:15).
(2) Justice is maintained. As far as justice is concerned, there can be no grounds for
complaint for the owner has kept his word. Those who have worked all day received pay for a
full day's work, i.e. the agreed upon denarius; grace or goodness cannot really function if it is
extended at the expense of justice.
(3) Exposure of the real motives. If there is a problem, fault, or blame, it lies with the
grumbler, who has an evil eye, expressed by the owner's rhetorical question:
The parable is concluded by a summary application, taking the reader back to 19:30, and
thus, the parable appears to explain the saying about the first becoming last. However, it is not
altogether clear how the parable emphasizes the reversal.17 True, the first workers are paid the
same as the last (1 denarius). However, the major thrust of the parable is not on the reversal
from first to last or last to first, but the employer's freedom to be gracious. Thus, the clear-cut
system of performance-reward is violated by the grace and freedom of God evident in the life
and ministry of Jesus. He upsets the religious system and order, even the performance-reward
expectation of his disciples (Matt. 19:27).
In terms of life-setting and audience, the parable is clearly oriented towards the point of
tension, voiced by the grumblers, echoed by Jesus' critics, even Jesus' disciples. The ones with
the problem are those who are indignant and who protest the generosity of the householder.
"Jesus was minded to show them how unjustified, hateful, loveless, and unmerciful was their
criticism. Such, said he, is God's goodness, and since God is so good, so am I. He vindicates the
gospel against its critics . . .over and over again we hear the charge brought against Jesus that he
is a companion of the despised and outcast, and are told of men to whom the gospel is an
offense."18
Careful accounting of God's grace, tabulated with the "spread-sheets" of others, does not
belong to the human domain; Jesus leads his people to reckon with a person's need to appropriate
divine grace, without looking into another's "ledger." He initiates a new way of thinking about
God and his freedom to order life in his sovereign and graceful way. The parable concerns God
and his free grace. It should, therefore, effect respect and appreciation for his freedom to be
gracious, to people without grumbling over the grace that is given to others.
Jesus makes a tremendous claim. The free and gracious activity of the employer is
exemplified in Jesus. His action, reflected in the vineyard owner is comparable to God's. The
story-parable expresses the freedom of God to be gracious and good (a0gaqo/v). God's grace and
goodness shatters all religious barriers that people erect before God and others. Jesus' people
depend upon their acceptance of God's gracious dealings and upon their willingness to allow
their narrow calculations to be shattered by his grace. Thus, the parable proclaims the freedom
of God in the person of Jesus to express his unmerited favor, generosity and love.
17 Due to the interruption of the saying between the thematic concerns of ch. 19 and ch. 20, and the
difficulty of relating the saying to the parable, Crossan assumes the saying is a Matthean addition to the
parable. John Dominic Crossan, In Parables (San Francisco: Harper Brothers, 1972), 112.
18 Jeremias, 38.
 13

2. Grace summons the "righteous" to attitudes of joy and acceptance.

The trilogy of parables in Lk. 15 is told to the "righteous," who critique Jesus' table-
fellowship with the publicly acknowledged sinners. Not only do the three parables justify
Jesus' involvement with "sinners," but the parables also constitute a genuine invitation to
the critics to share in the joy of the sheep that is found, the coin that is found and the son
who has been found. At the end of the third parable, the father is still outside with the
older brother, summoning him to "come out from the cold" and to enjoy the celebratory
feast; however, the parable itself does not contain the final response of the older brother.
Similarly, the Parable of the Two Debtors in Lk. 7:40-47 is an invitation to repentance
that means joy. Surely Jesus summons Simon and his dinner guests to adopt his open
invitation; the paragraph is open-ended in that we do not learn how Simon or his guests
finally responded to Jesus' words. Repentance means giving up a position of servitude in
relationship with God and assuming an attitude of rejoicing, non-judgment and
celebration of life. God is not interested in a relationship with people of servitude and
bondage, but family relationship, celebration, joy and acceptance. Repentance means
desisting from judgment and critique; the path to repentance is different from the path of
the "sinner"; it means leaving behind the relative "righteousness" that has been gained.
As such, this type of repentance is more difficult since there is more to leave behind.
Jesus issues the invitation to joy and celebration.

3. Grace summons the "righteous" to re-evaluate "scorekeeping."

Jesus also beckons the "righteous" to re-evaluate their "score-keeping," their motives
and the real rewards that are earned and not earned. In Matt. 6, Jesus uses four particular
examples of religious "score-keeping" or public piety (dikaiosu/nh Matt. 6:1). We find a
relationship of general to the particular with respect to four specific religious practices in
several paragraphs:
q Generalization—"practicing piety" (6:1)
q Particular—"giving alms" (6:2-4)
q Particular—"prayer" (6:5-6)
q Particular—"praying profusely" (6:7-15)
q Particular—"fasting" (6:16-18)
The general expression, "practicing piety" is followed by several particular examples that
illustrate the general principle. In each instance, Jesus envisions a religious observance,
which is intended to be noticed by others, informs his listeners that there will be no future
reward with God, and points them to the private expressions of piety, which will be
rewarded by God. For persons who keep score of their own religious performance, Jesus
says they have their reward in full. The verb "have" in Matt. 6:5, is a0pe/xw, and signifies a
receipt that one has received what he was after, i.e., fully paid. Thus, the verb is used to
inform the "righteous" who keep score, who seek elevated religious status through their
pious activity, that they have received their reward in full. There is no more to come.
Only those who did these things in secret without thought of human reward and
recognition—only these persons would receive reward and recognition by God. In the
giving of money, the persons were to give in secret, without a left hand knowing what the
right hand is doing (6:3). The term "in secret" means that the doer gives without self-
 14

consciousness. Those who find acceptance with God in the final judgment will be
surprised at their reward; they will express surprise as did the sheep in the Parable of the
Sheep and Goats, "Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give
you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing
clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?"
(Matt. 25:37-39). The sheep are utterly surprised and do not remember their acts of
religious piety.
Our culture is infused with ideas of performance and reward that have been so
deeply ingrained in us from childhood on:
The early bird gets the worm. (early performance)
No pain no gain. (disciplined performance)
Demand your rights. (justified reward based on performance)
There is no such thing as a free lunch. (reward comes because of performance)
I work for what I earn. (wages are a result of performance)
You get what you pay for. (purchases—rewards are based on paying-performance)
People get what they deserve—nothing more nothing less.19 (performance—reward)
And yet, this type of work-ethic creeps like a vicious cancer into organized religious life,
then and now. If we "have the ears to hear," we soon discover in our religious life, that we
do not get what we have deserved. "I deserved punishment and got forgiveness. I deserved
wrath and got love. I deserved debtor's prison and got instead a clean credit history. I
deserved stern lectures and crawl-on-your-knees repentance. I got a banquet—spread for
me."20

4. Grace offers a continued genuine invitation with a corresponding threat.

Even though Jesus defends his table-fellowship and acceptance with society's low-
lifes, he nonetheless extends a genuine invitation to the "righteous." It is important to
note that the Parable of the Searching Father concludes with the father inviting the older
son into the celebration of the return of the younger son. He also searches for the
"righteous" son; he is outside with the older brother, pleading with him to enter the
festive celebration. The celebration is incomplete without the presence of the older
brother. Jesus' offer of salvation to the "righteous" is genuine and it reaches out to them
as well as the publicly acknowledged sinners. At the same time, the path to salvation is
still marked by repentance, although in a different form than the "sinners." Repentance
for the "righteous" means an abandonment of religious pride, a performance-reward
system and a sideward look at others. The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax-Collector
(Lk. 18:9-14) is introduced by the explanation for why Jesus spoke the parable. He seeks
to undercut "those who trusted in themselves and looked upon others with contempt" (Lk.
18:9); he rejects both self-trust and the sideward glance at others.
If the invitation to the "righteous" is not received, then Jesus turns to others who will
accept the invitation. Many of Jesus' sayings and parables affirm God's freedom to invite
others; God is not beholden or dependent upon Israel and its leaders. Jesus says, "Many
will come east and west and sit at table with Abraham . . . in the Kingdom of Heaven"
(Matt. 8:11). The invitation of others is well expressed in the Parable of the Wicked
19 Philip Yancey, What's So Amazing About Grace, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1997),
64.
20 Yancey, 64.
 15

Tenants and the Parable of the Great Banquet (Lk. 14:16-24) or Parable of the Marriage
Feast (Matt. 21:33-46). While Luke's Gospel contains a greater posture of openness to
the "righteous," Matthew's Gospel reflects a polemical posture of warning and judgment
for failing to appropriately respond to the gracious invitation. Matthew contains the
Parable of the Two Sons (Matt. 21:28-32), which is clearly polemical, "Truly I say to
you, the tax-collectors and prostitutes enter the Kingdom of God before you," which
conveys the exclusive sense, "the tax-collectors and prostitutes enter the Kingdom of
God, but not you." The "righteous" have missed their chance; they are also like the
guests to the wedding banquet who have murdered the messengers who came with the
invitation, or murdered the vineyard owner's son (Mk. 21:33-46).

Implications

Many people read the Bible as if it were simply a moral code, clothed with sacred
authority, and in large part, an inspired book containing prohibitions and instructions that
would lead us to a utopian-like existence if they are strictly followed. Consequently,
religious people try to follow the biblical principles and codes, largely negative in
character, and find nothing but guilt and despair or pride in their own relative
"righteousness." Often the Bible is used to reinforce the ideas of the taboo and moralism.
Tournier says, "Taboo is a magical prohibition: 'This is unclean, do not touch; this is
forbidden, do not do it.' Taboos are prohibitions loaded with menacing dread. Moralism
follows—the setting up of a rigorous code of prohibitions, a moral code . . . Religion is
what you must do."21 Thus, the rich young ruler wonders what he must do to inherit
eternal life (Mk. 10:17-22). Many of Jesus' pointed words, directed to the Pharisees deal
with their external practicing of the moral code, which is based on the taboo. When
people practice narrow moralism, they so easily fall into the trap of self-satisfaction with
their relative righteousness, repress their conscience or they fall into the pit of despair
over their complete inability to achieve the moralistic standard. Thus, Jesus says, his
critics "strain out a gnat and swallow a camel," or tithe tiny garden spices and neglect the
weightier matters—justice, mercy and faithfulness (Matt. 23:23).
The people whom Jesus welcomes with acceptance and affirmation are not the
virtuous but the despised, not the important but the insignificant, not the "whole" but the
"fragmented" and "broken," not the healthy but the sick, not those of social or religious
position but the marginalized, those who are on the fringes.
The Church proclaims the grace of God and yet, moralism finds its insidious path
into the life of the Church and Christian experience. Moralism is a negation of the grace
of God. Down through the years of Church history, we read of various revivals and
renewals that have occurred. New and fresh religious movements arise and religious
orders are established (Saint Augustine, Saint Francis of Assisi, Saint Benedict, the
Reformers, the Wesleys, etc.). The Spirit of God infuses people with new life and
transformation. God's love is rediscovered anew and afresh and all pettiness is pushed
aside. People experience the unbelievable grace of God; people are called to ministry
and there is a freshness and vibrancy of faith. People feel welcomed and not judged; they
experience the joy and liberty of being in Christ, they are transformed and practice
genuine piety and Christian love.22
21 Tournier, 119.
22 Yancey, 64
 16

But with each successive revival, moralism makes its entrance and slowly creeps
into the Christian life and Christian community. And moralism is the very negation of
the basic principle and dynamic of grace. Rules emerge—written and unwritten codes of
conduct begin to surface, prohibitions multiply. And with the entrance of moralism
judgment appears. People who are unable to subscribe to certain standards feel alienated
and outside of the religious loop. And then, hypocrisy begins to make its entrance into
personal and community life. Hypocrisy rears its ugly head when people try to live up to
this moralistic standard and cannot succeed. Thus, people begin to appear to be better
than they are and begin to hide their faults and sins instead of confessing them. People
pretend to be more pious than they are; this was the very sin of Ananias and Sapphira
(Acts 5:1-11). With the entrance of moralism, the Spirit of God is likewise stifled. And
in an effort to cling to some form of security, people cling all the more to certain
principles and standards; often they become obsessed with their particular codes by
which they themselves cannot live. Correspondingly, what had been a joyous encounter
with God becomes constraint and legalism, obligation, fear of criticism and a picture of
God as a severe judge, who is waiting for the moment to punish the one who breaks the
moralistic code.
Jesus welcomes the sinners with open arms—those who do not deny their guilt,
but those who confess it and are so aware of their brokenness and impotence. His grace
is unconditional; his forgiveness is limitless. The OT prophets had denounced the sins of
the virtuous people and the silliness of ritual as a means of insuring a clear conscience.
"And Jesus Christ gives the final blow, by convicting of guilt the moral and scrupulous
people, by proclaiming that all people are equally sinful despite all their efforts, so that
not by showing off their vaunted impeccability, but by confessing their guilt, by
repentance, will they find the grace which erases it."23
Jesus embodies, models and teaches a grace-filled lifestyle in which he reaches out to
both the "sinners" and the "righteous." In so doing, he anticipates a grace-filled response from
all to his inclusive message of grace. In a paragraph from the Sermon on the Mount\Plain (Matt.
5:43-48; Lk. 6:27-36), Jesus underscores the truth that God is impartial in his dealings with all of
humanity, "he is graceful (xrhsto/v) to both the ungrace-full (a0xa/ristou/v) and to the evil (ponhrou/v)"
(Lk. 6:35). Matthew's version says that God's gracious activity is impartial and goes out to both
the evil and the good, "he causes the sun to shine upon the evil and the good (e0pi\ ponhrou\v kai\
a0gaqou\v), and he sends rain upon the righteous and the unrighteous (e0pi\ dikai/ouv kai\ a0di/kaiouv)"
(Matt. 5:45) Thus, the people of God are to mirror God's gracious impartiality, "Be merciful as
your heavenly father is merciful" (Lk. 6:36).24 The message of grace is comforting for some and
alarming for others. Some approach Jesus with fear and reservation, believing that God could
not love them because of who they have been or what they have done. Other people approach
Jesus with self-confidence and pride and trust in their relative "righteousness." Jesus meets both
groups where they are in their various "life-stations"; his embodied message is both an incredible
comfort and a challenging affront. But Jesus is very clear in his teaching to both groups; the
lesson needs to be received and appropriated by both groups, Appreciate the freedom of God to
be gracious.
23Tournier, 122.
24Matthew's expression, "Be perfect as your heavenly father is perfect" uses the adjective, "perfect" (te/leiov
Matt. 5:48), which is to be similarly understood as "complete/whole" with respect to God's impartial nature
and impartial dealings with humanity, for the righteous and the good.
17
 The Spirit-Filled Servant's Agenda of "Becoming the Neighbor"

The Agenda
Jesus' inaugural sermon in his hometown sets the agenda for his ministry, which builds
upon Isaiah's Servant Song (Isa. 61:1-2a). When he affirms his identity as the Spirit-filled
Servant, he announces his broad concern for social justice through the plight of numerous
victims.
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to bring good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives
and recovery of sight to the blind,
to let the oppressed go free,
to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor (Lk. 4:18-19).
Jesus then preaches a one-sentence sermon, "Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your
hearing" (Lk. 4:21). Jesus' message invites people to participate in the "good news" as it bears
upon the weak and marginalized.
Here is my servant, whom I have chosen,
The one I love, in whom I delight.
I will put my Spirit on him,
And he will proclaim justice to the nations.
He will not quarrel or cry out:
No one will hear his voice in the streets.
A bruised reed he will not break,
And a smoldering wick he will not snuff out,
Till he leads justice to victory.
In his name the nations will put their hope (Isa:42-1-4; Matt. 12:18-21).
Another Servant-Song affirms Jesus' empowerment, which explains the silence Jesus
imposes on individuals whom he heals (Matt. 12:16). The quiet and unobtrusive nature of Jesus'
ministry fulfills the expectation of the Spirit-filled Servant. The Servant does not follow the
custom of crying aloud in public and thereby imposing upon his hearers with his message.1 Nor
will the Servant use violence and harshly treat the weak, bruised and dimly burning.2 Instead,
the Spirit-filled Servant will express God's own compassion for the poor, oppressed, naked,
hungry, blind and imprisoned (blind—Isa. 42:7; weary—Isa. 50:4; prisoners in a dungeon with
no hope of freedom—Isa. 42:7), and will be successful in His mission of justice (42:4).
The unique feature is the quiet, non-aggressive and compassionate manner in which
Jesus, the Spirit-filled Servant goes about his task of restoration. The world-system often reflects
the "law of the jungle," wherein violence and aggression "pay off" and conquerors proclaim
victory over the weak, bruised, helpless, vulnerable and alienated; "to be weak and helpless was
to be destined for destruction."3 Jesus demonstrates compassion for the bruised and the ones
who are like smoldering wicks; compassion counters the violence, which the powerful express at
the expense of the weak. Needy persons follow Jesus in his withdrawal while the powerful and
1 Claus Westermann, The Promises to the Fathers, (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1980), 96.
2 In the original setting, the prophet regards Israel in the weakened condition which needs to be enlivened, not
crushed or snuffed out. The Servant Songs exhibit a creative ebb and flow between the individual and corporate
Servant.
3 James D. Smart, History and Theology in Second Isaiah, (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1965), p. 84.
aggressive authorities remain in the synagogue and plot his murder on the hallowed Sabbath, a
day set aside for life and doing good (Matt. 12:12)—not the violent taking of life. Jesus'
teaching on social justice deals with personal transformation as well as corporate and structural
good and evil. Individual moral agents are to be transformed through their faith-association with
the Spirit-Filled Jesus, which then clears the path for social change and transformation.
The new age of salvation is present in Jesus, who is concerned for the whole of life in its
physical, mental, emotional, spiritual, relational, national and international dimensions. Jesus is
not merely interested in one part of the human person, i.e., the soul, but is concerned for the
well-being (shalom) of people in all of their concerns. Jesus adopts the holistic Hebrew view
that treats the human person as a whole, looked at from different aspects—not parts. Psa. 146
links opening of the eyes (v. 8) with justice for the oppressed (v. 7), protection for the strangers
(v. 9), support for the fatherless and the widow (v. 9) and food for the hungry (7). Later, when
John sends messengers to ask if Jesus is the Coming One (Lk. 7:20), Jesus responds with a
narrative that occurs before the messengers' eyes—healings, exorcisms, people raised from the
dead, climaxed with the statement that the "poor are having good news preached to them" (Lk.
7:21-22). Jesus makes salvation real to the poor and despised, mourners and those who are
physically, socially, and religiously disadvantaged. Thereby, Jesus summarizes both his verbal
proclamation and his messianic activity as a fulfillment of his stated platform as the Spirit-filled
Servant. He intends that his concerns become the concerns of his people.
Unfolded in story and parable, Jesus states that God's mercy and justice for the
marginalized is for all; however God's offer is made real through the human response to God and
to others. God is personal and does not order the human response by divine fiat; a gracious
invitation can be turned down (Lk. 14:18-20). God's reign of justice breathes hope into lives that
are oppressed, fractured and alienated. Repentance not only means turning to God but
conversion towards the poor (Baptist's message in Lk. 3:11).
Other texts echo Jesus' alignment with the poor. Mary's Magnificat (Lk. 1:46-55) affirms
God's vested interest in the poor and lowly (Lk. 1:48, 51-53). Her song reflects a reversal of
socio-economic conditions when she recalls Hannah's Song (I Sam. 2:4-5). West suggests, "The
Magnificat could be suggesting a reversal of conditions for our leaders who proudly create
policies rewarding the rich and powerful with ever-increasing benefits so they can acquire more
wealth and power, while endlessly study, negatively labeling, and disciplining the morality of
those struggling with the least resources and under the most desperate of conditions."4

Becoming the Neighbor

Is there a parable in Luke's Gospel that is more focused on Jesus' mission on earth than
the Parable of the Good Samaritan in Lk. 10:25-37)? His mission emerges originally in a crisp
form through his inaugural sermon in the Nazareth synagogue that noted the Spirit's anointing of
Jesus for the cause of social justice. Of the four unfortunate groups of sufferers to whom Jesus is
sent (Lk. 4:18-19), the fourth class (poor) is paramount. They are "the broken victims" (RNEB),
vividly depicted in the wounded victim on the Jericho road whose wounds the Samaritan stranger
cleansed and bound up (10:34).
The Parable of the Good Samaritan is one of the most famous story-parables in the Bible;
the influence of its chief character is reflected in the names of countless hospitals and relief
agencies throughout the world. Over the years a connection has been made between "good" and
"Samaritan," a quantum leap from the apartheid society of the first century.
The lawyer asks the question, "Who is my neighbor?" (Lk. 10:29) Implicitly, the
4 Traci West, Disruptive Christian Ethics, (Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 2006), 107.
question about the neighbor's identity also implies a double-standard of treatment or rules that
apply to one's own group while a different set of rules is applied to outside groups. The parable
is intended to transform narrow presuppositions and categories and translate Christian thought
into Christian compassion and activity. Jesus' followers are not meant to ask about identity but
to see and respond to human need with mercy.
But what is the essence of true discipleship? It consists, says the evangelist, in love for
the neighbor by becoming the neighbor (10:25-37), utter dependence on the words of Jesus
(10:38-42), and persistent intercessory prayer (11:1-13). In brief, the successive paragraphs
affirm that the disciple is one who shows compassion and care for the "broken," yet one who
always needs to be fortified by the word of Jesus and prayer.
The parable is essentially Jesus' answer to the insistent question of the lawyer, "Who is
my neighbor?" Yet, as one expositor has noted, since the parable portrays an example that is to
be followed (10:37), "it is legitimate exegesis to say that Jesus was the supreme example of the
virtue inculcated."5 At the same time, the word "example" claims that the action that is shown
by the Good Samaritan reveals the beating heart of discipleship of sterling caliber. It is a
discipleship that cuts through the barrier of apartheid and demonstrates how compassion—not in
word but in deed (I Jn. 3:18)—disregards matters of personal danger and convenience in order to
care for a suffering stranger.
The paragraph (Lk. 10:25-37), which contains the Parable of the Good Samaritan reveals
the fundamental contrast between the question, "Who is my neighbor" (v. 29) and the counter-
question, "Who proved to be the neighbor?" (v. 36). There is a difference between the verb to be
and the verb to become. Jesus directs his hearer away from identifying the neighbor to becoming
the giver of mercy. The lawyer wishes to exclude others by his question, Jesus' response is all-
inclusive, to anyone who is in need. The spokesman is a lawyer who asks the pointed question
about eternal life (Lk. 10:25). The purpose of the question is a test or trap;6 the lawyer
challenges Jesus and his qualifications to thereby entrap him, since he wishes to justify himself
(v. 29). The lawyer's question reveals the notion that eternal life is a reward for works or merit.
Jesus refers the questioning lawyer back to the Law, of which he is the expositor. Jesus will not
be caught in the carefully prepared net. If Jesus says that eternal life is a gift which is
independent of the Torah then he will be easily dismissed by the religious hierarchy as a heretic.
Jesus instead chooses to lead the discussion to the major content and purpose of the Torah.
Initially, he does not offer his own view but solicits the lawyer's opinion. The lawyer is not
directed to the many commands and prohibitions (613), but to the fundamental goal of human
life. Through his question, "How do you read it?," Jesus intimates that he was asking about a
question that he should have known long ago.
The lawyer gives an answer which Jesus himself gives in Mk. 12:28-31. The answer
combines two OT texts:
Deut. 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD;
5 and you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and
with all your might.
Lev. 19:18 You shall not take vengeance or bear any grudge against the sons of your
own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD.
The answer parallels the teaching of the Rabbi Hillel, "What is hateful to you, do not do to
another" (Shabbat 31a). Similarly, Rabbi Akiba argued that Lev. 19:18 was the principle rule for
5A. B. Bruce, The Parabolic Teaching of Christ, (Minneapolis: Klock & Lock Publishers, 1980 repr.), 344.
6The Greek verb peirazō is capable of both a positive sense of to test what is in a person or a negative and hostile
sense of tempt, try, challenge, put to the test.
conduct (Talkut I. 174a). Jesus wholeheartedly affirms the rightness of the Lawyer's response
through a rabbinic phrase, you have judged rightly. Jesus supports the lawyer's answer and says
that it only remains to translate correct theology into practice in order to experience the life of
the coming age. "The reply of Jesus is not so much praise for the questioner as acknowledgment
that he has hit upon Jesus' view."7 That is to say, eternal life comes in the practice of life.
The lawyer requires further definition of the neighbor so that he would be assured of his
own "love of his neighbor"; thus, possessing eternal life (v. 29). He poses problems and raises
questions hoping to find a reprieve from action through his religious questions. He wants Jesus
to discuss the meaning and nature of the term neighbor. Once the term is defined, then one can
both include some and exclude others. According to the one strand of Jewish tradition, the term,
neighbor applied to every Jewish fellow-countryman, but did not extend to a non-Israelite.8 The
text of Lev. 19:17-18 indicates that neighbor means fellow-Israelite, "sons of your people":
Implicit in the question about the identity of the neighbor is the pragmatic concern,
"What is demanded of me by way of response?" The lawyer wishes to narrow the circle that
encompasses neighbors so that less will be demanded of him. The subtle and surprising message
that emerges from the parable does not outline the parameters for the question. The question is
unanswerable in that love does not begin by defining groups and objects, but discovers them.
The parable begins with an extreme life and death crisis, with a victim, stripped, robbed,
beaten and left half-dead on a lonely, rocky and dangerous road covering seventeen miles, from
Jerusalem to Jericho. Nothing except time stood between the victim of our parable and certain
death.
In the story, priest and Levite each rides by in turn, sees the prostrate victim and steers
his mount to the other side of the road once the half-dead-dead victim is seen. The religious
leaders do not see with compassionate vision. Thielicke says, "None of us really wants to see.
For to look at our neighbor's misery is the first step in brotherly love. Love always seizes the
eyes first and then the hand. If I close my eyes, my hands too remain unemployed. And finally
my conscience too falls asleep, for this disquieting neighbor has disappeared from my sight."9
Are they on their way home after serving in the Temple or are they afraid of incurring a ritual
defilement by touching a corpse? Was there any visceral response (compassion) that they felt?10
The lawyer must have been surprised even shocked as Jesus introduced the Samaritan
traveler—a hated half-breed who is responsive to suffering. A laymen in contrast to the religious
clerics perhaps, but not a heretical Samaritan. The Good Samaritan would have been "as
palatable as 'the good terrorist' or the "good crack-dealer."11 How can the Samaritan be a
neighbor? Jews publicly cursed the Samaritans in the synagogues, prayed to God that they
would have no share in eternal life, and refused to accept their services or their witness in a court
of law. But this Samaritan traveler, the victim of apartheid, does not ask the "neighbor-question"
but simply responds to human need and thereby becomes the neighbor.
The Samaritan, feeling compassion approaches the victim. The verb "I have compassion"
(splanchnizomai) has at its root the word, inward parts, inward seat of feeling, and is used for the
7 Eta Linnemann, Parables of Jesus, (Great Britain: Hollen Street Press Ltd.), 57.
8 Greeven, "plesion," Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. VI, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1971), 315.
9 Helmut Thielicke, Theological Ethics Foundations, Vol. 1 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966), 166.
10 The priest was forbidden to touch a corpse except for blood relatives: Lev. 21:1

1 And the LORD said to Moses, "Speak to the priests, the sons of Aaron, and say to them that none of them
shall defile himself for the dead among his people." The written and oral law both note that contact with a corpse
listed contact with a corpse at the top of the defilement list.
11 William C. Spohn, Go and Do Likewise, (New York: Continuum, 1999), 91.
depth of one's entire emotional life.12 Compassion is that force which moves him not only to see
the condition of the victim, but immediately to seek to alleviate his condition.13 Compassion is
then expressed by simple acts of first-aid: caring for the wounds (wine and oil), and for the
victim himself as they travel to the inn. The Samaritan traveler assumes fiscal responsibility for
the care that the inn-keeper will provide until the victim is completely healed. He does what is
needed for life, assuming a subservient position as a walker with respect to the half-dead
traveler, who is a rider. No financial burden is imposed upon the innkeeper. He will not be "out-
of-pocket" for helping the wounded man. If the tab is higher, the Samaritan will return and pay
the balance. Very simply, he does what is needed for the wounded man. His will to see is
translated into action; "he embodies the prophetic call to true religion."14 He demonstrates an
unexpected love to the one in need—the kind of love that God offers through Christ in the
Gospel.
According to the Law (Lev. 19:18), the neighbor is a person to be loved as one's very
self. Jesus takes the Levitical law a giant step forward. According to Jesus, "I do not define the
neighbor simply as a fellow human being out there somewhere—belonging to one race or
another, one culture or another—whom I am to love. No, I myself am the neighbor as I become
the neighbor to those in need, and give them help wherever and whoever they may be." Thus, it
is wrong to construe Lev. 19:18 in terms of a neighbor who needs definition. Rather, the
neighbor shows himself through love. The undefined object of love is inverted to become the
subject of loving. The answer to the question is clear; the neighbor (v. 29) is defined as the one
who proved to be neighbor (10:36) and the one who showed mercy on him (v. 37). The lawyer
cannot bring himself to mention the word Samaritan but distances himself by avoiding the term.
The lawyers' answer is met by the pointed application, Go, and do likewise. That is the
final answer to the lawyer's original question (v. 25). The command is not fulfilled by a careful
and legal definition of the neighbor or even in the acknowledgment of the neighbor, but in an act
of compassion. When Jesus tells the Lawyer, "Go and do likewise" (Lk. 10:37), he intends that
the man use his imagination in analogical fashion to his own sphere of influence.15 Just as Jesus
applies the message (A) to his world (B), so his followers (A') must apply the message to their
sphere (B'), including the audience in the 21st Century.
The command directly relates to the Golden Rule (Matt. 7:12). It is the willingness to see
and the readiness to respond to the one in need. Jesus calls his Jesus-people to move beyond the
narrow confines of their social and religious boundaries; it forces them to think in broader
categories than the "insider" and "outsider." The lawyer, along with the people of God are to be
profoundly affected by the needy, feel compassion for the broken and hurting, feel their pain and
then to translate that passion into positive action for the well being of victims of social injustice.
Jesus speaks of a transformation of compassionate vision that enables people to respond in love
to communities and institutions. Such "perception" is the ability to notice the morally relevant
features of a situation and the readiness to respond appropriately." The parable speaks to the
evangelical, Pentecostal, and charismatic communities that are prone to "demonize" the world in
whole or in part, and to treat it as an enemy instead of an object of God's supreme love.
12 Helmut Köster, "splanchnizomai" TDNT, vol. VII, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans,1980), 553.
13 In Luke's Gospel, "compassion" (splavgcna) is highlighted: Jesus sees and has compassion on the woman
who buries her son (7:13); the searching father who has compassion on the lost son (15:20); compassion of God with
the coming of Jesus (1:76-78). See what was observed in the Parable of the Prodigal Son account. The verb occurs
11 (or 12) times in the NT. All but 3 of the occurrences refer to Jesus. As for the three, they are in parables (Lk.
10:33; 15:20; Matt. 18:27) and do we not see divine compassion behind its use in each of the parables?
14 John D. Donahue, The Gospel in Parable, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988), 133.
15 Spohn, 52.
Implications
Evangelical, Pentecostal, and charismatic communities of faith need to understand the
identity and incarnate the mission of the Spirit-filled Servant, who is profoundly concerned with
how people live in social relationships. Jesus' anointing with the Holy Spirit directs his mission
towards justice, i.e., taking the side of the weak, poor, oppressed, and broken victims. The Spirit
points Jesus towards alignment with the prophetic call to justice (sedeqah). He advocates no
mystical ecstasy or a cloistered community, which only emphasizes charismatic experience and
teaching concerning the gifts of the Spirit to the exclusion of social concern. Through narrative
and teaching, he argues that compassion is not to be "doled out" by determining what persons are
suitable objects or recipients of love. Love discovers those in need and moves to meet those
needs. The Parable of the "Good" Samaritan affirms the need of genuine compassion and
benevolent action towards those in need. It summons the Spirit-filled communities to respond
with social justice by becoming the neighbor. It concludes with the words, "Go and do the same
thing" (Lk. 10:37). In so doing, communities become aware of the wonderful truth that in the
person of the Spirit-filled Jesus, this very God became the neighbor to a broken and hostile
humanity (Rom. 5:8), at the cost of all that God possessed. The message requires the will to see,
to sense the heartache and injustice of various victims, and to embody the Spirit's concern for
restoration and reconciliation. Having become the object of the supreme love of God, the
Church has been given the person and dynamic of the Holy Spirit to bring life, healing, justice,
and a new lease on life.
The parable intends to remove Christian communities from narrow vision and personal
security to "see" the inclusive love of God for all. "Jesus loves us and therefore he finds us. And
therefore, he also knows us. He knows better than we know ourselves and still he does not drop
us, still he remains our friend, the nearest friend."16 In this certainty, we find the initiative to
make others the objects of our concern by becoming the neighbor. We express our thanksgiving
by loving others, the proper objects of our concern, which heals us from our own self-centered
living.

16 Thielicke, 169.
 Thoughts on Hebrews

The Setting
The Book of Hebrews is a magnificent work that draws upon many philosophical and
religious symbols of the 1st Century. And it's a book that is often neglected in favor of Paul or
the Gospel of John. It is not really a letter since there are no addresses, and the personal
elements only come much later in Cha. 13—almost as an afterthought. We fine one reference in
cha. 13:18, "Pray for us. We are sure that we have a clear conscience and desire to live
honorably in every way." Timothy is mentioned in 13:23 with mention of his release from
prison. As a whole, the book may be regarded as a written sermon—it is called "a word of
exhortation" (logos parakleisews 13:22). In terms of an author, any number of people have been
suggested, but the opinions can only be very subjective. As a book, it needs to be read as a
whole, to sense the broad movement of thought.
Some things are stated about the audience. The readership has experienced some
suffering for its commitment to the Messiah (10:32-35; 12:3-13) and can expect some more. The
community has not yet suffered unto death (12:4), but no doubt experience public abuse,
shameful treatment, and suffering. The writer makes the remark that the readers "joyfully
accepted the plundering of their property, since they knew that they had a better possession and
an abiding one (10:34). Corresponding to some physical loss, it appears that they have lost with
respect to their emotional life, despair, "drooping hands and weak knees" (12:12), or the
temptation to turn away from their basic commitment (12:16-17). For some, there is the dullness
of hearing (5:11) as well as the failure of courage and faith.
1) Dualism (two-fold). We find in Hebrews both a spatial dualism and an
eschatological dualism. With regard to the spatial dualism, we do find in Hebrews a
similarity with Philos' thought of two worlds: the world above and the world below. And
much of the argument is built off the rhetorical form, "lesser to the greater," or "if this is so
with y, then how much more does it hold true for z (Latin, a minore ad maius; Heb. Qal we
chomer, light and heavy). The Greek view of reality is expressed in cosmological dualism.
There is a dividing line between the phenomenal world—that we see, feel, taste, and
touch.—this is the level of materiality, characterized by change, corruption, partial,
incomplete, and transient. Corresponding to the phenomenal world is a noumenal (ideas)
world—pure forms or ideas. Thus, for example, we see a dog, a furry creature that chases
cats and is companion or watchdog for many people. This is the material perception.
However, the idea of the dog or pure form of a dog is more real than the phenomenal world.
From the Greek perspective, the noumenal world (world of ideas) is far more important
than the phenomenal world and is the cause of the material world. This world in which we
live and move is derivative from the world of ideas. And so, the material world has
antitypes, while the physical world only has "types" or "shadows."

It is especially clear in chapters 8-10 in the discussion of the priestly institution of

the Old Testament. The Israelite priests offered gifts and sacrifices in an earthly sanctuary,
but these did not embody heavenly realities: Priesthood and Tabernacle. 8:5 -"who serve as
a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses was warned by God when he was
about to erect the tabernacle; for, See, He says, that you make all things according to the
pattern which was shown you on the mountain". The Old Testament tabernacle was made
in accordance with the pattern of the "real" in heaven. The earthly copies were purified
with animal sacrifices, while the heavenly were purified with better sacrifices:
9:23 -"Therefore, it was necessary for the copies of the things in heaven to be
cleansed with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than
these".
After Christ's ascension, He entered into the real heavenly sanctuary:
9:24 -"For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true
one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us.
The institution of the Law provided only a shadow of the good things to come, but not the
true form of the heavenly realities:
10: 1 -"For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the
very form of things, can never be the same sacrifices year by year; which continually
makes perfect those who draw near".
Faith then becomes the means by which the believer lays hold of this invisible world of
heavenly realities.
Eschatological Dualism. The writer advances beyond a cosmological dualism to an
eschatological dualism in that there is a real awareness of the history of the people of
God—they have lived in this age and will continue to live in the age to come. In the first
couple of verses in chapter 1, the writer notes of the different ways in which God has
spoken in the past, but now, in these last days, God has spoken in an absolute and definitive
way. By the revelation in Jesus, the people of God have entered the last days. In addition to
this spatial dualism, we can also find an eschatological dualism, including this the age to
come. In 2:5 the real object of all of God's dealings with humanity is the world, the age to
come. "For He did not subject to angels the world to come, concerning which we are
speaking". This future world will not be subject to angels, but to Christ and who has all
things in subjection under His feet (2:8). And yet He is waiting until all His enemies are
made the footstool of his feet (1:11; 10:13) This will occur at the Day, the Day of the Lord:
10: 25 -"encouraging one another all the more as you see the day drawing near".
Christ will appear a second time, not to deal with sin, but to save those who are
eagerly awaiting Him (9:28). Christians will receive the promised salvation only at
the Parousia of Christ:
10:36-37 -"For you have need of endurance so that when you have done the will of
God you may receive what was promised. For yet in a very little while, He who is
coming will come, and will not delay".
This gives us a clue to understanding the "rest" that yet remains for the people of God (4:9 -
"There remains therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God"), the promised eternal
inheritance (9:15), the promised homeland (11:14) or better country (11:16) which were
promised to the Old Testament saints. The longed for homeland (11:16) and the heavenly
Jerusalem (12:22) are eschatological -the final goal of God's community. The unshakable
kingdom (12:28) and the city to come (13:14) look ahead to the future consummation. This
age will end with a cosmic catastrophe by which the present world order will be shaken
and the true eternal kingdom of God will become invisible:
1:11-12 -"They will perish, but thou remainest; and they all will become old as a
garment, and as a mantle thou wilt roll them up; as a garment they will also be
 changed. But Thou art the same and Thy years will not comee to an end".
12:26 -"And His voice shook the earth then, but now He has promised, saying, Yet
once more I will shake not only the earth, but also the heaven".
The key link between those two ages is the Christ-event, which was a once-for-all event of
eternal significance, for this age and the age to corne.
7:27"Christ does not need daily, like high priests to offer up sacrifices, first for his
own sins, then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He
offered up Himself"
9:12 "And not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He
entered the Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption"
10: 10 -"By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of
Jesus Christ, once for all".
The eschatological tension of the two ages is also found in 9:26 -Christ has come at the end
of the ages; 1:2 -"these last days". We find this tension of the "already, but not yet" in the
theme of "rest". "So then there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God" (4:9). The
writer is looking to the eschatological consummation. It is a rest that believers are to
"strive" to enter. And yet, at the same time believers already enter God's rest: "For we who
have believed enter that rest, just as he said... " (4:3). The rest which is God's is both
present and future. People enter it now but must strive
to enter it.
In 10:1 we see the same tension: "For since the law has but a shadow of the good
things to come instead of the true form of these realities... ". The Old Testament provided
only a shadow of these realities. The New Testament provides the "true/real" form (eikon).
Yet the realities still lie in the future. The image (eikon) is more than a shadow, an exact
replica, but its manifestation awaits the final consummation.

2) A High Christology. Hebrews has an explicitly high Christology. The preexistence

of Christ is mentioned at the very beginning. It was through Christ that God created the
world (1:2). Christ by the word of his power upholds the universe (1:3). He reflects the
glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature (1:3). There is no discussion of the
incarnation but is clearly in the writer's mind when he speaks of Christ coming into the
world (10:5; 2:9).
Hebrews' favorite designation for Christ is "Son of God" (1:2). This representation of
Christ's humanity in chapters 2, 4, 5, has a very clear purpose--that of encouraging
Christians to recognize Jesus' role as an understanding and sympathetic mediator--One
who has shared life in every way with them, who is able to effectively communicate the
thought and intents of His brethren.
2:14—children share in flesh and blood—he partook of the same
2:17-18—made like his brethren in all respects that he might be a merciful high
priest
4:15—a merciful high priest who can sympathize with our weaknesses—but
without sin
5:7-8—days of his flesh, offered up both prayers and supplication with loud crying
and tears—heard because of his piety—learning obedience through the things he
suffered.
This representation of Christ's humanity in chapters 2, 4, 5, has a very clear
purpose…that of encouraging Christians to recognized Jesus' role as an understanding and
sympathetic mediator. One who has shared life in every way with them, who is able to
effectively communicate the thoughts and intents of his brothers.

The High Priest. The central theme in the Christology of Hebrews is the High
Priesthood of Christ. It seems that the main argument of the book is that the Old Testment
priestly institution was only a shadow of reality and could not really deal with the problem
of sin. The heavenly reality has been finally expressed once for all in the death of Jesus by
which He put sin away once for all. Therefore, apostasy from Christ means doom, for there
is no other way.
In Chapters 5-10, the thought expresses the real contrast of Christ's priesthood with
Aaron's priesthood. The Old Testament cult really accomplished nothing in dealing with the
fundamental human problem, that of purifying the conscience:
9:9 -"Both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect
in conscience".
The Old Testament system involved the sacrifice of dumb animals which cannot touch the
very real problem of sin:
10:4 -"For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins".
It can only accomplish an external ceremonial purity:
9:13 -"The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who
have been defiled, sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh".
Therefore it is weak and useless:
7:18 -"For on the one hand, there is a setting aside of a former commandment
because of its weakness and uselessness
In fact the writer says that the Old Testament Tabernacle served to keep people away from
God rather than open the way into His presence:
9:8 -"the Holy Spirit is signifying this that the way into the Holy place has not yet
been disclosed, while the outer tabernacle is still standing".
The sacrifices are constantly repeated (10:1) and but are impotent to take away sins:
10:11 -"And every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the
same sacrifices, which can never take away sins".
In fact, the very repetition of the sacrifices only serves as a reminder of sin:
10:2-3 -"Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered; because the
worshipers
having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins? But in
those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins year by year". The Old Testament priests
were inadequate because they were mortal men (7:24) who must offer sacrifice for
their own sins as well as for the people (5:3; 7:27).
On four different occasions, Hebrews describes the inadequacy of the Old Testament
era in terms of its failure to bring men to perfection: "Gifts and sacrifices which
cannot perfect the conscience of the worship (9: 9; 7: 11; 7: 19; 10: 1). The idea of
perfection teleiwsis is one of the repeated themes of Hebrews and it is clear that this
perfection could not be achieved under the Old Testament system, but could only be
realized in Jesus, the one who could attain perfection through suffering (2:11).
In contrast to the imperfect Aaronic priesthood, Jesus stands as the perfect High
Priest. In 2:11, Jesus attained per-through suffering. In 5:8, Jesus' perfection is parallel to
His obedience: "He learned obedience through what He suffered; and being made perfect
He became to all who obey Him the source of eternal salvation". As a man in his humanity,
Jesus had to learn complete trust and dependence upon God. Jesus did not choose the role
of High Priest far Himself but was appointed by God (5:5). He took upon Himself complete
humanity and He shared the same nature as other men in every aspect:
2:17 -Therefore He had to be made like His brethren in all things that He might become a
merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the
sins of the people".
As a man, he was different at only one point, He was sinless (4:15), and therefore did not
need to offer sacrifices for Himself as did the Old Testament priests (7:27). He learned
perfection through obedience (2:10; 5:9; 7:28). His priestly role is both "high" and "low."
7:26 -"For it was fitting that we should have such a High Priest, holy innocent,
undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens".
The various titles of Jesus communicate two different aspects: 1) Jesus is the one who
brings salvation to humanity (apostle, cause, sanctifier, shepherd, minister, builder,
guarantor), 2) and as the first-born he is also human who realizes the divine purpose for
humanity, and thus is able to "lift people" to where he is (heir, firstborn, file-leader, trail-
blazer, perfecter, and forerunner). His priestly aspect is seen through his grand sacrifice in
the real holy of holies. But his kingly aspect is generally to be understood through his
resurrection: "But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat
down at the right hand of God, there to wait till his enemies be made a stool for his feet"
(Psa. 110:1).
Christ's superior High Priesthood is also seen in the analogy drawn with
Melchizedek (ch. 7). The main point of this analogy is that Abraham gave tithes to
Melchizedek and received his blessing. This proves that Abraham recognized that
Melchizedek was greater than he. Christ is a High Priest after the order
of Melchizedek. But what did Jesus do? As High Priest what sacrifice did He offer? Hebrews
makes it very clear that Jesus is both High Priest and Sacrifice that the High Priest offers to
God.
9:14 -"How much more wi"ll the blood of Christ who through the eternal Sririt
offered Himself withoutb emish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to
serve the living God" .
7:27 -"Christ does not need daily, like those high priests to offer up sacrifices first
for His own sins, and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all
when He offered up Himself".
Christ put away sin by the offer of Himself:
9:26 -"He has been mainfested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself".
By His death He made purification for sins (1:3). Moreover his death is efficacious; he
tasted death for everyone.
2:9 -"But we do see Him who has been made for a little while lower than the angels,
namely Jesus, because of the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor, that
by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone".
His death accomplished expiation for the sins of the people (2:17). The blood of Christ is
the means by which atonement was possible. "Without the shedding of blood there is no
remission of sins". (9:22). The death of Jesus is both an eschatological event within history
and an event in the spiritual world. He passed through the heavens (4:14) where He
entered the Holy place taking His own blood (9:12) and He purified the heavenly sanctuary
(9:23-24).
By His ascension He has become the forerunner of all Mho follow Him (6:20) and He
is described as a Messianic King seated at the right hand of God (8:1; 10:12; 12:2). He is
able to save for all time those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to
make intercession for them (7:25).
Furthermore, Jesus' mission as High Priest is effective. He has effected purification,
sanctification and perfection/completion that none of the Old Testament order was able to
do. The perfect offering of Christ on the cross is able "to purify your conscience from dead
works to serve the living God". (9:14),
(cf. 10:2 -No longer consciousness of sins; 9:26 -put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself;
10:22 -let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts
sprinkled clean from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water) .
For completion of sanctification, cf. 10:10 -"By this will we have been sanctified through the
offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all". 13:12 -"Therefore Jesus also, that He might
sanctify the people, through His own blood,suffered outside the gate". cf. also 9:13.
The work of Jesus is also summed up in the word perfection, unattainable under the Old
Covenant.
7:11 -if perfection could come under Old Testament, why was there need for
another priest?
10:14 -"For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified" .
The death of Christ also inaugurates something new, a new covenant."Where there is a
change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well" (7:12). Because
Jesus abides as a High Priest forever, He is also the guarantee of a better covenant (7:22).
The significance of the new covenant is seen as a fulfilment of the covenant promised in Jer.
31:3134. This new covenant will not be external but internal. People will obey God because
of an inner motivation (cf. 8:7ff). In essence the new convenant will do two things: a) a
better sacrifice that accomplishes the forgiveness of sins, b) a new heart in the worshipper
to enable him to do the will of God (par. to Johannine -rebirth, Pauline "in Christ")., The old
covenant has been superseded and abolished.
8:13 -"When he said, a new convenant, He has made the first absolete. But whatever
is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear".(cf. 10:9 -He abolishes
the first in order to establish the second; 9:8 -old order keeps men away from the
presence of GOd; a better hope 7:19; a better covenant 7:22 -based on better
promises 8:6, all because of Christ's shed blood).
Christ's work as High Priest and Sacrifice is not only seen in His death, but the ongoing role
that He has of making intercession for the saints (cf. 2, 4, 5). But it doesn't stop there, it
reaches out to include His Parousia: "So Christ also, having been offered once to bear the
sins of many, shall appear a second time for salvation, without reference to sin, to those
who eagerly await Him" (9:28). The High Priest will return as judge. What He wrought on
the cross is once for all (ephapox 9:12; 10:10) his present role is priestly intercessor is
forever and as High Priest He will return as judge.

3) The Christian Life.

Faith -The primary prerequisite for the Christian life is faith. There is a distinctly
different emphasis from that in John and Paul. John and Paul conceive of faith as personal
trust and commitment to Jesus that brings union with Christ and therefore salvation. But
here in Hebrews, faith is the faculty to perceive the reality of the unseen world of God and
to make it the primary object of one's life, in contrast to the transitory and often evil
character of present human existence. "Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the
conviction of things not seen" (11:1). Faith is both cosmic and eschatological.
11:6 -"For without faith it is impossible to please God. For whoever would draw
near to God must believe that He exists and is a Rewarder of those who seek Him".
The person of faith looks beyond the material world to the unseen world of ultimate reality.
We find in the roll-call of the heroes of faith, men and women who looked beyond their
immediate situation and trusted in the promise of God. They all looked beyond. Abraham
looked beyond to the city which has foundations (11:10). The patriarchs were seeking a
homeland (11:14), a better country, that is, a heavenly one (11:16), a heavenly city (11:16).
Moses in Egypt was looking to the reward (11:26).
We do find some miraculous deliverances, some were tortured, refusing to accept
release that they might rise again to a better life (11:35). In 11:39 we read, "and all these,
though well attested by their faith did not receive what was promised". Faith is the laying
hold of the promise of God for ultimate salvation whether this life brings physical blessings
or evils.
This is the context of the statement that Jesus is the pioneer and perfecter of our faith
(12:2). He led the way and He perfectly fulfilled the demands of a true faith. Jesus was faced
with the cross and its shame. And yet He could look beyond the human experience of
suffering and death to the joy set before Him. "fixing our eyes on Jesus, the file-leader and
perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him, endured the cross, despising the shame,
and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God" (12:2). Therefore Jesus' people are
to follow in the same footsteps of faith, looking to the author, pioneer and perfecter of faith.
They also are to look beyond the present age and present circumstances to the real world
beyond.
Discipline -Closely related tothe call to faith is an understanding of discipline. Just as
the Christian through faith looks beyond so the Christian is to look beyond the momentary
discipline to see beyond. Discipline is for the purpose of sharing in Christ's holiness.
12:10 -"For our earthly fathers disciplined us for a short time as seemed best to
them, but He disciplines us for our good, that we may share in Christ's holiness.
Discipline yields the "peaceful fruit of righteousness" and is a revelation of God's love
(12:5-8) and is a proof of sonship. If the call to faith and discipline is the positive response,
we also need to sense the same imperative in the several warning passages:
2:1-4 We must pay much closer attention. How shall we escape if we neglect so
great a salvation••. signs, wonders, various miracles, gifts of the Holy Spirit.
3:7 -4:11 -Don't harden hearts as Israel did.
"Take care, brethren lest there should be in anyone of you an evil, unbelieving heart
in falling away from the living God".
Need to enter rest.
"Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall through following the
same example of disboedience".
5:11-6:12
Press on to maturity -not laying foundations over again.
 "For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted it is
impossible
to renew them again to repentance".
10:19-39 -Let us hold fast our confession warning -trampling under foot the Son of
God In the face of persecution, don't throwaway your confidence which has a great
reward.
Ethical Concerns –Do not be carried away by varied and strange teachings for it is
good for the heart to be strengthened by grace not by foods through which those who were
thus occupied were not benefitted.
1) Jewish food laws in 13:9 are based partly on a reversion to Jewish food laws.
Perhaps there is the presence of an evil practice condemned in Rev. 2:14, 20 -where food
and immorality are closely associated. 2) Perverted sexual relationships may well be the
theme of the warning given in 13:4: "Let marriage be held ,in honor among all, and let the
marriage bed be undefiled; for fornicators and adulterers God will judge". (cf. gnostic
disdain of marriage in 1 Tim 4:3 -"men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from
foods, which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the
truth". 3) General moral laxity. 12:16 "that there be no immoral or godless person like
Esau, who sold his bithright for a single meal". And a reluctance to face the rigors of
Christian discipleship (12:3). In 10:26-27 we read, "For if we go on sinning willfully after
receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a
certain terrifying expectation of judgment and the fury of a fire which will consume the
adve~saries. This has raised the question of post-baptismal sin. We need to see the parallel
with Israel who fell away from the living God (3:12). The writer of Hebrews is not
interested in the question; the systematic theologian asks, "Were they saved only to lose
their salvation?" But he is facing the actual situation where people gave all the evidences of
conversion, separating themselves from their pagan ways, and identified themselves with
the Christian community, only to deny their faith in the face of persecution.
Pilgrim Existence -Closely related to all of the above statements concerning the
Christian life is the understanding of the Christian life as a pilgrim existence. The church is
portrayed as a pilgrim people (cf. ch. 11 for the roll call). The church is not simply a
company of the elect already saved and destined for eternity, but a people on the move, not
yet reaching the homeland. Sin is regarded as a dragging of one's feet, encumbrances (12:1;
12-13) and apostasy is like falling out of the race. The goal is the heavenly city. 13:14 -"For
here we do not have a lasting city, but we are seeking the city which is to come". The key
word is steadfastness (hupemonay -12:1)
(Draw out the parallel with Israel's wilderness journey in 3, 4 and their "rest"). As a
means of sustenance for this journey of faith, God has given baptism and the eucharist (9:1-
14, 20; 10:19f; 13:10; 10:22; 13:15).
Leadership is also a gift from God (13:7, 17, 24).
13:7 -"Remember those who led you, who spoke the Word of God to you, and
considering
the result of their conduct, imitate their faith.
13:17 0bey your leaders and submit to them; for they keep watch over your souls, as
those who will give an account".
13:24 -"Greet all your leaders and all the saints".