| One suspects that, in discerning that development, Luke was aided by his opportunities to speak with individual Christians in the Holy Land. In pursuing this path to his narrative, the author of Luke/Acts is very distinctive among the New Testament writers. This organic stricture in Luke/Acts has a permeating quality discernible in other ways. Take, for instance, the story about Herod that follows immediately the account of Jesus endowing the Apostles with “power and authority.” The author, adhering to the sequence established in Mark 6, inserts a story about Herod between the mission of the Apostles and the multiplication of the loaves. But how differently! Whereas Mark deftly uses his long account of Herod’s beheading of John the Baptist to indicate the significant interval between the sending of the Apostles (“So they went out . . .”-6:12) and their return (“Then the Apostles assembled with Jesus”-6:30), Luke has in mind a completely different purpose, conveyed in a peculiar organic narrative: First, Luke had already removed John the Baptist from the story back in 3:19-20. Indeed, he removed John so thoroughly that the Baptist is not even mentioned in the account of Jesus baptism (2:21-22)! Second, Luke joins this story of Herod to the things ( ginomena panta —9:7) the dispersed Apostles are doing. This conjunction ties the present account to the narrative in Acts, which further extends the relationship of the Apostles to Herod’s family. Third, in the introduction of Herod at this point in the Gospel, Luke prepares for Herod’s later appearance at Jesus’ trial (23:6-12). He does this in a curious way: He takes various popular assessments of Jesus (“Elijah” or “one of the old prophets”) and makes them rumors in the Herodian court. In portraying Herod as “weighing” (dieporei) these popular interpretations of Jesus, Luke likely relies on the witness of Johanna, who was tied to the Herodian court (cf. 8:3; 13:31). Luke ends the account with the comment that Herod wished to “see” Jesus, thus setting up the later trial scene, when the king does see Jesus. |
| 2A. Not Elijah (1:21a) That the Fourth Gospel plays John " s role down in light of some contemporary exorbitant claims for him is likely (see comment on 1:6–8), especially since the Fourth Gospel refuses to grant him even the role of Elijah which he seems to have played to some extent in pre-Markan tradition ( Mark 1:6 ; Matt 3:4; 3829 cf. 1 Kgs 17:6; 2 Kgs 1LXX; Mark 9:13 ; Matt 17:12–13; Luke 1:17), 3830 even though he does not explicitly transfer those claims to Jesus. 3831 It may also merit mention that the Synoptic miracle traditions which applied Elijah " s miracle-working role to Jesus and passages such as Luke 9:61–62 (cf. 1 Kgs 19:20) and 10(cf. 2 Kgs 4:29) already transferred some Elijah images to Jesus, but for Jesus these were clearly inadequate (cf. Luke 9:8, 19–20, 33–35, although Luke omits Mark " s parallel acclamation of the deceased Baptist as Elijah here). Of course, even the Synoptic writers did not suppose that John was literally Elijah ( Mark 9:4 ; Matt 17:3; Luke 1:17; 9:30). 3832 If the historical John saw himself as a forerunner, he may have seen himself as an Elijah at least in a figurative sense (cf. 1:23; Mal 4:5 ); if he saw himself as a forerunner for Elijah, he would have seen the one coming after him as literally «before» him (1:30). 3833 Jewish tradition naturally developed the promise of Elijah " s return in Mai 4:5–6 (MT 3:23–24), which appears as early as Ben Sira ( Sir 48:10 ). Later rabbis particularly seized on this feature of eschatological expectation, although they developed it in very different ways from nonrabbinic streams of thought. 3834 That Elijah remained alive was safely assumed from the biblical text (2 Kgs 2:9–12; Mal 4:5–6 ; cf. 1Macc 2:58; Sir 48:9 ), and later rabbis continued to work from this assumption. 3835 In these later rabbis, however, his role in the present period before the final time became more prominent than his eschatological function, perhaps due in part to the de-emphasis of messianic eschatology after the sufferings under Hadrian. (The rabbis also tended to view the prophets as proto-scribes.) 3836 Like other biblical prophets, Elijah became a master halachist, often sent to settle rabbinic disputes; 3837 also sometimes described with a role comparable to that of angels, 3838 the rabbinic Elijah often was sent on divine errands to miraculously aid rabbis. 3839 Other rabbinic evidence, however, does point to Elijah " s eschatological role. The rabbis were clearly aware of Malachís prophecy and they anticipated Elijah " s return at the end of the age 3840 alongside rabbinism " s other eschatological figures. 3841 Elijah would also exercise an eschatological halakic role, 3842 especially (in line with the rabbinic interpretation of Malachi) in determining proper lines of descent (Israelites vs. proselytes, etc.). 3843 Although the bulk of this evidence derives from the more numerous Amoraic texts, some of it is also Tannaitic. 3844 |
| How historically likely is the crowd " s desire to make Jesus king, which the Synoptics do not report? Against its likelihood, one must consider that, if crowds did attach political connotations to Jesus» miracle in the wilderness, word might have eventually reached Antipas, who would have then viewed Jesus as a political threat. 6035 Yet in the whole context of Jesus» ministry, it is unlikely that he escaped political speculation in any case. Self-proclaimed prophets were ideal candidates for leaders of revolts in the pagan world, 6036 especially if they could claim to work miracles. 6037 Further, in first-century Palestine, wilderness prophets who promised signs like Moses usually gained large fallowings that lent themselves to political interpretations (Josephus War 2.261–263; Ant. 20.169–171 ); 6038 it is thus likely that at least some among the crowds understood Jesus in potentially political terms. Perhaps Jesus defused the crowd " s political aspirations by dispersing them quickly (6:15); perhaps Antipas was not fully aware (the reports that reached him seem to have focused on Jesus» miracles–Luke 23:8) or his enmity ( Mark 6:14–16 ; Luke 13:31–32) was not seriously enough aroused to take quick action. Titular acclamations after miracles were common in the Greco-Roman world, and not only in the NT. 6039 John certainly has reasons (such as the emperor cult) in his own milieu to emphasize 6:14–15, but the desire to make Jesus king fits what we know of Jesus» milieu. 6040 Writing closer to the time of the Judean-Roman war, Matthew and Luke, following Mark, may not have wished to emphasize how easily Jesus could have been misinterpreted by those with revolutionary sentiments. Jesus» knowledge of the crowd " s intentions (6:15) fits the Jesus tradition ( Mark 2:8 ), but also fits John " s picture of Jesus knowing the human heart (e.g., 2:25; 6:61). He was a prophet and coming one (6:14), a king (6:15; cf. 1:49; coming king in 12:13); but he was not the sort they expected, nor could he receive his kingship from merely human acclamation or support (18:36). Both those who wished to make him a king by «force» and those who forcibly arrested him on the charge of kingship (18:12, 33) misunderstood, failing to recognize that his kingdom was not «of this world» (18:36). He would be king only by continuing to be prophet–continuing to proclaim the truth (18:37), and ultimately by being lifted up on a cross (19:3, 12,14–19). |
| Was Jesus Christ religious? He was circumcised a Jew (Luke 2:21) and received a Jewish religious education (Luke 2:46). He taught at the synagogues (Matthew 13:54) and attended the religious holidays in Jerusalem(John 2:23). He upheld the Mosaic law and prophetic teachings, and He instructed others to also keep the commandments of God (Matthew 5:17-20, 7:12). He encouraged those He healed to offer the Mosaic ritual sacrifice (Matthew 8:4). He affirmed that people must obey their religious leaders (Matthew 23:3) and pay the temple tax (Luke 20:25; 21:1-4). He was tried as a Jew (John 18:12-14, 19-24) and was buried according to Jewish religious tradition (John 19:38-42). Jesus also instituted with His followers new religious practices like Baptism (Matthew 3:13-17) and the Eucharist (Matthew 26:26-29). There should be no question that Jesus was religious. Spiritual A typical dictionary definition of “spiritual” is: being concerned with the spirit—the metaphysical, incorporeal, immaterial, ultimate, ideal, etc . You can be spiritual without believing in a deity; instead, you can believe in ghosts, witchcraft, ESP, reincarnation, universal love, etc. Also “concerned” in the above definition is merely an intellectual interest or awareness to something. You can acknowledge the truth of a spiritual principle but not necessarily strive to make it an ongoing rule in your life. Therefore, you do not have to follow any particular system of behavior when being spiritual; there are seemingly no set moral constraints. You may try to develop a particular lifestyle in accordance with your spiritual beliefs, but you’re accountable to no one except yourself. Consequently, there is a lot of freedom to being spiritual—believe and act in whatever way you deem is right. The antonym for being spiritual is “materialism:” involvement with the gathering of wealth, sensual experiences, and physical comfort. Was Jesus Christ spiritual? He went beyond just keeping religious laws and taught that your attitude and character are just as important as your behavior (e.g., “You heard it said. |
| Nicodemus, by contrast, had to be named because he recurs in 7and 19:39.) The contrast between Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman (as well as some other characters) would frustrate a normal ancient Jewish reader " s expectations (although John s own original audience already may be predisposed to suspect that the Judean elite is more hostile); in matters of ministry as well as Christology, one dare not judge by outward appearance (7:24). Because Nicodemus eventually believes (19:39), this text illustrates the wide spectrum of believers in Jesus. 5210 Other, more subtle narrative connections are also possible, like the comparison with Jesus» crucifixion scene, the epitome of his rejection by his own people in contrast to the positive Samaritan reception. 5211 1. Theological Themes in the Narrative Jesus crosses at least three significant barriers in the story: the socioethnic barrier of centuries of Jewish-Samaritan prejudice; the gender barrier; and a moral barrier imposed by this woman " s assumed behavior. The heart of the story appears in 4:23–24: the Father has been seeking true worshipers who will worship him in Spirit and truth, and that was why the Father sent Jesus (4:4) to this particular woman. Outward markers, which John " s religious contemporaries would contemplate, such as her gender, religious tradition and ethnicity, and past moral activity, prove irrelevant in revealing the sort of person God seeks to worship him. Indeed, whereas Jesus sought Philip (1:43), he did not seek out members of the religious elite; even open-minded Nicodemus had to come to Jesus (3:2); but Jesus went to great lengths and took serious risks to reach the Samaritan woman. 5212 All of these barriers appear individually in other Gospel traditions. Thus Jesus ministers to Samaritans in Luke (10:33; 17:16–19), 5213 and Gentiles appear at notorious points in Mark (7:26–29) and Q (Matt 8:5–13; Luke 7:1–10); the later church found these few traditions particularly usefu1. Still more clearly, women appear in prominent roles in the gospel tradition, 5214 with an undoubtedly historical core. 5215 Although later Christians like Paul seem to have moderated this emphasis for apologetic reasons, many of these traditions, distinctly progressive by ancient Mediterranean standards, remained. 5216 Jesus» banquets with sinners, as well as complaints of the pious against this practice, are also significant in the tradition and undoubtedly reflect a historical nucleus. 5217 Mark " s account of the Syro-Phoenician woman combines two of these issues, 5218 but John " s account of the sinful Samaritan woman underlines three of these issues latent in the Jesus tradition. |
| The two disciples are thus paradigmatic for disciples in John " s day. When the disciples ask where Jesus «dwells,» they are allowed to stay with him and learn as disciples; 4198 Johannine believers can dwell in Jesus» presence and learn from him continually (14:23,26). 4199 Just as the model disciples in the narrative «come and see» where Jesus «abides,» and then began to «abide» with him, so other disciples who follow Jesus will «abide» or «dwell» with him where he is (cf. 14:2,6,23; 15:4–10); only those who continue as Jesus» disciples will truly be his disciples (8:31). 4200 Those who «come and see» are those who experience Jesus for themselves (1:46, 50), and disciples can repeat the invitation first offered by Jesus (1:46; 4:29). 2B. Testing Would-Be Disciples Not only did Jesus sometimes make it difficult for would-be disciples to follow him; sometimes he thrust them aside (Q material in Matt 8:19–22; Luke 9:57–62), especially if they held high worldly status ( Mark 10:21–22 ; Matt 19:21–22; Luke 18:22–23). 4201 In the same way, the Johannine Jesus is particularly hard on Nicodemus and the wealthy official of Antipas (3:3, 10; 4:48) and to a lesser extent on members of his family (2:4; 7:6–8)–on those who would be most likely to assume their right of access to him (contrast his inviting treatment toward the Samaritan woman). But Jesus probably thrust aside or made matters difficult for prospective disciples for the reason other ancient popular teachers did: to test the would-be student " s real willingness to become a learner, challenging a disciple to recognize the need to sacrifice. The sacrifice of following a traveling teacher like Jesus could be demanding. Although disciples usually studied with local teachers, remaining with their wives during study, this may not have always been the case, even in formal rabbinic schooling reported in second-century sources. 4202 An epideictic story of Rabbi Akiba, whether wholly or only partly apocryphal, reflects the views of this period: having returned home after years of study, he heard that his wife was willing to be apart from him for as many more years, for the sake of learning–whereupon he returned to his studies and came back to her at their completion with an abundance of disciples. 4203 Similarly (perhaps due to the transfer of the story from Akiba), R. Simeon ben Yohai and another rabbi were said to have left their families for thirteen years to study under Akiba. 4204 While these examples may represent patent exaggerations–Tannaitic law forbids leaving ones wife for more than thirty days to engage in Torah study 4205 –they may indicate that despite rulings of first-century schools prohibiting long-term abstinence, some Jewish men would go to study with famous teachers of the Law. 4206 It is at least clear that those who circulated these traditions about Akiba and his disciples viewed such sacrifice as laudatory. |
| 1. Those Who Were Sent (1:19, 24) Sending an inquiry to a prophet could fit biblical tradition (2 Kgs 19:2; 22:15; Isa 37:2), but the messengers here seem to inquire more from suspicion of John than from desire to hear his message. What appears most striking, however, is the identity of the senders and their agents. Josephus (Life 1; cf. Ant 4.218), Philo (Spec. Laws 1.131–155, esp. 1.131; 4.190–192), 3804 and the Dead Sea Scrolls (the «wicked priest» in lQpHab 8.8–12; 9.4–7; 12.5; greedy priests in 4QpNah 1.11) indicate the prominence that priests retained in all parts of Judaism before the destruction of the temple. Josephus, who also praises their general piety (Ant. 14.65–68), attests that priests remained the main local rulers of Palestine in this period. 3805 Even the later Pharisees, who joined the Essenes and the Gospels in criticizing the high priesthood 3806 as corrupt (e.g., lQpHab 9.4–5), 3807 respected the high priests office (later, e.g., p. Sanh. 2:1, §2). While some priests seem to have followed Pharisaic practices, even the later rabbis admitted that many (we would say most) did not; 3808 most scholars concur that most of the priestly aristocracy were in fact Sadducees (see, e.g., Josephus Ant. 13.298; 18.17). 3809 Other aspects of this narrative also fail to fit the historical picture gleaned from a variety of other ancient sources. Rabbis who were mainly successors of the Pharisees later sent formal messengers to other dignitaries, 3810 but the practice is well attested in this period and earlier only of the high-priestly temple hierarchy–of those with official authority. 3811 The Levites appear rarely elsewhere in the NT but often appear together with priests in OT narratives and in passages such as Luke 10:31–32; they fill the same literary function as the priests here. 3812 John, who prefers to emphasize the authority of the «Pharisees» (more than Matthew, and far more than Mark or Luke, probably because he writes at a period when their authority was far more advanced and hostile to Palestinian Jewish Christians), nowhere else mentions «priests and Levites.» 3813 One might suggest that the Fourth Gospel generally transforms the priestly leaders in traditional sources into Pharisees (leaders whose role in repressing minority factions in John s day corresponded to aristocratic priests in Jesus» day), and here perhaps even transforms crowds into priests. |
| Ahead of New School Year, Patriarch Daniel Blesses Romanian Students, Professors Everywhere Source: Basilica.ro Photography courtesy of Basilica.ro Files/Mircea Florescu Ahead of the school year 2021-22, His Beatitude Patriarch Daniel sent a message to “Romanian students, parents, teachers and professors everywhere”, referring to “the usefulness, but also the limits of online education”, as well as the role of the family in educating children. “In the context of the Romanian and European tradition, the determining role of the Family and the Church in educating children and young people over time is well known,” the Patriarch of Romania noted. Blessing for the new school year: full text With fatherly love, we bless all Romanian students, parents, teachers and professors everywhere at the beginning of the school year 2021-22. The Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church declared 2021 a Solemn Year of the pastoral care of Romanians outside Romania. Through its ministers, the Romanian Orthodox Church supports and encourages the Romanian Orthodox believers from abroad, understands their joys, but also the difficulties they face. Through cultural events and social-philanthropic actions organized by the Romanian Patriarchate, spiritual connections are created and consolidated between Romanian communities in the country and those in the Romanian diaspora. Thus, between December 21, 2020, and August 22, 2021, in the Romanian Patriarchate took place the National Catechetical Contest Church: the Family of Romanians everywhere, which addressed children from parish catechetical groups in the country and the diaspora, enrolled in the National Catechetical Program “Christ shared with children.” The participating catechesis groups realized and implemented mini-projects with a cultural and philanthropic character, directed mainly to families. Children and young people were always blessed by our Saviour Jesus Christ, the perfect Teacher, who valued them (Matthew 14:21), helped them (Luke 7: 11-15; 8: 41-56), received them with love (Matthew 19: 13-15; Mark 10: 13-16; Luke 18: 15-17) and listened to them carefully (Matthew 19: 16-22). |
| Although John emphasizes Jesus» foresight (13:19) and determination to suffer for others (12:27–28; 13:33), he also underlines Jesus» emotion (13:21), even though some of his contemporaries would have viewed it as a mark of weakness. 8226 He is «troubled in spirit» (13:21), as he was when facing the mourning of friends in 11and 12:27. 8227 Jesus» emotional suffering here and in 12may correspond with his suffering in Gethsemane in the Passion Narrative that stands behind the Synoptic accounts. 8228 That the disciples reacted to the announcement of the betrayal by wondering among themselves who would do it (13:22–24) fits other extant Jesus tradition ( Mark 14:19 ; Luke 22:23). One might surround oneself with onés most intimate friends during the later hours of a banquet (13:23); thus Josephus dismissed other banqueters after a few hours, retaining near him only his four closest friends, during a time of great distress. 8229 At banquets disciples sat near their sages. 8230 Participants were seated according to their status (see comment on status and the foot washing, earlier in the chapter). Many banquet settings assigned three participants to each table, arranging diners in such a manner that in this scene one to the right of Jesus would need only have leaned his head back to find himself near Jesus» chest. 8231 Although we should not expect that Jerusalem could accommodate formal banquet settings for all the Passover pilgrims, a home large enough to accommodate all Jesus» disciples (presumably the Twelve, 6:70) might be better furnished than many, and traditional banquet arrangements may remain informative. The first of the three couches around a table included the three persons of highest rank; the middle position on each couch represented the highest rank on that couch. 8232 Jeffers describes the Roman style of banqueting: Romans ate while reclining on couches, usually situated in a U shape (called a triclinium) around a low table. The triclinium had places of honor (Luke 14:8–10). Diners supported themselves on their left elbows and ate with their right hands. The ancients did not have forks, only knives and spoons. In any event, seated in this position it was more convenient to eat with onés fingers. 8233 |
| 2A. Resurrection Appearances (20:15–29) The resurrection appearances in John 20 become paradigmatic for all believers» encounters with Jesus, which give way to believers» relationship with Jesus (14:21–23; 20:19–23). Because of her devotion to Jesus, Mary functions as one of the more positive paradigms for witness in this section, as well as the first one. 10535 She was the first agent Jesus commissioned with the message of his resurrection and of believers as God " s children. 10536 Witnesses who said that they had seen Jesus alive from the dead (e.g., 1Cor 15:1–8 ; virtually all the narrative accounts also suggest significant conversation with him rather than fleeting appearances) were so convinced of the veracity of their claims that many devoted their lives to proclaiming what they had seen, and some died for it; clearly their testimony was not fabricated. 10537 Ancients also recognized that the willingness of people to die for their convictions verified at least the sincerity of their motives, arguing against fabrication. 10538 As noted above, some scholars deny the empty-tomb tradition; most, however, affirm that the disciples believed they had seen Jesus alive. Yet some scholars even find ways to deny the historical value of the resurrection appearances; Mack, for example, suggests that before the Gospels we have only Paul " s account of «visions.» 10539 But although the language Paul employs is general enough that it could include visionary experiences, he is reporting earlier Palestinian tradition in 1Cor 15:3–7 10540 and Palestinian Jews did not speak of nonbodily resurrections (see discussion of the Jewish resurrection belief above). Nor would anyone have persecuted them for simply affirming that they had seen someone who had been dead; apart from the bodily character of the resurrection–the sort that would leave an empty tomb–people would merely assume they claimed to see a ghost, a noncontroversial phenomenon. 10541 Ghosts were «phantasms» that appeared especially at night (Plutarch Brutus 36; Caesar 69.5, 8; Cimon 6.5), but this is not what the resurrection narratives report (Luke 24:40). 10542 Further, Jesus «appeared» to his followers in Acts 1but there provided concrete proofs of his physicality (cf. Luke 24:39–40). 10543 Finally, Paul himself distinguishes between the Easter appearances and mere visions (cf. 1Cor 9:1; 15:8 ; 2Cor 12:1–4 ). 10544 |
|
|
