Jesus announces his ministry in Luke through scripture - specifically from the prophet Isaiah. I find it interesting that we don't dwell too much on what the ministry of Jesus was about. We seem more concerned with "how" Jesus established his church. But Jesus clearly showcases what he was going to be about through the fulfillment of Isaiah. I'm wondering if we should be more interested in being like Jesus in ministry, or if we should continue to try to precisely duplicate what we think the church was about after Jesus left - as we perceive it.
Luke 4:14 and following:
14Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. 15He taught in their synagogues, and everyone praised him.
16He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. And he stood up to read. 17The scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:
18"The Spirit of the Lord is on 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 for the blind,
to release the oppressed,
19to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."[e]
20Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him, 21and he began by saying to them, "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hi Kent,
I have crossed paths with you on a few blogs from time to time, but I saw where you commented on an old post on mine recently. Thanks for the kind words.
I havent visited here in a while, but I am glad to be back. I think you are on to something special in this post. You did not analyse it too much, though. I wonder what these observations are doing for you.
I have to confess that I am not as strong on OT as I wish to be (lame statement really -same goes for NT as well, but I mean in comparison). I am also not as strong in Luke as in Mark or Matt. So I have a lot to learn there, however, I did take a class on Luke with Tony Ash at ACU a few years ago. So, I am not oblivious by any stretch.
However, in recent years, I have begun to really appreciate the NT's use of OT in some fresh ways. Not sure I have good words for it, but lots of fresh perspective to be sure. The NT cannot be appreciated properly in an ahistorical vacuum, which I think our tradition has tried to do.
I have been reading N. T. Wright for a few years very avidly. Taking cues from Richard Horsley, he has shown me Jesus's (and Paul's and Luke's) confrontation with Rome and the gospel of Rome. Notice that Luke places the birth narrative in the Reign of Augustus etc... And thus contrasts Caesar's rule with the birth of the True Lord heralded by angels to lowly shepherds. It is subversive.
Then Wright does what you are hinting at here. He looks again at the story against its OT backdrop. Why Isaiah? Wright suggests that Isaiah, among others to be sure, is a proph of comfort to exiles (Comfort O Comfort My People Jerusalem see ch 40). The Jews of the first century have come home geographically, but not theologically or spiritually. In that sense, they are still in exile. Under Rome, Israel is ruled by a tyrant king again, and a pagan no less. So, Jesus brings good news to captives etc.
But I note the citation of the Spirit's presence in your passage too. And anytime I see a citation of the Spirit, I think of Gen 1:3 where He broods over the waters of chaos and brings forth good godly order inwhich humans can live. I think of Gen 2:7 where the breath (aka Spirit) of God is blown into the nostrils of the newly form dirt creating a man -an image of God bearing man. One who is truly human. One who, by virtue of the image bearing quality he possesses (Gen 1:26) shows the rest of Creation what God is like.
Luke shows Jesus returning to Galilee in the power of the Spirit and then a few verses later saying “The spirit of the Lord is on me to proclaim…” These are deeply theological ways of saying the Jesus is truly human. He is the image bearer Adam was meant to be, that Noah was meant to be, that Abe and descendents were meant to be and all failed. So, as a great Wright-ism goes… Jesus came to be for Israel what Israel was meant to be for the world. Jesus, unlike arrogant Rome, or even arrogant Judaism for that matter, brings good order to the world, and order of love and self sacrifice.
What does that say to America? What does it say to contemporary Israel, to Lebanon? to Russia? To the western church? And how about the church of Christ, which is a uniquely American church? It started here, contrary to the arrogant claim of AD 33, around the time of the American Revolution. Think about it. The American Rev had huge impact on our tradition. Read documents like Campbell's "Declaration and Address". Why such a title? Why such a format? And at such a time?
I think your question is on to something big. The church needs to go back and look at Isaiah and the continuity a Jesus shaped mission for the church has with Isaiah, rather than the A-historical vacuum church we have invented.
Just my opening thoughts without exegeting. Wondering if your thoughts were going this direction or another.
It is good to blog with you man….
Many blessings…
Thanks for the kind words Mike. My thoughts were pretty basic I suppose. Jesus is proclaiming what he is about to his hometown - which in itself is odd. I think the church simply focuses too much on the writings of Paul in the areas of "how" to do church.
Post a Comment