Luke’s Unique Perspective on Jerusalem’s Fall and the Kingdom of God (Part 1 of 4)

In the parallel accounts of Matt. 24:1–25:46, Mark 13:1-37, and Luke 21:5-36, Jesus predicted the desolation of Jerusalem’s temple and buildings approx. four decades prior to it occurring, while also answering questions about the sign of his coming and the end of the age <see previous post>. However, Luke’s report differs from the other two, adding to the confusion of what most would agree is already a complicated discussion.  

When compared to the Lord’s recorded words in Matthew and Mark, the arrangement of parallel statements in Luke seems misplaced (Luke 17:23-37; 18:8; 19:41-44). Also, according to Matthew and Mark’s reporting, the signs of which Jesus spoke are said to signal the imminence of Jerusalem’s fall (Matt. 24:33-34; Mark 13:29-30), whereas Luke quotes Jesus saying, “when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near” (Luke 21:31).¹

How do we account for these differences, and can they be harmonized? How is “near” to be understood in relation to “the kingdom of God”? How does the overall message and purpose of Luke’s Gospel shed light on his unique arrangement and wording? And how does all this fit into the broader context of kingdom theology? The main focus of our current study is how the term βασιλεία is employed in Luke’s writings with respect to ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ, typically rendered in English, “the kingdom of God.”

Concerning Biblical Chronology

In view of the fact that Jesus almost certainly addressed the same topics on multiple occasions, the repetition of words in various written accounts does not automatically imply the same setting. Neither does any record of the same event provide comprehensive information or replicate every detail. Rather than contradict, the different versions of the Gospel story confirm, supplement, and complement one another.

Unlike modern-day westerners, biblical authors were not preoccupied with linear thinking, and they often arranged materials, under the guidance of God’s Spirit, thematically rather than chronologically. More than just historians and biographers, the Gospel writers were primarily evangelists and theologians, organizing their narratives with deliberate interest in certain aspects of what the Lord said, did, and experienced. Each author retells the story of Jesus from a unique perspective in ways relevant to and meaningful for a particular reading audience.

Word Analysis

The adverbial ἐγγύς (“near”) can be used in the sense of (a) closeness in spatial proximity (John 3:23; 6:19, 23); or (b) closeness in time (John 2:13; 6:4; 7:2).² This modifier occurs eight times in the Synoptic Gospels, both as a time reference (Matt. 26:18) and as a spatial reference (Luke 19:11). In its verbal form (ἐγγίζω), twice in Luke’s Gospel the kingdom of God is said to have “drawn near” in the spatial sense (Luke 10:9-10).

The most apparent meaning of ἐγγύς in the parallel accounts of Matt. 24:32-33, Mark 13:28-29, and Luke 21:30-31 is nearness in time with reference to the approach of summer and the destruction of Judaism’s capital city and temple. How, then, do “these things,” according to Luke’s record, point to the nearness of God’s kingdom?

The Kingdom of God Biblically Defined

The Greek noun βασιλεία, with reference to “the act of ruling” in the abstract sense, essentially means “kingship, royal power, royal rule,” and particularly in the NT, “the royal reign of God.” A secondary meaning is “kingdom” in the concrete sense of the “territory ruled by a king” (BDAG 168-69).

Although the words of Jesus have been preserved in Greek translation, he originally conversed in Aramaic with fellow-Aramaic speaking Jews, and his teachings were grounded in the Hebrew scriptures, mainly directed to those familiar with these sacred writings. How would he and his listeners have understood the term rendered βασιλεία in Greek and “kingdom” in our English Bibles?

The Aramaic malkû [מַלְכוּ] corresponds to the Hebrew malkûth [מַלְכוּת], translated βασιλεία in the LXX, meaning “kingship, royalty ... sovereignty over ... kingship over” (BDBG 574). German theologian Gustaf Dalman, who pioneered the study of biblical Aramaic, along with ancient Near Eastern culture and Jewish literature, concluded: “No doubt can be entertained that both in the Old Testament and in Jewish literature מַלְכוּת, when applied to God, means always the ‘kingly rule,’ never ‘the kingdom,’ as if it were meant to suggest the territory governed by Him.... not a body politic in our sense, a people or land under some form of constitution but merely a ‘sovereignty’ which embraces a particular territory” (Words of Jesus 94).

At the same time, however, even though Jesus did explain and clarify OT teachings with divine insight, he extended his new-covenant message beyond old-covenant concepts. With the fundamental idea of “sovereign rule” as its core meaning, the expression’s frequent use in the NT, particularly in the teachings of Christ, is too broad and flexible to fit neatly into a single semantic box. There are a number of βασιλεία passages where the expanded sense of “kingdom” is also appropriate and applicable.

The scriptures clearly affirm the sovereignty of God and the universal realm of his reign,³ although the history of the world is replete with defiant humans rejecting his rule in their lives. Biblical allusions to divine governance, therefore, are often meant in the more limited sense of the sphere in which God’s dominion is accepted, acknowledged, and lived out in the lives of those submitting to his will, collectively comprising his spiritual kingdom as obedient subjects.

In this broader sense, the βασιλεία of God is both internal and experiential. The Lord can speak of those who are in God’s βασιλεία (Luke 7:28; 13:24-29; 14:15-25; 18:16-25) and God’s βασιλεία in them (Luke 13:20-21; 17:20-21). Conversely, there are those excluded from the sphere of God’s reign (Luke 13:24-28), seeing that inwardly they are void of his governing control (Matt 23:21-28).

Since a king represents and exemplifies the kingdom over which he rules,⁴ Jesus’s royal status of messianic kingship, acknowledged before and during his earthly ministry,⁵ embodies God’s kingdom and sovereign reign. When he sent out dozens of disciples to preach in communities where he himself was about to go, they were to announce, “the kingdom of God has drawn near to you ... the kingdom of God has drawn near” (Luke 10:9, 11). As noted above, the modifier “near” can mean closeness in spatial proximity or closeness in time. Jesus, representing and personifying the kingdom of God, was nearby geographically, while his arrival in these communities was close in time. He could also say, “the kingdom of God has come upon you” (Luke 11:20), and “the kingdom of God is in your midst” (Luke 17:20-21).

The Fact of God’s Kingdom in Luke

Proclaiming the good news of “the kingdom of God” was a major thrust of Jesus’s public ministry (Luke 4:43; 8:1; 9:11). He also trained and sent out faithful disciples “to proclaim the kingdom of God ...” (Luke 9:2, 60; 10:9).

Because of their receptive hearts and openness to spiritual teachings, loyal followers of Jesus were afforded the opportunity “to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God ...” (Luke 8:10a), i.e., the deeper spiritual truths once hidden but now revealed.⁶ Conversely, the uncommitted, closed-minded, and worldly-driven ones are not only incapable of comprehending God’s kingdom but are unprepared for it (Luke 8:10b; 9:62; cf. 12:1-2).

Instead of striving for the material things of this physical world, Jesus instructed his followers: “But seek his kingdom ... for your Father has taken pleasure to give you the kingdom .... for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Luke 12:31-34). The sovereign rule of God is actualized both inwardly and outwardly.

In the course of Christ’s itinerant ministry, while teaching in a synagogue, twice he rhetorically asked, “To what is the kingdom of God like, and to what shall I compare it?” He then likened God’s kingdom to a mustard seed, something planted that starts out small but grows big, and to a leavening agent, something that permeates, transforms, and spreads (Luke 13:18-21), with both internal and external effects.

Conclusion

In the next post we will consider passages in Luke’s Gospel where God’s kingdom is spoken of as not yet, soon to be, and already here. Instead of conflicting, however, these texts collectively demonstrate the different ways God’s βασιλεία is conceptualized, with varying nuances and emphases that reveal a rich and multifaceted kingdom theology.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Unless noted otherwise, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ² See BDAG 271. Another option, closely related to the first, is the concept of spiritual or relational closeness (Rom. 10:8; Eph. 2:13, 17). The verb form ἐγγίζω (“draw near”) is employed eighteen times in Luke’s Gospel, mostly as a distance marker (7:12; 10:9, 11; 12:33; 15:1, 25; 18:35, 40; 19:29, 37, 41; 22:47; 24:15, 28), but also in relation to time (21:8, 20, 28; 22:1).

     ³ 1 Chron. 29:11-12; 2 Chron. 20:6; Psa. 10:16; 22:28; 29:10; 45:6; 93:1-2; 103:19; 145:1-13; Jer. 10:10; Lam. 5:19; Dan. 4:3; Acts 17:24-25; Rev. 4:11.

     ⁴ See esp. Dan. 2:37-45; 8:20-21; cf. also Num. 24:7; 1 Sam. 24:20; 2 Sam. 5:12; 1 Kings 2:46; 1 Chron. 14:2

     ⁵ Luke 1:32-33; 19:38-40; 23:2-3; cf. Matt. 2:1-6; 21:4-5; Mark 11:9-10.

     ⁶ See Rom. 16:25; 1 Cor. 2:7; 4:1; Eph. 1:9; 3:3-9; 5:32; 6:19; Col. 1:24-28; 2:2; 4:3-4; 1 Tim. 3:9, 16.

Works Cited:

BDAG: Walter Bauer, F. W. Danker, W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago; London: The University of Chicago Press, 2001.

BDBG: Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, The New Brown–Driver–Briggs–Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon. Lafayette, IN: Associated Publishers, 1980.

Gustaf Dalman, The words of Jesus considered in the light of post-Biblical Jewish writings and the Aramaic language, trans. D. M. Kay. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1902.

Related Posts: Literary World of the Gospels, Kingdom of God (Part 1), 

Related articles:

 

Image credit: https://www.facebook.com/groups/391854177904014/posts/1564281403994613/

Another Look at Matthew 24 Through Pronominal Lenses

In what has historically been labeled the “Olivet Discourse,” Jesus foretold the destruction of the Jewish temple and surrounding buildings approximately four decades prior to it happening, while also addressing questions about the sign of his coming and the end of the age. The parallel accounts are recorded in Matt. 24:1–25:46; Mark 13:1-37; and Luke 21:5-36 (note also Luke 17:23-37; 18:8; 19:41-44).

Immediate Context

Jesus was at the temple in Jerusalem with his disciples, one of whom commented on the massive buildings and impressive architecture. Jesus then predicted the total destruction of “all these things” (Matt. 24:1-2; Mark 13:1-2; Luke 21:5-6). Later, at Mount Olivet, Peter, James, John, and Andrew privately asked him two questions: (a) “when will these things be?” (the destruction of the temple and buildings); and (b) “what is the sign when all these things are to be accomplished?” (Mark 13:4; Luke 21:7); “what is the sign of your coming and of the consummation of the age?” (Matt. 24:3).¹

Using Matthew’s more extensive account as our base text, Jesus answered the first question about the temple’s destruction in 24:4-34, concluding, “Truly I say to you that this generation will not have passed away until all these things have occurred” (v. 34). He then answered the second question in 24:35–25:46, affirming, “But concerning that day and hour, no one knows, not even the heavenly angels nor the Son, but only the Father” (24:36). 

Differentiating Pronominal References

Attention to pronouns and related pronominal references further establishes the separate responses. Plural demonstrative pronouns describe the events surrounding the temple’s destruction: “these [things]” (ταῦτα) (24:2, 3, 8, 33, 34) and “those days” (ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις) (vv. 19, 22, 29). The singular is used for the end of the age: “that day” (τῆς ἡμέρας ἐκείνης) (v. 36).

When Jesus addressed and alluded to his immediate (contemporary) disciples, he used second person plural (“you”) terminology (vv. 2, 4, 6, 9, 15, 20, 23, 25, 26, 32, 33, 34, 42, 43, 44, 47).² When speaking of those who were not his disciples, he used third person plural (“they”) terminology, inclusive of (a) false prophets (vv. 5, 11, 24, 26); (b) enemies (v. 9); (c) apostates (v. 10).³

The Challenging Verses

In the midst of answering the two questions, Jesus employed symbolism (vv. 27-31) that raises the issue of whether these verses apply to both of his responses, or just one to the exclusion of the other. Adding to the confusion for modern, westernized thinkers are the impediments of (a) ingrained linear thinking, (b) unfamiliarity with apocalyptic imagery, (c) a tendency to literalize, and (d) failure to recognize pronominal distinctions.

False claims of Christ’s premature arrival (v. 26) are to be rejected because the coming of the Son of Man will be like “lightening” (v. 27)—sudden, observable, unmistakable—while the fall of Jerusalem is likened to birds of prey gathered around a lifeless body (v. 28).

Shortly⁴ after the horrific events of “those days” (parallel to verses 19 and 22 leading up to Jerusalem’s fall), a dark, terrible day of judgment will occur against nationalistic Judaism, vividly portrayed with apocalyptic symbolism: “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken” (v. 29). These enigmatic descriptors, corresponding to no biblical accounts of Christ’s second coming, would have been familiar to anyone acquainted with Jewish apocalyptic literature. The darkening of atmospheric luminaries and plummeting constellations symbolize the collapse, downfall, and devastation of prominent powers (cf. Isa. 13:1-13; 14:4-15; 34:1-9; Amos 5:1-20; Luke 10:18): in this case, the first-century Jewish state.

“And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with great power and glory. And he will send his angels with a great trumpet [sound] and will gather his chosen ones from the four winds, from the ends of the heavens unto their ends” (vv. 30-31).

Contextually, while these verses could be interpreted figuratively with reference to the Lord’s swift judgment against Jerusalem and providential protection of his disciples,⁵ there seems instead to be a momentary shift, elaborating on what was said in verse 27, introducing what will be more fully disclosed in verses 35 ff., while contrasting what is to occur in the near and distant futures.

The visual and perceptual “seeing” verb ὁράω is consistently used throughout this discourse with the second person plural (“you”) form of address when applied to Christ’s contemporary followers: “you see [to it] that you are not troubled” (v. 6); “when you see ...” (v. 15); “if anyone says to you, ‘See ...’” (v. 23); “See, I have told you ...” (v. 25); “If they say to you, ‘Look ... look ...’” (v. 26); “when you see all these things ...” (v. 33). However, there is a pronominal shift in v. 30, “they will see ...” Many of the Lord’s personal disciples will still be alive to see the events leading up to Jerusalem’s destruction but not when the Lord himself returns.

The correlative adverb of time, “then” (τότε), occurring twice in verse 30, is used “of any time at all that fulfills certain conditions” (BDAG 1012). What Jesus says here is comparable to what he had revealed earlier to these same individuals (Matt. 13:39-43), as well as similar teachings elsewhere in the NT (e.g., 1 Thess. 4:13–5:10; 2 Thess. 1:6-10).

The parable of the fig tree illustrates for “you” (the current listeners) what “you know” about the foliage of a fig tree as a sign that summer is near (v. 32). “Thus also you, when you see all these [things], know that it is [ἐστιν] near, at the doors” (v. 33). Again, the expression “these [things],” repeatedly referring to the temple’s destruction (vv. 2, 3, 8), is not applicable to what “they will see” at the end of time (v. 30) but what “you see” from the perspective of the ones to whom Jesus was speaking on this occasion.

Conclusion

The pronominal switch from “you” (Matt. 24:2-26) to “they” (v. 30) back to “you” (vv. 32-33) leads to the concluding statement: “Truly I say to you that this generation will not have passed away until all these things have occurred” (v. 34). Then, starting at verse 35 through to the end of chapter 25, the second question is more fully addressed about “that day and hour” of the Lord’s return and the end of the age, the timing of which “no one knows, not even the heavenly angels nor the Son, but only the Father” (24:36). “Be watchful, therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour in which the Son of Man comes” (25:13).

--Kevin L. Moore

*Thanks to Martin Klamm for bringing this “Pronoun Shift” to my attention <Topical Bible Studies>.

Endnotes:

     ¹ Unless noted otherwise, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ² The disciples are alluded to by Matthew in third person narrative (vv. 2, 4). Others, contemporary with Peter, James, John and Andrew, are spoken of in the third person: “Then the [ones] in Judea, let them flee to the mountains” (v. 16); “the [ones]” pregnant and “the [ones]” nursing (v. 19).

     ³ Third person plurals are also used in reference to angels (v. 31), the pre-flood population (vv. 38-39), and the master’s household (v. 45). Third person singulars denote the one having endured to the end and saved from destruction (v. 13), “the [one] reading ...” (v. 15), “the [one] on the housetop ...” (v. 17), and “the [one] in the field ...” (v. 18). Note also verses 40-51.

     ⁴ While the adverb εὐθέως is often rendered “immediately,” the sense of “shortly” better conveys its use here, i.e., after an indefinite but not a greatly extended period of time (as in Luke 13:5). In the midst of these signs, the end does not come “immediately” [εὐθέως] (Luke 21:9).

     ⁵ See K. L. Moore, “Matthew 24: End of the World or Jerusalem’s Fall,” Moore Perspective (8 Feb. 2014), <Link>.

Related Posts: The Day of the Lord, Anticipating Christ's Return: Part 1, Part 2, Luke's Perspective on Jerusalem's Fall: Part 1

Related articles:

 

Image credit: https://askgramps.org/what-is-the-olivet-discourse/ 

The Process of Identifying, Selecting, and Appointing Elders

Each congregating community of God’s people is autonomous, designed to be organized with a plurality of qualified men serving as the principal leaders, designated as elders, overseers, shepherds (Acts 20:17, 28; 1 Pet. 5:1-4). Qualifications of these leaders are provided in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9.

No Procedural Pattern

The first mention of elders in a local church is Acts 11:30, but nothing is said about how these men were selected and instated. When Paul and Barnabas “appointed elders in every church” during their first missionary campaign (Acts 14:23), no details are given about a selection process or conferment procedure. Titus was instructed to “appoint elders” in every city of Crete where churches had been established, but other than the necessary qualifications of these men (Titus 1:5-9), no procedural guidelines are given.

Throughout the NT we read of elders already serving (Acts 15:2-6, 23; 20:17, 28; 21:17-19; Eph. 4:11-12; Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 5:17; James 5:14; 1 Pet. 5:1-4), but the mechanics of how these men were chosen and installed is not recorded. 

What About Acts 6:1-6?

The special circumstances of Acts 6:1-6 do not necessarily establish a set pattern for appointing congregational leaders. The twelve apostles were the recognized church leaders at the time, and the Christian community in Jerusalem consisted of multiplied thousands of disciples (Acts 2:41, 47; 4:4; 5:14; 6:1). When it became necessary to delegate the benevolence-ministry responsibilities to deacon-like servants, the apostles sought input from “the multitude of disciples” to help identify the men who exhibited the predetermined qualifications. This would have been most expedient under the circumstances, since twelve apostles could not have possibly known, on an individual basis, the thousands of men from which to choose.

Procedural Expediencies   

The Bible provides sufficient information for us to know what is expected of church leaders and the type of men who should serve. But God has not disclosed specific guidelines for the selection and conferment process, probably because every situation is different in relation to membership, circumstances, cultural environment, and human resources. Explicit procedural details are not biblically mandated. As long as the end result is a scripturally organized church in accordance with God’s purpose, the divine will as revealed in scripture has been fulfilled.

--Kevin L. Moore

Related Posts: Elder Qualifications (Part 1) and accompanying Links, Congregational Leadership Without Elders 

 

Image credit: https://livingontheedge.org/2000/01/02/how-do-i-begin-reading-the-bible/?srsltid=AfmBOoq9VvN4sg5gVz8L_B_JF8iqeAMn4JobJiKIXi0tT7J3fZOI_vht