sign in sign up
<<
Home , Luke 4, Luke 6, Rejection of Jesus

Luke’s Account of the Rejection of at (:16-30)

Presented to the 65th Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society Baltimore, Maryland, November 19-21, 2013 by Myron C. Kauk Moody Institute

Luke’s account of the at Nazareth, recorded in Luke 4:16-30, continues to attract attention for a number of reasons. First, there is the question of the relationship of Luke’s account to the other . There is a similar account of Jesus preaching in Nazareth recorded in Matt 13:53-58 and :1-6a, but both Matthew and Mark place the event significantly later than Luke. Are they the same event, and if so, has Luke moved the event chronologically forward, or have the other gospels moved it back? Or are these separate events? Related to this is the question of Luke’s sources. Is Luke dependent on Mark, on Q, or on some other source?

Second, there is the question of Luke’s use of the Old Testament in this account. In the , Jesus reads, presumably from the Hebrew text of Isa 61:1-2, but the citation in Luke’s more closely resembles the LXX with a few modifications.

Third, this passage is significant because according to Luke’s presentation, this appears to be an inaugural sermon of Jesus that is paradigmatic for His earthly ministry. Indeed, Luke seems to build on this paradigm both in the gospel and in the book of Acts.

Consequently, this paper will examine 1) the relationship of Luke 4:16-30 to the other gospels, 2) the use of the

Old Testament in this passage, and 3) the role this passage plays as a paradigm for Jesus’ ministry in Luke-Acts.

The Relationship of Luke 4:16-30 to the Other Gospels

Aland’s Synopsis lists Matt 13:53-58; Mark 6:1-6a; Luke 4:16-30 as parallels in §33 and again in §139.1 As early as Augustine, it was suggested that Mark’s account should be considered primary and that Luke records this event antecedent to its historical occurrence,2 but with the rise of historical criticism, and the assumption of Marcan priority, this view has grown in popularity. Hugh Anderson, in a 1964 review of literature, recognized a shift from an earlier tendency to view Luke as a meticulous historian and thus to give priority to his account, to a tendency to view Luke

1 Kurt Aland, Synopsis of the Four Gospels (Stuttgart: German Bible Society, 1983), §33, §139. 2 Augustine, De consens. Ev. 2.42.90 Myron C. Kauk Page 1 more as creatively shaping his materials for theological purposes.3 Bultmann, for instance, regarded the earliest form of this tradition to be preserved in an independent saying found in Oxyrhincus Papyrus I (οὐκ ἐστιν δεκτός προφήτης ἐν τῇ

πατρίδι αὐτοῦ, “a prophet is not welcome in his homeland”). From this, Bultmann regards the Marcan account to be a

“typical example of how an imaginary situation is built up out of an independent saying”4 and the Lucan account to be a further embellishment of this. Subsequent scholarship has continued to gravitate towards the assumption that the

Lucan account is a redaction of the account in Mark.5 Prior states that “the general hypothesis of scholars who subscribe to the Two-Source Theory of gospel origins” is “that Luke may have given a new context to the scene as recorded in

Mark and Matthew, and elaborated it after his own fashion, with or without the use of other material from the tradition.”6

The first argument in support of this is the overall agreement in order of Mark and Luke.7 Following Luke’s account of the incident in Nazareth, the material in Luke 4:31-44; 5:12-6:11; 8:4-18, 22-56 corresponds closely with the material in :21-3:6; 4:1-25; 4:35-5:43. There is an account of Jesus calling four disciples in Mark 1:16-20 before he goes to and in :1-11 there is an account of Jesus calling these same disciples following his departure from Capernaum. In :12-16, calling of the twelve precedes Jesus’ healing of the multitudes while in

Mark 3:13-19a it follows. Luke 6:20-8:3 is not represented in Mark except for a possible parallel between :36-50 and Mark 14:3-9. The discussion of Jesus’ true kindred occurs later in Luke (8:19-21) than in Mark (3:31-35). Following

Mark’s account of the rejection at Nazareth, :1-17 corresponds closely with Mark 6:6b-16; 30-34, but Mark 6:17-

29 and Mark 6:45-8:26 are not represented in Luke. All of this suggests that Mark and Luke are telling substantially the same story. But since Luke corresponds to Mark at so many points and yet does not contain an account of Jesus being rejected at Nazareth where Mark has one, this leads to the suggestion that Luke has taken Mark’s account and moved it

3 Hugh Anderson, “Broadening Horizons: The Rejection at Nazareth Pericope of Luke 4:16-30 in Light of Recent Critical Trends.” Interpretation 18.3 (1964): 261-263. 4 Rudolf Bultmann, History of the Synoptic Tradition (New York: Harper & Row, 1963), 31. 5 For a comprehensive survey of literature through 1989, see C. J. Schreck, “The Nazareth Pericope: Luke 4,16-30 in Recent Study,” in L’Evangeile de Luc = The , ed. F. Neirynck (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1989), 399-471. More recently, see Robert Stein, Luke (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1992), 151-161; Darrel L. Bock, :1-9:50 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 391-421; Michael Prior, Jesus the Liberator (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995); Darrell L. Bock, Jesus According to the Scripture (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 95-98; W. Pao and Eckhard J. Schabel, “Luke,” in Commentary on the Use of the Old Testament, eds G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), 287-291; Craig L. Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2009), 270-272, 314. 6 Prior, 86. 7 See Appendix A. Also, there is a helpful analysis in Prior, 74ff. Myron C. Kauk Page 2 forward in his narrative for his own purposes. Tannehill considers it inconceivable that there are two events here. Mark

6 could hardly have happened after the people of Nazareth had tried to stone Jesus on a previous ocassion.8

Secondly, there is the argument from agreement in content. Actual agreement in words is actually fairly small.

Only fourteen out of 270 words in Luke 4:16-30 are exact agreements with Mark.9 Luke’s story does exhibit some similarities to the accounts in Matthew and Mark. Tannehill argues that all of the essentialy points of Mark 6:2-4 are present in Luke.10 But there are also significant differences. Bock notes that the accounts in Matthew and Mark contain eight elements while the account in Luke contains thirteen. Luke overlaps with Matthew and Mark in only three of these.11

Matthew/Mark Luke

Entry into the synagogue Entry into the synagogue on the (Luke 4:16; Matt 13:54; Mark 6:2) Astonishment at Jesus’ teaching Jesus standing to read Isaiah Source of Jesus’ wisdom questioned Citation of the passage Closing of the book Jesus’ declaration that fulfillment has come today The crowd’s speaking well of Jesus’ gracious words Jesus’ kinship questioned Jesus’ relationship to Joseph questioned (Luke 4:22; Matt 13:55-56; Mark 6:3) The offense that some took at Jesus The proverb that a physician should heal himself and do great works A prophet’s lack of honor A prophet’s lack of honor (Luke 4:24; Matt 13:57; Mark 6:4) Jesus’ stoppage of works there The - parallel Jesus’ marvelling at their unbelief The crowd filling with anger The crowd’s desire to throw Jesus over a cliff Jesus’ passing through the crowd

A closer look at these overlaps shows that even they exhibit more differences than similarities. While Luke 4:16 and Mark 6:1-2 both place Jesus in Nazareth, only Luke specifies the name of the city (Ναζαρά). Mark simply says that

Jesus came to his home town (τὴν πατρίδα αὐτοῦ). Mark adds the interesting detail that His disciples followed Him, which is absent in Luke. Both accounts have Jesus going into the synagogue on the Sabbath, hardly a unique occurrence since Luke mentions that this was Jesus’ custom,12 but the wording is significantly different. Mark uses a genitive construction, γενομένου σαββάτου, “when the Sabbath came,” while Luke uses a prepositional phrase, ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν

σαββάτων, “on the Sabbath day.” Mark uses the preposition ἐν plus the dative τῇ συναγωγῇ, “in the synagogue,” while

Luke uses εἰς plus the accusative τὴν συναγωγὴν, “into the synagogue.” These differences in wording hardly make a

8 Robert C. Tannehill, “The Mission of Jesus according to Luke IV 16-30.” In Jesus in Nazareth, ed. Eric Gräßer and Walther Eltester (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1972), 51-52. 9 See Appendix B. 10 Tannehill, “Mission,” 51. 11 Bock, Luke 1:1-9:50, 395. 12 Cf. Matt 12:9; 13:54; Mark 1:21; 3:1; 6:2; Luke 4:16, 31-33; 6:6; John 6:59. Myron C. Kauk Page 3 difference in the overall sense of these verses, but on the assumption that Luke is copying from Mark, it is difficult to assign a redactional purpose to them.

A comparison of Luke 4:24 with Mark 6:3 shows still more differences. In both verses, a rhetorical question is asked concerning Jesus’ family, but in Mark, reference is made to His mother, His brothers, His sisters, and His trade as a carpenter. The question is noticeably disparaging and Mark records that “they took offense at Him.” In Luke, However,

Jesus is refered to as the son of Joseph and the immediate sense of the crowd seems to be positive rather than negative.13

The closest parallel is between Luke 4:24 and Mark 6:4 where seven of the fourteen verbal agreements occur.

But the significant difference here is that Luke uses the word δεκτός “welcome” while Mark uses ἄτιμος “without honor.” In Mark, Jesus uses this proverb in response to the offense of the crowd to explain their rejection of Him. In

Luke, it is part of His response to a positive appraisal by the crowd and part of His explanation why He will not do for them as they heard He had done in Capernaum. It introduces His reference to the prophets Elijah and Elisha and their ministries outside of the boundaries of Israel. Along with these other elements, the proverb in Luke’s gospel becomes the occasion of the crowd’s offense rather than the response to it. As Tannehill says, “It is not so much that Jesus goes elsewhere because he is rejected as that he is rejected because he announces that it is ’s will and his mission to go elsewhere.”14 So, if Luke is dependent on Mark at this point, he has turned the proverb completely on its head.

If Luke is dependent on Mark for his account of Jesus preaching in the synagogue in Luke 4:16-30, he has relocated Mark’s account to an entirely different setting and has used practically none of Mark’s vocabulary. He has also added much that is not represent in Mark at all. Unique to Luke are the following features:

 The dramatic character of the scene  The ritual of the synagogue service  The fact of the reading from Isaiah  The detail of the reading from Isaiah  The detail of the teaching  The detail of the reaction of the audience  The detail of the reaction of Jesus  The absence of the phrase “Where did this man get all this? What is the wisdom given to him?” (Mk 6.2)  The absence of the phrase, “What mighty works are wrought by his hands!” (Mk 6.2)  The mention of Joseph, rather than the carpenter’s son  The absence of reference to Mary and brothers

13 Joel B. Green, The Gospel According to Luke (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 215. 14 Tannehill, 62. Myron C. Kauk Page 4  The reference of “Physician, heal yourself.”  The reference to “what we have heard you did at Capernaum, do here also in your own country”  The reference to Elijah and Elisha  The anger of the audience  The attempt to kill Jesus  The mode of Jesus’ escape15

Still proponents of Luke’s dependence on Mark argue that there are certain tell tale signs of Luke’s redactional activity.16 Chief among these is the reference to Capernaum in Luke 4:23. Luke has not previously mentioned

Capernaum and indeed, the reference in Luke 4:31, “And He came down to Capernaum, a city of , and He was teaching them on the Sabbath,” sounds as if he is introducing Capernaum for the first time. Thus Chilton argues that

“Luke retains traces of the order he altered.”17 Stein sees this as evidence that Luke is not writing chronologically.18 In this construction, Luke 4:14-15 is considered a redactional bridge corresponding to Mark 1:14 and worded intentionally to allow for a wider ministry before Jesus reaches Nazareth.19

Tannehill, on the other hand, argues that the reference to Capernaum in Luke 4:23 is forward looking. He considers it impossible that Luke would intend a reference to previous actions of Jesus in Capernaum when he has recorded none. He suggests that the future tense of ἐρεῖτέ, “you will say,” needs to be taken seriously and that Jesus is predicting what the response in Nazareth will be after His upcoming activity in Capernaum. He regards Luke 4:14-15 to be a summary of the events that follow in Luke’s narrative rather than a statement of events that precede Jesus’ visit to

Nazareth.20

Neither of these moves is necessary. :12 provides evidence of early activity in Capernaum by Jesus and it is likely that this activity included miracles. Nicodemus is aware of Jesus’ miraculous activity as early as John 3:2, so it is likely that the people of Nazareth would know of it as well. Luke does not need to report this activity in order to accurately report Jesus’ discussion with the people of Nazareth about it. In the final analysis, the case for Lucan dependence solely on Mark alone is not compelling. At the very least, It seems necessary to look for additional sources for Luke’s account.

15 Prior, 82. 16 See especially, Bruce Chilton, “Announcement in Nazara: An Analysis of Luke 4:16-21,” in Gospel Perspectives: Studies of History and Tradition in the Four Gospels. ed. R. T. France and David Wenham (Sheffield: JSOT, 1981), 2:147-171. 17 Chilton, “Announcement in Nazara,” 150. 18 Stein, Luke, 158. So also Bock, Jesus, 95; John Nolland, Luke 1-9:20 (Dallas: Word, 1989), 191. 19 Schreck, 412-413. 20 Tannehill, “Mission,” 54-55. Myron C. Kauk Page 5 It has been suggested that Q is such a source. Q is a hypothetical document supposedly used by Matthew and

Luke in the writing of their gospels. The contents of Q have been reconstructed from parallels in Matthew and Luke that are not represented in Mark. But it is widely accepted that Q may have overlapped with the contents of Mark and that either Matthew or Luke might follow Q when the other is following Mark. Is Luke 4:16-30 an instance of this?

Christopher Tuckett has suggested that it is.21 His primary argument in favor of this is based on the occurrence of the word Ναζαρά in v 16. This form of the word, widely regarded to be an Aramaism, occurs only here and in Matt 4:13. On the basis of this single word, the International Q Project has been willing to posit evidence of a Q segment at Matt 4:13;

Luke 4:16.22 Tuckett suggests that allusions to Isa 61 in Luke 6:20ff | Matt 5:3ff and 7:22 | Matt 11:5 belong to the Q stratum and so it is likely that the quotation from Isa 61:1-2 in Luke 4:18-19 belongs to Q as well.23 Tuckett argues that

“the Isaiah quotation is integral to the sequel, and without it the whole section collapses to nothing. This suggests that the reference to Ναζαρά in v. 16a and the Isiaiah quotation belong together.”24 Thirdly, Tuckett argues that the occurrence of the word φήμη (“report”) in Luke 4:14 and Matt 9:26, the only occurrences of this word in the NT, indicates another parallel in the context. Matt 9:26 is parallel to Mark 5:43, which immediately precedes Mark’s rejection story. So Tuckett concludes that “some relationship between these verses is likely.”25 This suggests “the existence of a tradition which spoke of Jesus coming to Ναζαρά and being preceded by a general favourable report of his activity; this tradition appears to have been used by Matthew and Luke, and hence formed part of the Q material.”26

Tuckett suggests that vv 16-21, 23, 25-27 all come from Q.27

The case for a Q parallel in Luke 4:16-30 seems extremely slight. And yet, some source other than Mark seems necessary. Marshall has claimed that “It is certain that Luke knew Mk. 6:1–6 and regarded this narrative as a substitute for it, but there is no evidence that he has used it as a source here.”28 He leaves the nature of Luke’s substitute source unspecified. Nolland argues that “there can be little doubt that Luke had access to an additional account of Jesus’

21 C. M. Tuckett, “Luke 4,16-30, Isaiah and Q,” in Logia: Les Paroles de Jésus – The Sayings of Jesus, ed. Joēl Delobel (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1982), 343-354; C. M. Tuckett, Q and the History of Early (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996), 222-237. 22 James M. Robinson, Paul Hoffman, and John S. Kloppenberg. The Critical Edition of Q (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000), 42-43. So also B. H. Streeter, The Four Gospels (London: MacMillan, 1924), 206. 23 Tuckett, “Luke 4, 16-30, Isaiah and Q,” 343. 24 Tuckett, Q, 228-229. 25 Tuckett, 345. 26 Tuckett, “Luke 4, 16-30, Isaiah and Q,” 343. 27 Tuckett, “Luke 4, 16-30, Isaiah and Q,” 354. 28 I. Howard Marshall, The Gospel of Luke: a Commentary on the Greek Text (Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1978), 179. Myron C. Kauk Page 6 ministry in Nazareth. The mention of Capernaum in v 23b is inexplicable on the basis of free Lukan construction.”29 But if there was a source in addition to Mark, there really is no reason to insist on Mark as a source of Luke’s account at all.

Mark adds nothing that would not have been in the other account. And once dependance on Mark is abandoned, there is no reason to insist that Luke is recording the same event. All of the common features are things which could easily have happened on multiple occassions. Jesus visited His hometown. How many times is that likely to have happened during His three year ministry? As Dahunsi stated, “it may rightly be supposed that Jesus visited His home town on several occasions.”30 Jesus went to the synagogue. How often did He do that? He taught in the synagogue. How often did He do that? The people were amazed at Jesus’ teaching. This was a regular response to Jesus’ teaching. There is a question about Jesus’ origins. It is not unlikely that this occurred more than once. Jesus uses a proverb about a prophet without honor. But it appear that Jesus may have said something like this on multiple occassions. In addition to the version in Luke 4:24, Mark 6:4, and Matt 13:57, there is also an occurrence of this proverb in :44 in a manisfestly different context from Matthew and Mark. Jesus is rejected. How many times did this happen?

The best solution seems to be to recognize that Luke is recording a separate event from that recorded in Mark 6 and , one that occurred at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. :13 mentions a visit to Nazareth prior to Jesus’ ministry in Capernaum although he gives no details about it. Arndt suggests that this is the true parallel to Luke

4:16-30. He states that “Lk’s assertion (1:3) that he intends to relate things ‘in order’ hardly is compatible with the view that he should deliberately change the sequence of events so radically as presupposed by the theory that he here departs from chronological sequence.”31 This would mean Luke’s account corresponds with the events of Mark 1:14-15 and also with John 4:43-45.32 And if this is the case, then according to John 2:12, “Jesus had established His headquarters in Capernaum about half a year before.”33 Finkel concludes that “Luke (and John 4, 44) represents the earlier narrative of rejection and astonishment at Jesus’ home-town at the beginning of his ministry. Whereas, Mark

29 John Nolland, Luke 1-9:20 (Dallas: Word, 1989), 192. 30 Emanuel Ajayi Dahunsi, “The Significance of the Account of the Nazareth Episode in the Gospel of Luke,” (ThD Thesis, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1957), 16. 31 William Arndt, The Gospel According to St. luke (Saint Louis: Concordia, 1956), 135. See also Asher, Finkel, “Jesus’ Sermon at Nazareth (Luk. 4, 16-30),” in Abraham Unser Vater, edited by Otto Betz, Martin Hengel, and Peter Schmidt (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1963), 106-115. 32 Arndt, 132. 33 Arndt, 135. Myron C. Kauk Page 7 and Matthew record a narrative of rejection on a later date, after he continued his mission as a teacher and healer in other villages.”34

The Use of the Old Testament in Luke 4:18-19

Luke 4:18-19 is a composite quotation taken mostly from Isa 61:1-2a with a line added from Isa 58:6 and one deleted from Isa 61:1.35 Out of 26 words in Luke 4:18-19, 24 agree exactly with the LXX of either Isa 61:1-2 or 58:6. Luke agrees with the LXX over against the Hebrew in omitting two out of three references to the tetragrammaton.

and to those who are bound an opening”) as καὶ τυφλοῖς“) וְלַאֲ סּורִ ים פְקַ ח־קֹוחַ Luke also follows the LXX in rendering

is פְקַ ח is a hapax legommenon, but the verb פְקַ ח־קֹוחַ ἀνάβλεψιν (“and to the blind recovery of sight”).36 The Hebrew used elsewhere in the Bible only of opening eyes or ears. In light of similar expressions in Isa 42:7, 18, 22; 43:8, Sanders says “the Greek translator had no difficulty whatever in understanding and conveying the metaphor of blindness for

לַחֲ בֹׁש לְנִׁשְ בְרֵ י־לֵ ב prisoners.”37 Luke omits LXX ἰάσασθαι τοὺς συντετριμμένους τῇ καρδίᾳ, which corresponds to

at the beginning of v לִקְ רֹא In the Hebrew text. Then Luke has κηρύξαι instead of LXX καλέσαι in agreement with MT

is translated (לִקְ רֹא) Isa 61:2). This may be explained by the fact that in the previous verse, the same Hebrew verb) 19 by κηρύξαι.38

Finally, Luke inserts a phrase from Isa 58:6 LXX, ἀπόστελλε τεθραυσμένους ἐν ἀφέσει (“set the oppressed free”) with a minor modification of ἀποστεῖλαι for ἀπόστελλε. It has been suggested that this reflects a midrash on Isa 61:1 that was formed in “a Greek milieu” based on the common word ἄφεσιν. However, Bock suggests that a Semitic link is also possible. He concludes that “the textual divergences from the LXX make it likely, especially in view of Luke’s very careful handling of text in other checkable contexts, that we should see here another traditional text source behind this

34 Finkel, 115. 35 See Appendix C. 36 Bock, Proclamation, 106. 37 James A. Sanders, “From to Luke 4,” in Christianity, and Other Greco-Roman Cults, ed. Jacob Neusner (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975), 82. 38 Tannehill, “Mission,” 66. Myron C. Kauk Page 8 textual insertion.”39 Tannehill argues the connection between Isa 61:1-2 and 58:6 is dependent on the LXX since two different Hebrew words are being translated as ἀφέσει.40 This word is frequently used in the sense of “forgiveness”

(1:77; 3:3; 24:47; Acts 2:38; 5:31; 10:43; 13:38; 26:18). In Isaiah it is a reference to release from the Babylonian captivity. In Luke, it seems to include exorcism and healing.41

Bock argues that “The text, because of its alteration, is not an actual synagogue reading. Instead, Luke is using a summary passage to point to the context of Jesus’ remarks about the task and office he fulfills, that is the description present primarily in Isaiah 61.”42 But Nolland claims that “the LXX text form and the evident redactional activity in no way preclude an actual reading of Isa 61 in the Nazareth synagogue.”43 He states that “in the absence of fixed prophetic it is not clear how the particular choice of readings was regulated by the ruler of the synagogue, but here a sense of the initiative of Jesus dominates the account.”44

Bock argues that “the relationship of Isa. 58.6 to Isa 61.1 must be dependent on Jesus’ authority to have been introduced at all.”45 This agrees with C. H. Dodd’s overall assessment in his study of the Old Testament testimonia, “To account for the beginning of this most original and fruitful process of rethinking the Old Testament we found need to postulate a creative mind. The gospels offer us one. Are we compelled to reject the offer?”46 But “the association may not have been expressed in a specific reading; instead the reading may represent a summary of Jesus’ remarks on a fuller set of texts on the occasion addressed in the tradition.”47 Finkel argues that the complete sermon by Jesus on this occasion is not given, but only a summary, since Luke 4:21 indicates what he “began to say” and 4:22 indicates that the people were “wondering at his gracious words” which suggests a further exposition by Jesus.48 Finkel suggests that the additional content of Jesus’ sermon may correspond to the beattitudes in the , which seem to be based on Isa 61:1-7.49

39 Bock, Proclamation, 106. 40 Tannehill, “Mission,” 66. 41 Charles H. Talbert, Reading Luke: A Literary and Theological Commentary (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2002), 58. 42 Bock, Proclamation, 107. So also Stein, 156; Marshall, 182. 43 Nolland, 193. 44 Nolland, 196. 45 Bock, Proclamation, 108. 46 C. H. Dodd, According the Scriptures: The Sub-structure of New Testament Theology (London: Nisbet, 1952), 110. 47 Bock, Proclamation, 108. 48 Finkel, 111. Also Nolland, 198. 49 Finkel, 113. Myron C. Kauk Page 9 Luke 4:16-30 in the Argument of Luke Acts

The sermon Jesus preaches in Luke 4:16-30 is paradigmatic for His entire ministry as it is presented in the book of Luke and . Green notes the following features:

(1) It stands as a concrete representation of the summarized in 4:14-15. (2) This is the first narrated episode of Jesus’ public ministry. (3) Elsewhere in the Third Gospel, Jesus conducts his ministry in the (see esp. the summaries in 4:15, 44; also 4:31-37; 6:6; 13:10-17), but nowhere else does Luke include a report of the content of his teaching. Hence, here we have an exemplar of the sort of message Jesus proclaimed in synagogues throughout his public ministry. (4) Luke has tied 4:16-30 together with the preceding material, from 3:21 onward, by the common concern with the activity of the Spirit and the consequent identification of Jesus and the nature of his mission…. (5) Subsequent summaries of Jesus’ ministry refer back to this account (7:21-22; Acts 10:38).50

According to Seccombe, Luke keeps returning to the ideas presented in this inaugural sermon. “In his Great Sermon

(Luke 6:20), in Jesus’ answer to the disciples of John (Luke 7:22), and in Peter’s speech to Cornelius (Acts 10:38) the same understanding of Jesus’ mission resurfaces, indicating a significant depth of interest in these particular Isaianic categories, and suggesting that Isaiah may have had a formative influence on Luke’s theology.”51

Peter Mallen argues that “Jesus’ interpretation of the Isaiah passage shares the eschatalogical perspective of the

Qumran community, but differs from it in three important ways.”52 First, in Qumran, the eschaton is soon to be fulfilled, but Jesus announces that it is being fulfilled “today.” Second, in Qumran, salvation was extended to the insiders, members of the community, but in his reference to Elijah and Elisha (Luke 4:25-27), Jesus extends salvation to women, the unclean, and even Gentiles. Third, Jesus’ citation omitted the last line of Isa 61:2 which was understood by the

Qumran community as speaking about judgment for Israel’s enemies.

According to Sanders, “the offense taken by the faithful of Nazareth was at Jesus’ midrash on the Isaiah passage.”53 Jesus was violating a hermeneutical axiom that assumed that in the eschaton God’s wrath would be directed against outsiders and his mercy to insiders. Instead, Jesus substitutes a hermeneutic of prophetic critique. The initial reaction of the crowd to Jesus’ sermon in v 22 is positive. “μαρτυρέω is used in Acts to indicate that men have a

50 Green, The Gospel of Luke, 207. 51 David Seccombe, “Luke and Isaiah,” in The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Edited by G. K. Beale (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 250. 52 Peter Mallen, The Reading and Transformation of Isaiah in Luke-Acts (London: T & T, Clark, 2008), 76. 53 Sanders, 92. Myron C. Kauk Page 10 good reputation” (6:3; 10:22; 22:5, 12; 26:5).54 θαυμάζω expresses surprise and can be positive or negative, but when paired with ἐπὶ τοῖς λόγοις τῆς χάριτος probably is intended positively. The expression οὐχὶ υἱός ἐστιν Ἰωσὴφ οὗτος; “Is not this Joseph’s son?” should probably also be taken positively.

The proverb in Luke 4:23 should be taken to mean that a physician’s first responsibility is to his own family. This is unpacked in the second clause where Jesus explains that they will expect Him to do the same things in Nazareth that

He has done in Capernaum.55 By way of contrast, Jesus explains that His role will be prophetic, calling the people of

Israel to and expanding His ministry to the Gentiles.56

Conclusion

This paper has looked at three main issues in Luke 4:16-30. It has examined the relationship of this passage to the other gospel accounts and has concluded that Luke’s account of Jesus’ preaching and rejection at Nazareth is best seen as an independent event occuring early in Jesus’ ministry and not the same event recorded in Mark 6 and Matthew

13. Regarding the quotation from Isa 61:1-2 and 58:6 it has argued that this is best seen as a summary of Jesus’ teaching on a particular occasion in the Nazareth synagogue. And finally, it has been suggested that the sermon Jesus preached on this occasion formed a broad base paradigm for his ongoing ministry and that of the church in the book of Acts.

54 B. J. Koet, “’Today This Scripture Has Been Fulfilled in Your Ears’. Jesus’ Explanation of Scripture in Luke 4.16-30” in Five Studies on Interpretation of Scripture in Luke-Acts (Leuven: Peeters, 1989), 40. 55 S. J. Noorda, “’Cure yourself, doctor!’ (Luke 4,23) Classical Parallels to an Alleged Saying of Jesus,” in Logia: Les Paroles de Jésus – The Sayings of Jesus, ed. Joēl Delobel (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1982) , 459-467. 56 Koet, 42-50. Myron C. Kauk Page 11 Appendix A Order of Pericopes from Luke’s Account of Jesus’ Preaching at Nazareth to the Account in Matthew and Mark57

Luke Mark Matthew Jesus’ Preaching at Nazareth 4:16-30 6:1-6a 13:53-58 The Call of the Disciples 5:1-11 1:16-20 4:18-22 Teaching in the Synagogue at Capernaum 4:31-32 1:21-22 4:13; 7:28-29 The Healing of the Demoniac in the Synagogue 4:33-37 1:23-28 The Healing of Peter’s Mother-in-law 4:38-39 1:29-31 8:14-15 The Sick Healed at Evening 4:40-41 1:32-34 8:16-17 Jesus Departs from Capernaum 4:42-43 1:35-38 First Preaching Tour in Galilee 4:44 1:39 4:23 The Miraculous Draught of Fish 5:1-11 4:1-2; 1:16-20 13:1-3a; 4:18-22 The Cleansing of the Leper 5:12-16 1:40-45 8:1-4 The Healing of the Paralytic 5:17-26 2:1-12 9:1-8 The Call of Levi 5:27-32 2:13-17 9:9-13 The Question about 5:33-39 2:18-22 9:14-17 Plucking Grain on the Sabbath 6:1-5 2:23-28 12:1-8 The Man with the Withered Hand 6:6-11 3:1-6 12:9-14 Jesus Heals Multitudes by the Sea 6:17-19 3:7-12 4:24-25; 12:15-16 The Choosing of the Twelve 6:12-16 3:13-19a 10:1-4 The /Plain 6:17-49 4:24-7:29 The Centurion of Capernaum 7:1-10 8:5-13 The Widow’s Son at Nain 7:11-17 ’s Question and Jesus’ Answer 7:18-23 11:2-6 Jesus’ Witness concerning John 7:24-35 11:7-19 The Woman with the Ointment 7:36-50 14:3-9 26:6-13 The Ministering Women 8:1-3 Jesus is Thought to be Beside Himself 3:19b-21 On Collusion with 11:14-15, 17-23 3:22-27 12:22-30; 9:32-34 The Sin against the Holy Spirit 12:10; 6:43-45 3:28-30 12:31-37 Jesus’ True Kindred 8:19-21 3:31-35 12:46-50 The Parable of the Sower 8:4-8 4:1-9 13:1-9 The Reason for Speaking in Parables 8:9-10 4:10-12 13:10-17 Interpretation of the Parable of the Sower 8:11-15 4:13-20 13:18-23 He who has Ears to Hear, Let him Hear 8:16-18 4:21-25 The Parable of the Seed Growing Secretly 4:26-29 The 13:24-30 The Parable of the Mustard Seed 13:18-19 4:30-32 13:31-32 The 13:20-21 13:33 Jesus’ Use of Parables 4:33-34 13:34-35 Jesus’ True Kindred 8:19-21 3:31-35 12:46-50 Stilling the Storm 8:22-25 4:35-41 8:23-27 The Gadarene Demoniacs 8:26-39 5:1-20 8:28-34 Jairus Daughter and the Woman with a Hemorrhage 8:40-56 5:21-43 9:18-26 Jesus is Rejected at Nazareth 4:16-30 6:1-6a 13:53-58

57 Adapted from Aland, Synopsis of the Four Gospels, §33-139. The chart follows the order in Mark and Luke. Sections that are listed out of order are underlined. Parallel sections in Matthew are listed. Sections that occur only in Matthew are not listed. Myron C. Kauk Page 12 Appendix B Luke 4:16-30 | Mark 6:1-6a | Matthew 13:53-5858

Luke 4:16-30 Mark 6:1-6a Matthew 13:53-58

53 Καὶ ἐγένετο ὅτε ἐτέλεσεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς

τὰς παραβολὰς ταύτας, μετῆρεν

16 1 ἐκεῖθεν. Καὶ ἦλθεν εἰς Ναζαρά, οὗ ἦν Καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ἐκεῖθεν καὶ ἔρχεται εἰς 54 καὶ ἐλθὼν εἰς τὴν πατρίδα αὐτοῦ τεθραμμένος, καὶ εἰσῆλθεν κατὰ τὸ τὴν πατρίδα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀκολουθοῦσιν ἐδίδασκεν αὐτοὺς ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ εἰωθὸς αὐτῷ ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ. 2 αὐτῶν, σαββάτων εἰς τὴν συναγωγὴν καὶ καὶ γενομένου σαββάτου ἤρξατο ἀνέστη ἀναγνῶναι. διδάσκειν ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ, 17 καὶ ἐπεδόθη αὐτῷ βιβλίον τοῦ προφήτου Ἠσαΐου καὶ ἀναπτύξας τὸ βιβλίον εὗρεν τὸν τόπον οὗ ἦν γεγραμμένον· 18 πνεῦμα κυρίου ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ οὗ εἵνεκεν ἔχρισέν με εὐαγγελίσασθαι πτωχοῖς, ἀπέσταλκέν με, κηρύξαι αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν, ἀποστεῖλαι τεθραυσμένους ἐν ἀφέσει, 19 κηρύξαι ἐνιαυτὸν κυρίου δεκτόν. 20 καὶ πτύξας τὸ βιβλίον ἀποδοὺς τῷ ὑπηρέτῃ ἐκάθισεν· καὶ πάντων οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ ἦσαν ἀτενίζοντες αὐτῷ. 21 ἤρξατο δὲ λέγειν πρὸς αὐτοὺς ὅτι σήμερον πεπλήρωται ἡ γραφὴ αὕτη ἐν τοῖς ὠσὶν ὑμῶν. 22 ὥστε ἐκπλήσσεσθαι αὐτοὺς καὶ λέγειν· Καὶ πάντες ἐμαρτύρουν αὐτῷ καὶ καὶ πολλοὶ ἀκούοντες ἐξεπλήσσοντο πόθεν τούτῳ ἡ σοφία αὕτη καὶ αἱ ἐθαύμαζον ἐπὶ τοῖς λόγοις τῆς χάριτος λέγοντες· πόθεν τούτῳ ταῦτα, καὶ τίς ἡ δυνάμεις; τοῖς ἐκπορευομένοις ἐκ τοῦ στόματος σοφία ἡ δοθεῖσα τούτῳ, καὶ αἱ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἔλεγον· δυνάμεις τοιαῦται διὰ τῶν χειρῶν αὐτοῦ γινόμεναι; οὐχὶ υἱός ἐστιν Ἰωσὴφ οὗτος; 3 οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τέκτων, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς 55 οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τοῦ τέκτονος Μαρίας καὶ ἀδελφὸς Ἰακώβου καὶ υἱός; οὐχ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ λέγεται Ἰωσῆτος καὶ Ἰούδα καὶ Σίμωνος; καὶ Μαριὰμ καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ οὐκ εἰσὶν αἱ ἀδελφαὶ αὐτοῦ ὧδε πρὸς Ἰάκωβος καὶ Ἰωσὴφ καὶ Σίμων καὶ

23 ἡμᾶς; καὶ ἐσκανδαλίζοντο ἐν αὐτῷ. Ἰούδας; καὶ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτούς· πάντως 4 καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς ὅτι οὐκ 56 καὶ αἱ ἀδελφαὶ αὐτοῦ οὐχὶ πᾶσαι ἐρεῖτέ μοι τὴν παραβολὴν ταύτην· ἔστιν προφήτης ἄτιμος εἰ μὴ ἐν τῇ πρὸς ἡμᾶς εἰσιν; πόθεν οὖν τούτῳ ἰατρέ, θεράπευσον σεαυτόν· ὅσα πατρίδι αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐν τοῖς συγγενεῦσιν ταῦτα πάντα; ἠκούσαμεν γενόμενα εἰς τὴν αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ αὐτοῦ. 57 καὶ ἐσκανδαλίζοντο ἐν αὐτῷ. ὁ δὲ Καφαρναοὺμ ποίησον καὶ ὧδε ἐν τῇ 5 καὶ οὐκ ἐδύνατο ἐκεῖ ποιῆσαι Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· οὐκ ἔστιν πατρίδι σου. 24 οὐδεμίαν δύναμιν, εἰ μὴ ὀλίγοις προφήτης ἄτιμος εἰ μὴ ἐν τῇ πατρίδι εἶπεν δέ· ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι οὐδεὶς ἀρρώστοις ἐπιθεὶς τὰς χεῖρας καὶ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ αὐτοῦ. προφήτης δεκτός ἐστιν ἐν τῇ πατρίδι ἐθεράπευσεν. 58 καὶ οὐκ ἐποίησεν ἐκεῖ δυνάμεις αὐτοῦ. 6 25 καὶ ἐθαύμαζεν διὰ τὴν ἀπιστίαν πολλὰς διὰ τὴν ἀπιστίαν αὐτῶν. ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, πολλαὶ αὐτῶν. Καὶ περιῆγεν τὰς κώμας κύκλῳ χῆραι ἦσαν ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις Ἠλίου ἐν διδάσκων. τῷ Ἰσραήλ, ὅτε ἐκλείσθη ὁ οὐρανὸς ἐπὶ ἔτη τρία καὶ μῆνας ἕξ, ὡς ἐγένετο

58 Aland, Synopsis of the Four Gospels, §33. Exact agreements between Luke and Mark are underlined. Agreements between Luke and Matthew against Mark are marked with a dotted line. Near agreements are marked with a wavy line. Myron C. Kauk Page 13 λιμὸς μέγας ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν, 26 καὶ πρὸς οὐδεμίαν αὐτῶν ἐπέμφθη Ἠλίας εἰ μὴ εἰς Σάρεπτα τῆς Σιδωνίας πρὸς γυναῖκα χήραν. 27 καὶ πολλοὶ λεπροὶ ἦσαν ἐν τῷ Ἰσραὴλ ἐπὶ Ἐλισαίου τοῦ προφήτου, καὶ οὐδεὶς αὐτῶν ἐκαθαρίσθη εἰ μὴ Ναιμὰν ὁ Σύρος. 28 καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν πάντες θυμοῦ ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ ἀκούοντες ταῦτα 29 καὶ ἀναστάντες ἐξέβαλον αὐτὸν ἔξω τῆς πόλεως καὶ ἤγαγον αὐτὸν ἕως ὀφρύος τοῦ ὄρους ἐφ᾽ οὗ ἡ πόλις ᾠκοδόμητο αὐτῶν ὥστε κατακρημνίσαι αὐτόν· 30 αὐτὸς δὲ διελθὼν διὰ μέσου αὐτῶν ἐπορεύετο.

Myron C. Kauk Page 14 Appendix C Luke 4:18-19 | Isaiah 61:1-2; 58:6 (LXX) | Isaiah 61:1-2; 58:6 (MT)59

Luke 4:18-19 Isa 61:1-2; 58:6 (LXX) Isa 61:1-2; 58:6 (Hebrew)

18 1 πνεῦμα κυρίου ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ οὗ εἵνεκεν πνεῦμα κυρίου ἐπ᾽ ἐμέ οὗ εἵνεκεν 1 רּוחַ אֲ דֹנָ י יְהוִ ה עָלָ י יַעַ ן מָׁשַ ח ἔχρισέν με εὐαγγελίσασθαι πτωχοῖς, ἔχρισέν με εὐαγγελίσασθαι πτωχοῖς יְהוָ ה אֹתִ י לְבַשֵ ר עֲ נָוִ ים ׁשְ לָחַ נִ י ἀπέσταλκέν με, κηρύξαι αἰχμαλώτοις ἀπέσταλκέν με ἰάσασθαι τοὺς ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν, συντετριμμένους τῇ καρδίᾳ κηρύξαι לַחֲ בֹׁש לְנִׁשְ בְרֵ י־לֵ ב לִקְ רֹא לִׁשְ בּויִם ἀποστεῖλαι τεθραυσμένους ἐν ἀφέσει, αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς 19 κηρύξαι ἐνιαυτὸν κυρίου δεκτόν. ἀνάβλεψιν 2 דְ רֹור וְלַאֲ סּורִ ים פְקַ ח־קֹוחַ καλέσαι ἐνιαυτὸν κυρίου δεκτὸν καὶ ἡμέραν ἀνταποδόσεως παρακαλέσαι 2 לִקְ רֹא ׁשְ נַ ת־רָ צֹון לַ יהוָ ה וְ יֹום נָקָ ם πάντας τοὺς πενθοῦντας

לֵ אֹלהֵ ינּו לְנַחֵ ם כָ ל־אֲבֵלִ ים οὐχὶ τοιαύτην νηστείαν ἐγὼ 6 ἐξελεξάμην λέγει κύριος ἀλλὰ λῦε πάντα σύνδεσμον ἀδικίας διάλυε 6 הֲ לֹוא זֶ הצֹום אֶבְחָרֵ הּו פַתֵחַ στραγγαλιὰς βιαίων συναλλαγμάτων חַרְ צֻ בֹות רֶׁשַ עהַתֵ ראֲ גֻ דֹות מֹוטָ ה ἀπόστελλε τεθραυσμένους ἐν ἀφέσει καὶ πᾶσαν συγγραφὴν ἄδικον διάσπα וְׁשַ לַ ח רְ צּוצִ ים חָפְׁשִ ים וְכָ ל־מֹוטָ ה תְ נַתֵ קּו

59 Gleason L. Archer and Gregory Chirichigno, Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament (Chicago: Moody, 1983), 128-129. Exact agreements between Luke 4:18-19 and the LXX of Isa 61:1-2 are underlined. Agreements between Luke and Isa 58:6 are marked with a wavy line. Hebrew text that is reflected in the LXX and Luke is boxed and Hebrew text that is partially reflected is marked with a wavy box. Myron C. Kauk Page 15 Bibliography

Aland, Kurt. Synopsis of the Four Gospels. Stuttgart: German Bible Society, 1983.

Anderson, Hugh. “Broadening Horizons: The Rejection at Nazareth Pericope of Luke 4:16-30 in Light of Recent Critical Trends.” Interpretation 18.3 (1964): 259-275.

Archer, Gleason and Gregory Chirichigno, Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament. Chicago: Moody, 1983.

Arndt, William F. The Gospel According to St. Luke. Saint Louis: Concordia, 1956.

Blomberg, Craig L. Jesus and the Gospels. Nashville: B & H Academic, 2009.

Bock, Darrell L. Jesus According to the Scripture. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002.

Bock, Darrel L. Luke 1:1-9:50. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994.

Bock, Darrell L. Proclamation from and Pattern. Sheffield: JSOT, 1987.

Bultmann, Rudolf. History of the Synoptic Tradition. New York: Harper & Row, 1963.

Chilton, Bruce. “Announcement in Nazara: An Analysis of Luke 4:16-21.” In Gospel Perspectives: Studies of History and Tradition in the Four Gospels. Edited by R. T. France and David Wenham, 2:147-172. Sheffield: JSOT, 1981.

Dahunsi, Emanuel Ajayi. “The Significance of the Account of the Nazareth Episode in the Gospel of Luke.” ThD Thesis, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1957.

Dodd, C. H. According the Scriptures: The Sub-structure of New Testament Theology. London: Nisbet, 1952.

Finkel, Asher. “Jesus’ Sermon at Nazareth (Luk. 4, 16-30).” In Abraham Unser Vater, edited by Otto Betz, Martin Hengel, and Peter Schmidt, 106-115. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1963.

Green, Joel B. The Gospel of Luke. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.

Koet, B. J. “’Today This Scripture Has Been Fulfilled in Your Ears’. Jesus’ Explanation of Scripture in Luke 4.16-30.” In Five Studies on Interpretation of Scripture in Luke-Acts, 24-55. Leuven: Peeters, 1989.

Mallen, Peter. The Reading and Transformation of Isaiah in Luke-Acts. London: T & T Clark, 2008.

Marshall, I. Howard. The Gospel of Luke: a Commentary on the Greek Text. Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1978.

Noorda, S. J. “’Cure yourself, doctor!’ (Luke 4,23) Classical Parallels to an Alleged Saying of Jesus.” In Logia: Les Paroles de Jésus – The Sayings of Jesus, ed. Joēl Delobel, 459-467. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1982.

Nolland, John. Luke 1-9:20. Dallas: Word, 1989.

Pau, David W. and Eckhard J. Schabel, “Luke.” In Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, ed. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, 251-414. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007.

Prior, Michael. Jesus the Liberator. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995.

Robinson, James M., Paul Hoffman, and John S. Kloppenberg. The Critical Edition of Q. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000.

Myron C. Kauk Page 16 Sanders, James A. “From Isaiah 61 to Luke 4.” In Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults, ed Jacob Neusner, 75-106. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975.

Schreck, C. J. “The Nazareth Pericope: Luke 4,16-30 in Recent Study.” In L’Evangeile de Luc = The Gospel of Luke. Edited by F. Neirynck, 399-471. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1989.

Seccombe, David. “Luke and Isaiah.” In The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Edited by G. K. Beale, 248-256. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994.

Stein, Robert. Luke. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1992.

Talbert, Charles H. Reading Luke: A Literary and Theological Commentary. Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2002.

Tannehill, Robert C. “The Mission of Jesus according to Luke IV 16-30.” In Jesus in Nazareth, ed. Eric Gräßer and Walther Eltester, 51-75. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1972.

Tannehill, Robert C. Luke. Nashville: Abingdon, 1996.

Thompson, G. H. P. The Gospel According to Luke. Oxford: Clarendon, 1972.

Tuckett, C. M. “Luke 4,16-30, Isaiah and Q.” In Logia: Les Paroles de Jésus – The Sayings of Jesus, ed. Joēl Delobel, 343- 354. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1982.

Tuckett, C. M. Q and the History of Early Christianity. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996.

Myron C. Kauk Page 17