Why Foreign Missions? 11. Luke and the Isaianic New Exodus

Why Foreign Missions?  11. Luke and the Isaianic New Exodus

The previous section argued that Luke uses Psalms 104-108 to frame the salvation historical narrative of Israel that comes to include the Gentiles.  He also uses Isaiah 40ff for the same purpose.  This point has been argued in detail by David Pao, and the following points present his argument.  Pao’s thesis is that ‘the scriptural story which provides the hermeneutical framework for Acts is none other than the foundation story of Exodus as developed and transformed through the Isaianic corpus.’[1]  This is an important matter for a biblical theology of missions, for Is. 40ff is the key section of the Old Testament for the mission of John the Baptist, Jesus, and the early Church.

Pao brings to attention the fact that Luke apparently frames his two volume work—Luke and Acts—with quotations from Isaiah:

                Lk. 3.4-6 (John the Baptist) from Is. 40.3-5 (the passage also explains calling Christianity ‘the Way’ in Acts 18-19 and 24; so also Is. 43.16-19)

                Lk. 4.18-19 (Jesus’ first sermon) from Is. 61.1-2

                Acts 8.28-33 (the Ethiopian eunuch) from Is. 53.7-8

                Acts 28.25-27 (why Jews’ reject Paul’s message in Rome) from Is. 6.9-10

The quotation from Isaiah 40.3-5 expands the passage that Mark quotes (1.3).  Thus the text not only functions (1) as a prophecy about John the Baptist’s ministry but also (2) points to God’s salvation that will come to (3) all flesh.  Also, the larger context of this passage, Is. 40.1-11, introduces four themes of importance to Luke:

                1. The restoration of the people of God (Is. 40.1-2).  This theme is related to the idea of comfort—God comforting his people in restoring them from exile (Is. 49.13) and rebuilding Jerusalem (Is. 51.3; 52.9).  Simeon speaks of the ‘consolation of Israel’ (Lk. 2.25; cf. Is. 40.11).  The underlying Greek for comfort/consolation is parakaleō and its cognates, which has to do with God’s coming salvation in Is. 35.4; 40.1, 11; 49.10, 13; 51.3, 12; 57.18; 61.2; 66.10-13.

                2. The universal revelation of God’s glory/salvation (Is. 40.3-5).  This theme has to do with God’s return to Zion.  As he bares holy arm to reveal his glory and salvation for Israel, all the nations are witnesses (Is. 42.4, 23; 49.6; 51.4-6).  Moreover, when God calls the nations, they come running (Is. 55.5).

                3. The power of the word of God and the fragility of the people (Is. 40.6-8).  Pao argues that the main ‘character’ in Acts is God’s Word; if so, Isaiah can also be cited as relevant for this theme.  God’s Word goes forth and will not return (Is. 45.23; 55.10).  God’s powerful Word contrasts to the impotence of the nations’ idols (Is. 40.18-20; 41.5-7; 44.9-20; 46.5-7).  Note Acts 19.20: ‘the word of the Lord grew mightily and prevailed.’  The theme of God’s Word overcoming idols in Acts should also be noted.

                4. The restoration of the people of God (Is. 40.9-11).  This theme of restoration beginning from Jerusalem is found in Is. 52.7-10 and 2.3, as it also is in Acts 1.8.

Is. 40.1-11 also introduces the theme of the new exodus (see also Is. 43.16-19; 44.26f; 51.9-11; 52.12 (cf. Ex. 23.20).  The new exodus theme is also combined with the new creation theme in Isaiah (40.12-31; 42.5; 43.15-21; 44.24; 45.9-18; 48.12f; 50.2; 51.9-11, 12-16).  In this way, the restoration of God’s people, Israel, is part of a larger plan of salvation for all peoples: Is. 40.5 and 49.6.

Pao argues that the identity of God’s people and the means God uses to save his people changes in Isaiah and in Luke-Acts.  Isaiah opens up the identity of God’s people, and Luke understand the Church to be God’s people (Acts 9.2; 19.9, 23; 22.4; 24.14, 22).  A passage in the Community Rule at Qumran also references Is. 40.3 to identify the wilderness as the place for restoring God’s people, uses the term ‘the Way’ to refer to God’s plan, and understands that the identity of God’s people will be different, since deceivers will be separated out from them (1QS 9.16-21; cf. 1 QS 8.13-16).[2]  The means by which God restores his people is through the proclamation of God’s Word—a Word about what he has done in Jesus Christ.  The Spirit-empowered disciples are witnesses of the work of God (Acts 1.8, 22; 2.32; 3.15; 5.32; 10.39, 41; 13.31; 22.15, 20; 26.16) and so are the means by which God’s Word is spoken.

For Jesus’ first sermon (Lk. 4.16-30), given in Nazareth, he reads Is. 61.1-2c and part of Is. 58.6.  This quotation involves a figurative redefinition of God’s people as Israel restored from captivity.[3]  Jesus’ sermon, however, redefines this ‘Israel’ so as to include Gentiles—a point that nearly gets him killed on the spot.  Paul frequently turns from Jewish synagogues to the Gentiles (Acts 13.14; 14.1; 18.19; 19.8; cf. 17.10).[4]  Moreover, Luke does not limit himself to taking the ‘poor’ lot of God’s people figuratively, since Jesus’ ministry includes the actual poor, marginalized, and needy (cf. Lk. 7.22).

Isaiah 49:6 is an important text for Luke:

… he says, "It is too light a thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the survivors of Israel; I will give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth.

This passage is quoted in Acts 13.47[5] and is alluded to on three other occasions: Lk. 24.44-49; Acts 1.8; and Acts 26.23 (cf. ‘light to the nations’).  The text appears at the end of Luke’s first volume, foreshadows what appears at the beginning of Luke’s second volume, in Acts 1.8, and is alluded to once more towards the end of the second volume, in Acts 26.23.  The phrase ‘end of the earth’ appears in both Acts 1.8 and 13.47.  The disciples will be Jesus’ witnesses from Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and the ends of the earth.  The phrase ‘ends of the earth’ can be found in Isaiah, in 8.9; 48.20; 62.11, as well as in 49.6.  Pao suggests that Acts 1.8 should be read not as the geographical expansion of the Church but in terms of (1) Jerusalem as the place where God’s salvation dawns; (2) Judea and Samaria as a reference to the reconstitution of Israel; and (3) ‘ends of the earth’ as a reference to the inclusion of the Gentiles in God’s salvation.[6]

In conclusion, we see from Pao’s helpful analysis of Luke’s use of Isaiah that the second exodus motif is important for Luke’s understanding of salvation history and its climax in Jesus Christ.  The restoration of God’s people from captivity involves a redefining of the identity of God’s people (this need not require our speaking of a ‘replacement’ of Israel by the Gentiles in Luke any more than this is the case in Isaiah, though) and of the means by which God’s restoration occurs—through the preaching of the Word.  Thus Luke’s mission theology, like Matthew’s, is an interpretation of Isaiah in light of the coming of Jesus Christ.

---

[1] David W. Pao, Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002; originally published by J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 2000) as volume 130 in Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Series 2), p. 5.  The following notes pay particular attention to the first half of this book (apart from the literature survey), which presents the basic argument.  For more detail, the rest of Pao’s work should be consulted.

[2] Pao, Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus, pp. 66-67.

[3] This point was previously made by Max Turner, Power From on High: The Spirit in Israel’s Restoration and Witness in Luke-Acts (Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), p. 250.

[4] Pao, Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus, p. 82.

[5] Pao notes that Acts 13.46-47 transfers the servant role of Isaiah from Jesus to the early Christian missionaries (Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus, p. 100).

[6] Pao, Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus, p. 95.

Why Foreign Missions? 10. Luke’s Salvation History in the Infancy Songs and Pss. 104-107 or 108.

Why Foreign Missions? 10.  Luke’s Salvation History in the Infancy Songs and Pss. 104-108.

Luke offers two Biblical perspectives on God’s salvation history.  Both have to do with God’s work with and for Israel, but that work has the greater objective of God’s salvation for the world.  The first perspective comes from several psalms, the second from Isaiah.  We will here examine Luke’s salvation history from his use of Psalms 104-107 and possibly also Ps. 108.

This study rests on more detailed work of mine presented in an article entitled, ‘God’s Mercy from Generation to Generation: Luke’s use of Psalms 105-108 in his Infancy Narrative Songs to Provide a Salvation Historical Understanding for his two-volume History.’[1]  Scholars have not, to my knowledge, noted Luke’s intentional use of Psalms 104-108 in his infancy songs.  In my article, I lay out the evidence that Luke draws particularly from these psalms in his infancy songs (‘The Magnificat,’ or ‘Mary’s Song,’ Lk. 1.46-55; ‘The Benedictus,’ or ‘Zechariah’s Song,’ Lk. 1.68-79; ‘The Nunc Dimitis,’ or ‘Simeon’s Song,’ Lk. 2.29-32).  These psalms provide Luke with a theology of salvation history—a mission theology—in which history is seen as the unfolding of God’s salvation plan through his people, Israel, for the nations.  This is accomplished despite Israel’s sinfulness.

The Particular Message of These Psalms

Ps. 104 is about the goodness of God the creator.  It ends with a request that sinners be consumed from the earth (v. 35).

Ps. 105 speaks of God’s goodness to Israel, from Abraham through the exodus from Egypt.

Ps. 106 retells the story of Israel with her sinfulness from the time of the exodus from Egypt to the time of the exile.  God’s salvation keeps coming to a sinful people, and the psalm ends with the hope of being gathered from the nations.

While Ps. 107 begins the next book of the psalter, Luke uses it as well.  Ps. 107 fits well with the progression of thought: it is a thanksgiving psalm, thanking God for his steadfast love and deliverance from exile.

Ps. 108 is significant, possibly, for v. 3: ‘ I will give thanks to you, O LORD, among the peoples, and I will sing praises to you among the nations.’  Like Ps. 107, it speaks of God’s steadfast love (v. 4).

These psalms, then, hold in view God’s creation and salvation activity.  Luke’s use of these psalms emphasises that God’s work continues with Jesus’ coming: there is continuity in salvation history from the beginning of creation to the present time.  God’s steadfast love can be seen in his creation and saving work, even when Israel is sinful.

The Missiological Perspective of Psalms 90-106 According to E. Zenger

Psalms 104-106 conclude a book of the psalter that includes Pss. 90-106.  Erich Zenger draws attention to the unified theology of this book of the psalter:[2]

Zenger argues that Pss. 90-106 overlap with Isaiah on the notions of God’s restoration of Israel [from exile] and the salvation of the nations….  Zenger also argues convincingly for a consecutive reading of these psalms.  Psalm 100, e.g., brings the previous ‘Royal YHWH’ psalms (93-99) to a ‘high point’, referencing or quoting earlier lines … in calling ‘Israel and the nations to the common acknowledgement of YHWH’s reign over the whole world. Thereby the prerogative of Israel named in Ps 95.6-7 is extended to the nations who acknowledge YHWH’ (Zenger, p. 178). Ps. 100 even ‘places the covenant formula … in the mouth of the nations as a confession of their “new” relationship with God’ (Zenger, p. 178). Zenger emphasises that the nations do not replace Israel in these psalms. He concludes his examination of Pss. 90-106 as follows:

… the reign of YHWH over creation, established from of old, has chosen Zion, in order, on the one hand, to work [tsadikah] (‘saving deeds’) here in the midst of YHWH’s people Israel and in order, on the other hand, from Zion to “lure” the nations, fascinated by the God of Sinai’s palpable steadfast love for Israel, into YHWH’s covenant of peace, and to let them live peacefully next to and with one another on the basis of the “truth of God” common to Israel and the nations –“Know the LORD (alone) is God. It is he that made us, and we are his; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture (Ps 103.3)”.[3]

The Message of the Infancy Songs in Luke

Mary’s song moves from singing of her Saviour to singing of Israel’s Saviour.  God’s promise to Abraham is now fulfilled.

Zechariah’s Song also speaks of salvation for Israel because God forgives her sins (Lk. 1.77).  Its perspective explains why the disciples still anticipate a restoration of the kingdom to Israel in Acts 1.6 and why Paul continues to extend the Gospel to Jews in Rome in Acts 28.

Simeon’s Song draws attention to salvation for the Gentiles.  Zechariah’s Song did mention that salvation was coming to all in darkness, but Simeon explicitly extends the coming of light to the Gentiles:

²⁹ "Master, now you are dismissing your servant in peace, according to your word;  ³⁰ for my eyes have seen your salvation,  ³¹ which you have prepared in the presence of all peoples,  ³² a light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to your people Israel" (Lk. 2.29-32).

The Significance of the Theology of the Infancy Songs for Missions

Four points seem justified from observations on Luke’s use of Pss. 104-107 or 108.

1. Salvation stands open for the Jews.  There is no replacement theology in Luke.

Luke’s theological statement …  is that Israel’s salvation sung about in the songs of Mary, Zechariah and Simeon is an open offer: Psalms 105 and 106 stand before Israel as a challenge over how they will respond to God’s consistent working of salvation in history. Will they respond positively (Ps. 105) or negatively (Ps. 106) to the mercy that God offers from generation to generation? … The offer of salvation remains open to the Jews if they will follow their history of God’s acts of salvation through to what God has now done in the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 28.31).[4]

2. Salvation is through Jesus and is the culmination of God’s history of salvation: Luke sees the progression of God’s work from creation through Israel’s history and restoration, a restoration that he finds in Jesus rather than in an earlier restoration of Israel from captivity.  Just here his reading of Ps. 107 will coincide with his and the early Church’s reading of Is. 40-66 (and related passages): the restoration of Israel from captivity or exile is fulfilled through Jesus.

3. Salvation is the same for Jews and Gentiles: God’s single act of salvation in Jesus Christ offers salvation to Israel and the Gentiles.  Israel’s restoration out of exile and darkness means that she is not different from the nations in her need of redemption, and God’s work among both is a work of salvation, not election for one and something else for the other.  Both need God’s salvation in the same way, a salvation that only Jesus provides for both.  The message of Pss. 90-106 is that God is King, and his salvation of Israel includes the Gentiles.

4. Salvation is holistic: salvation may be understood as delivery from oppression, as in Mary’s Song, but it is also a release from darkness and a forgiveness of sins, as in Zechariah’s Song.  Here lie the roots of a holistic theology that does not limit salvation to either a social or spiritual Gospel.  Jesus’ ministry to the poor and marginalized is consistent with his offering forgiveness to Jews and Gentiles.

---

[1] Rollin G. Grams, ‘God’s Mercy From Generation to Generation: Luke’s Use of Psalms 105-108 in His Infancy Narrative Songs to Provide a Salvation Historical Understanding for His Two Volume History,’ Baptistic Theologies 2 (Autumn, 2009): 93-108.

[2] This paragraph is a quote from my article, p. 106 n. 20.

[3] Erich Zenger, ‘The God of Israel’s Reign Over the World (Psalms 90-106)’, in The God of Israel and the Nations: Studies in Isaiah and the Psalms, eds. Norbert Lohfink, Erich Zenger, trans. Everett R. Kalin (Collegeville, MN: The Order of St. Benedict, Inc., 2000; orig. German, Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk GmbH., 1994), p. 190.

[4] R. Grams, ‘God’s Mercy from Generation to Generation,’ p. 108.

Why Foreign Missions? 9. Matthew 25.31-46: The Nations’ Reception of the Missionary Disciples of Jesus

Why Foreign Missions?  9. Matthew 25.31-46: The Nations’ Reception of the Missionary Disciples of Jesus

What is the meaning of Jesus’ parable of the sheep and the goats in Mt. 25.31-46?  I will argue that this parable is about the nations (or peoples) of the world being challenged to receive the missionary disciples of Jesus.  To accept them is to accept Jesus.

Such an interpretation goes against commonly held views.  One common interpretation is that the parable is about caring for the poor.[1]  If so, it is stating what we find elsewhere in Scripture and other Jewish writings, such as:

-      

         Proverbs 25:21-22   ²¹ If your enemies are hungry, give them bread to eat; and if they are thirsty, give them water to drink;  ²² for you will heap coals of fire on their heads, and the LORD will reward you. (also quoted in Rom. 12.20).

-       

          Isaiah 58:6-7   ⁶ Is not this the fast that I choose: to loose the bonds of injustice, to undo the thongs of the yoke, to let the oppressed go free, and to break every yoke?  ⁷ Is it not to share your bread with the hungry, and bring the homeless poor into your house; when you see the naked, to cover them, and not to hide yourself from your own kin?

-       

         4 Esdras 2:20-23   ²⁰ "Guard the rights of the widow, secure justice for the ward, give to the needy, defend the orphan, clothe the naked,  ²¹ care for the injured and the weak, do not ridicule the lame, protect the maimed, and let the blind have a vision of my splendor.  ²² Protect the old and the young within your walls.  ²³ When you find any who are dead, commit them to the grave and mark it,¹ and I will give you the first place in my resurrection.

However, we have to ask three questions of this view:

1. Why are the nations gathered?  This interpretation typically challenges individuals or possibly groups, such as churches, to care for the poor.  Yet the passage is about the judgement of nations.  Also, while Israel might be indicted for its treatment of the poor in such texts as Is. 58, Mt. 25.31ff would be unique in speaking of worldwide judgement of the nations based on their treatment of the poor.
2. Why does Jesus refer to ‘my brothers’ in this passage?  The typical answer given is that Jesus is calling the poor his brethren.  In the two other passages where Jesus speaks of his brothers in Matthew, they are the disciples (Mt. 12.48-49; 28.10).
3. Why are the nations judged only for feeding the hungry, offering a drink to the thirsty, welcoming the stranger, and visiting the sick and imprisoned?

While care for the poor and needy is certainly part of the Biblical message in both the Old and New Testaments, this does not appear to be the point of Mt. 25.31-46.

A second view is that the nations are judged for their treatment of the disciples.[2]  As Don Carson states,

The fate of the nations will be determined by how they respond to Jesus’ followers, who, ‘missionaries’ or not, are charged with spreading the gospel and do so in the face of hunger, thirst, illness, and imprisonment.  Good deeds done to Jesus’ followers, even the least of them, are not only works of compassion and morality but reflect where people stand in relation to the kingdom and to Jesus himself.  Jesus identifies himself with the fate of his followers and makes compassion for them equivalent to compassion for himself.

Carson is aware that his interpretation is open to the objection that it does not preserve a distinction between the ‘least of these’ and the sheep.  Yet he argues that a similar ambiguity might be found in Mt. 18 between ‘child’ and ‘disciples’, that his interpretation emphasizes the loving relationship within the Christian community, and that it explains why the sheep and goats are surprised by Jesus’ response.

I might offer further support for this position while still favouring the more nuanced position to be noted next.  In favour of the ‘least of these’ being Jesus’ disciples, consider the terms used of disciples throughout Matthew’s Gospel.[3]  Notice how often and in what different ways Matthew defines Jesus’ disciples as little in some sense.  We can see this through nine different words Matthew uses for disciples. 

One word found several times in this Gospel is ‘mikros/mikroi’, which we find translated as ‘little ones’ in Mt. 10.42: ‘And whoever gives to one of these little ones even a cup of cold water because he is a disciple, truly, I say to you, he shall not lose his reward." 

A second word Matthew uses for the disciples is ‘nepios’, or ‘baby’: ‘At that time Jesus declared, "I thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes...’ (11.25). 

The third word to note is the actual word for ‘child’, ‘teknon’: ‘If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!’ (7.11). 

Similarly, fourth, the word for ‘son’, ‘huios’, is used of the disciples: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God’ (5.9). 

Fifth, ‘elachistos’ or ‘least’ refers to the disciples in the same way that ‘mikros’ does: ‘And the King will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me’’ (25.40). 

Sixth, a disciple is described as ‘servant’ (‘diakonos’): ‘He who is greatest among you shall be your servant...’ (23.11). 

Seventh, the word for ‘slave’ (‘doulos’) also captures the nature of discipleship: ‘...and whoever would be first among you must be your slave’ (20.27). 

Eighth, Jesus speaks of disciples as ‘last’ (‘eschatos’): ‘So the last will be first, and the first last’ (20.16). 

Finally, ninth, those who follow Jesus are ‘disciples’ (‘mathetes’), not ‘church leaders’ or some other term that might permit them to claim power and authority.  As ‘students’ (mathetes), the disciples always understand that they are ones who do not make others disciples of themselves but ones who make others disciples of Jesus.  This notion is captured in the final instance of this most common designation for those who follow Jesus: ‘Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit...’ (28.19).

However, a third, more likely view is that the nations are judged for their treatment not simply of believers but of the missionary disciples—a view advocated by J. Ramsay Michaels.[4]  The notion of disciples as ‘little ones’ explains the nature of Christian mission.  One who becomes a missionary in the world is one who becomes ‘little.’  This is why Jesus describes the disciples who go from village to village and appear before kings as ‘little ones’ in Mt. 10.42.  Jesus’ missionary discourse in Mt. 10 explains that the disciples will become little because they have taken nothing with them on their journey, they are dependent upon those who will receive them as they travel, and they will be thrown into prison and need to be fed and clothed by others.  Those who receive these disciples who have become little for the sake of ministry will receive a reward, even if all they did was give these little ones water (10.42).  This verse is significantly similar to Mt. 25.31ff.

In Mt. 25.31ff, the sheep are those nations which receive the disciples who, through becoming little, bring a Gospel that is itself not about power as the world knows it but about God’s power in the cross, a story that seems to be about failure and weakness in the world’s eyes.  The sheep nations receive the disciples by clothing them, feeding them, giving them something to drink, helping them in their sickness in foreign lands, and visiting them when they are thrown into prison because of their testimony.  The disciples experience this littleness in their lives because they are witnesses for Jesus, and so Jesus says, ‘Inasmuch as you [sheep nations] did this to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it also to me’ (25.42, 44).

The second and third views noted above overlap: missionary disciples are, after all, disciples, and all disciples are challenged with the mission.  Yet not all are placed in situations of hunger, thirst, being strangers, becoming sick and imprisoned because of their travelling to the nations an encountering hardship and persecution.  Mt. 25.31-46 has these missionary disciples primarily in view.

That said, discipleship is, in Matthew’s Gospel, a matter of joining Jesus in His mission of bringing the reign of God to this sin-ridden world.  This is done through becoming little by serving others.  Jesus goes to the cross to suffer and die, and those who would be His disciples must go with him, carrying their own crosses (Mt. 16.21, 24ff).  This mission inevitably involves leaving--leaving family (Mt. 19.29; cf. 8.21; 12.46-50), leaving homes and lands (Mt. 8.20; 19.29) and leaving wealth (Mt. 19.21; 6.19-34).  It may even involve giving up married life (Mt. 19.12).  This is not asceticism, where one expects to find God’s pleasure in self-denial.  This leaving always has a purpose: to serve the Kingdom of Heaven.  The Gospel message is to be proclaimed to all nations.  It will meet resistance.  Self-denial and sacrifice will be necessary to take this message to the nations.

Perhaps the three views noted above can actually be brought together in another text in Matthew—in what Jesus says to the rich young man: ‘If you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me’ (Mt. 19.21).  Following Jesus as a missionary disciple requires an unencumbered life.  Such a life frees one to give generously to the poor and needy, since life is no longer about acquiring things but doing good.  Of course, it is more than that, but it is at least that.  It is also about going (or supporting those who go) to the nations with the good news of the kingdom (Mt. 24.14).  What Mt. 25.31-46 adds is that the nations will be judged on how they have received these missionary disciples.

---

[1] E.g., David R. Catchpole, ‘The Poor on Earth and the Son of Man in Heaven: A Re-appraisal of Matthew xxv.31-46,’ Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 61 (78-79): 355-397.

[2] Donald Carson holds this view (‘Matthew,’ in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 8 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), ad loc.).  He gives five positions on how ‘the least of these my brethren’ (vv. 40, 46) has been understood: (1) all hungry, distressed, and needy; (2) apostles and other Christian missionaries; (3) favourites within Matthew’s community; (4) the Jews; (5) Jesus’ disciples.  More recently, R. T. France has affirmed Carson’s view (The Gospel of Matthew.  New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007), ad loc.)  See Carson for some extensive bibliography.

[3] See my article, 'Not 'Leaders' but 'Little Ones' in the Father's Kingdom: The character of discipleship in Matthew's Gospel.' Transformation 2004 (21.2): 114-125.

[4] J. Ramsay Michaels, Apostolic Hardships and Righteous Gentiles: A Study of Matthew 25.31-46", Journal of Biblical Literature 84 (1965): 27-37.

Why Foreign Missions? 8. Proclaiming the Good News of the Kingdom Throughout the World (Mt. 24.14)

Why Foreign Missions? 

8. Proclaiming the Good News of the Kingdom Throughout the World (Mt. 24.14)

In Matthew 24.14 (cf. Mk. 13.10) Jesus says, ‘And this good news of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the world, as a testimony to all the nations; and then the end will come.’  This passage has been interpreted in several ways.

Some have understood these words to mean that only once the Gospel is proclaimed throughout the world will Jesus return.  In the early twentieth century the following saying was coined: ‘Evangelize to a finish to bring back the King.’  This notion reappeared at the end of the twentieth century with the AD 2000 movement.  Ralph Winter sought to identify unevangelised people groups so that the task of Mt. 24.14 could be completed.

Richard France offered a different interpretation of Mt. 24.14.[1]  First, ‘all nations’ does not mean every people group but simply those outside Jerusalem.  Second, evangelism is simply stated to be preliminary to the end of the age, not the single outstanding requirement for the end to come.  Third, by the ‘end’ Jesus did not mean the end of this age or world or the second coming of Christ.  Rather, the ‘end’ in Mt. 24.14 means the destruction of the temple, which is the initial subject Jesus and his disciples are discussing at the beginning of Mt. 24.  Fourth, the Greek word for ‘world’ in this verse is not the typical word ‘kosmos’ but the word ‘oikoumenē.’  This word means the inhabited world, specifically the inhabited, civilized world of the Mediterranean (cf. Acts 11.28; 19.27).  Fifth, this task was accomplished by the time Matthew wrote in the second half of the first century and prior to the destruction of the Temple in AD 70.  Col. 1.5b-6a; Rom. 16.26 and 15.18-24 envision the Gospel already bearing fruit in the whole world.

–      Colossians 1:5b-6a You have heard of this hope before in the word of the truth, the gospel that has come to you. Just as it is bearing fruit and growing in the whole world, so it has been bearing fruit among yourselves from the day you heard it….

–      Romans 16:26 but is now disclosed, and through the prophetic writings is made known to all the Gentiles, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith—

–      Romans 15:18-24 For I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me to win obedience from the Gentiles, by word and deed,  19 by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God, so that from Jerusalem and as far around as Illyricum I have fully proclaimed the good news of Christ.  20 Thus I make it my ambition to proclaim the good news, not where Christ has already been named, so that I do not build on someone else's foundation,  21 but as it is written, "Those who have never been told of him shall see, and those who have never heard of him shall understand."  22 This is the reason that I have so often been hindered from coming to you.  23 But now, with no further place for me in these regions, I desire, as I have for many years, to come to you  24 when I go to Spain. For I do hope to see you on my journey and to be sent on by you, once I have enjoyed your company for a little while.

Thus, on France’s view, the worldwide church is established as God’s new Temple before the old Temple is destroyed in AD 70.  This France also argues for Mt. 12.6 and 41f, where Jesus says that some ‘thing’ (neuter) greater than the Temple is here.[2]  What does this neuter imply?  France believes that it implies Jesus’ role, the new principle (or worship) that Jesus brings, and the Church—all three.

Related to this understanding of Mt. 24.14, France argues that the Temple’s destruction and the Son of Man’s authority and vindication are related ideas in Mt. 24.3-34.  Mt. 24.3-34 is not about Jesus’ second coming but the Son of Man’s coming to receive power from God.[3]  Matthew 24.30 says, ‘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 power and great glory.’  This verse is similar in meaning to Mt. 16.28 and 26.64:

–      Matthew 16:28  Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

–      Matthew 26:64  Jesus said to him, "You have said so. But I tell you, From now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven."

France, then, sees the tribulation of the Church and the destruction of the Temple as occurring at the same time as Jesus’ receiving authority and power as the Son of Man.  The early Church understood Jesus’ exaltation to the right hand of God to be His assuming heavenly authority.  The generation that sees the suffering, persecution, and destruction foretold in Mt. 24.3-34 will see the coming of the Son of Man’s reign and judgement.  This was already said in Matthew 24:13 (‘But the one who endures to the end will be saved’). The whole message up to 24.34 is a message to ‘this generation’ going through the tribulation: they should stay the course for the Son of Man is coming.  He is the one with authority from heaven to render judgement.

My assessment of France’s argument will focus only on its relevance for missions.  His limitation of ‘nations’ to those outside Jerusalem seems too narrow.  The far-flung regions of the world are in view, as has been argued on the grounds that Mt. 28.16-20 (v. 19 compares to Mt. 24.14) alludes to Is. 66.18-23.  Second, I would agree that Jesus sees the moment of his leaving Jerusalem and the present time of his own crucifixion to be the beginning of the tribulation of the end times.  This tribulation time is equated with the time of mission.  Both Mt. 10 and Mt. 24 focus on the tribulation that the disciples will experience in their kingdom mission.  The emphasis in Mt. 24.14, then, seems to be on the task of world evangelism as the task to accomplish before the end comes.  This point can be qualified somewhat, though, with reference to Mt. 28.19-20: the task is not merely proclamation but also disciple-making through baptism and teaching Jesus’ commandments.  Third, just as the tribulation was thought in apocalyptic Judaism to come at the end of this age and to precede the beginning of the age to come, so too the tribulation and the Church’s mission are what must now take place before the end comes.  In this, I do not think France is correct in identifying the ‘end’ with the destruction of the Temple.  It really does refer to the end of this age, at which time Jesus will return.  Fourth, we gain nothing by identifying oukoumenē with the inhabited world.  This cannot be limited to the Roman Empire—all those in the Roman Empire knew that there were civilizations beyond their borders, many people from which lived as slaves in the Roman world and were among the early Christians.

France is correct to cast doubt on taking Mt. 24.14 as a plan for the Church to complete in order to bring Christ back.  He is correct to doubt that evangelism is the only task to accomplish before the end.  He is correct to intertwine the present tribulation of the Church with its missionary task, just as Jesus’ mission was accomplished on the cross (that is, by his tribulation). 

Yet, while I would agree that much of Mt. 24 relates to the historical events of the past, that is, to the time leading up to the Temple’s destruction, I do not think that what we find there can fully be so associated with the past.  The ultimate end of this age is telescoped onto the events of the first century, but they are not equated with them.  This fact makes it difficult to sort out what verse belongs to the past for us and what verse belongs to the future—or whether the same verse belongs to both.  This is only problematic if we are trying to determine when things will take place.  Yet Jesus’ message in Mt. 24-25 is largely about not knowing when.  Indeed, because we do not know when these things will take place, we should be ready at any time.  Being ready, according to the three parables of Mt. 25, has to do with keeping awake and burning our lights in the darkness (Mt. 25.1-13), busily accomplishing what the Lord has left to our care (Mt. 25.14-30), and receiving the mission of the disciples among the nations (Mt. 25.31-46).  This last point will be the focus of the next study.  What we see from Mt. 24.14, though, is that the reason for the present time before the end of this age is the mission of the Church, a mission of proclaiming the good news of the kingdom throughout the world as a testimony to all nations.

---

[1] Richard T. France, The Gospel of Matthew.  New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007), pp. 908f.

[2] R. T. France, Matthew, p. 461.

[3] R. T. France, Matthew, p. 920.

Why Foreign Missions? 7. The meaning of ‘ethnoi’ in Matthew 28.19

Why Foreign Missions? 7. The meaning of ‘ethnoi’ in Matthew 28.19

The previous discussion examined the relationship between Mt. 28.16-20 and Is. 66.18-23.  One specific issue in this comparison deserves attention: who are the ‘nations’ (Greek ethnoi) to whom the disciples are to go (Isaiah 66.19 says 'from those being saved' for the remnant who are 'sent out to the nations')?  The Greek word can be translated as ‘peoples,’ ‘nations,’ or ‘Gentiles.’  

Are the disciples to go to each people group in the world?  Are they to go to the nations in the sense of each country in the world?  Or are they to go to the Gentiles in general, without the more particular idea of each distinct people group with its own language and customs being reached?

‘Gentiles’: If we are to look internally in Matthew’s Gospel, we might say that ethnoi typically means ‘Gentiles.’[1]  Mt. 4.15 speaks of ‘Galilee of the Gentiles,’ that is, where many non-Jews live.  The word ethnoi is further used in this sense in Mt. 6.32; 10.5; 20.19; 20.25. 

‘Gentiles’ or possibly ‘peoples’: The word is also probably used this way in Mt. 10.18; 12.18; 24.9, although the word could be translated as ‘peoples’ in these verses. 

‘People’ or ‘nation’: In the singular, in Mt. 21.43; 24.7, ‘ethnos’ should be translated as ‘people’ or ‘nation,’ but not as ‘Gentiles.’  Josephus, the first century Jewish historian, also uses the singular ‘ethnos’ in the sense of a specific group of people.  Several examples may be cited: the ‘Sodomite people’ and the ‘Arabic people’ (Antiq. 1.1); ‘Median people’ (Antiq. 1.124); a city called ‘Mazaca’ gave its name to the entire ‘people’ (Antiq. 1.125); the ‘Judadaians, a people of Western Ethiopia’ (Antiq. 1.135); Moabites are ‘even now a people/nation’ (Antiq. 1.206); Ishmael is said to be the founder of the Arab people (Antiq. 1.214); Amram, being well established among the Hebrews, was afraid for the whole ‘nation’ (Antiq. 2.210), etc.  Thus the term could be used with specific groups with their own characteristics, languages, and histories in mind.

‘Peoples’ or ‘nations’: Yet there are a few occasions where the word in the plural probably does mean ‘peoples,’ or at least ‘nations’ in the general sense rather than the specific sense of ‘Gentiles, not Jews’:

And this good news of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the world, as a testimony to all the nations; and then the end will come (Mt. 24.14).

All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats (Mt. 25.32).

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Mt. 28.19).

Matthew’s typical use of ‘ethnoi’ for ‘Gentiles’ may lead us to suppose that the word in these three passages could again mean ‘Gentiles.’  Yet the adjective ‘all’ suggests otherwise.  Moreover, the relation between Mt. 28.19 and Is. 66.18 also suggests that ‘ethnoi’ should be translated as ‘peoples’ or ‘nations.’ 

Is. 66.18 clearly has ‘all peoples’ or ‘all nations’ in view: ‘For I know their works and their thoughts, and I am coming to gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come and shall see my glory….’ (this is so in both the Hebrew and the Greek; the Aramaic adds a third term: ‘peoples, nations, and tongues’).  Is. 66.21 says, ‘And I will also take some of them as priests and as Levites, says the LORD.’  The ‘them’ in this verse seems to refer to the nations.  This notion has already been stated in Isaiah 56:6-7:

 ⁶ And the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD, to minister to him, to love the name of the LORD, and to be his servants, all who keep the sabbath, and do not profane it, and hold fast my covenant--  ⁷ these I will bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer; their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples.

 

The places to which the survivors of Is. 66 will go are mentioned in v. 19: ‘toTarshish, to the Libyans and Lydians (famous as archers), to Tubal and Greece, and to the distant islands….’  The mention of these specific lands seems to carry the meaning of far-away lands.  The mission of the survivors is not limited to these places; the point is that they will go even to these far-away places, and therefore to every other place.

This mission in Is. 66 includes the peoples or nations of the world, but it is also a mission to recover the exiled Jews from these places:

They shall bring all your kindred from all the nations as an offering to the LORD, on horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and on mules, and on dromedaries, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, says the LORD, just as the Israelites bring a grain offering in a clean vessel to the house of the LORD (Is. 66.20).

Thus Is. 66.18-23 has the survivors ministering far and wide to both the exiled Jews and to the peoples of the earth. 

We must, however, exercise caution.  To say that ‘all nations’ in this passage or in Mt. 28.16-20 means every people group on earth is simply to read too much into the word.  Moreover, through time the earth’s ‘peoples’ and ‘nations.’  The texts rather have a more general sense of various groups on the earth.  What both Is. 66 and Mt. 28 have in view is a mission that goes outwards to the various peoples of the earth, without trying to identify and target each people group in the world.

Here, then, is the basis for the Church’s concern with foreign missions.  Mt. 28.16-20 claims that the time has come to fulfill the prediction of Is. 66.18-23.  Thus the Church’s very purpose is to fulfill this mission to the world.  Believers and churches may well ask, ‘Where do I/we fit into this commission?’  The Church is being built through missions, and it exists for missions.  Its history is the history of missions.

---

[1] There is a related word that means ‘Gentile’—ethnikos.  Matthew uses this word to discount only greeting one’s brothers, since even the ethnikoi do this (5.47).  We find this word used again in Mt. 6.7 and 18.17.

Why Foreign Missions? 6. Matthew 28.16-20 and Isaiah 66.18-23

Why Foreign Missions?  6. Matthew 28.16-20 and Isaiah 66.18-23

Is the mission of the disciples also the mission of the Church today?  Is this mission to both Jews and Gentiles?  Matthew’s Gospel concludes with the ‘Great Commission’ (Mt. 28.16-20): because all authority in heaven and earth has been given to the risen Jesus Christ, the disciples are to make disciples of all nations.  This conclusion in Matthew’s Gospel  alludes to the conclusion in Isaiah (66.18-23).  I will demonstrate this relationship by quoting a section from my article, ‘Narrative Dynamics in Isaiah’s and Matthew’s Mission Theology.’[1]  The importance of this allusion to Isaiah is that it shows that Matthew is stating that the time for restoring the nations—the dispersion of Israel and the other nations—has come.  If so, then the Great Commission is not only for the original disciples but for the Church as well.  We live in the time of gathering in the nations by making disciples.

Isaiah 66:18-23 (NRSV):  ¹⁸ For I know their works and their thoughts, and I am coming to gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come and shall see my glory,  ¹⁹ and I will set a sign among them. From them I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish, Put, and Lud-- which draw the bow-- to Tubal and Javan, to the coastlands far away that have not heard of my fame or seen my glory; and they shall declare my glory among the nations.  ²⁰ They shall bring all your kindred from all the nations as an offering to the LORD, on horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and on mules, and on dromedaries, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, says the LORD, just as the Israelites bring a grain offering in a clean vessel to the house of the LORD.  ²¹ And I will also take some of them as priests and as Levites, says the LORD.  ²² For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, says the LORD; so shall your descendants and your name remain.  ²³ From new moon to new moon, and from sabbath to sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, says the LORD.

Matthew 28:16-20 (NRSV):  ¹⁶ Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them.  ¹⁷ When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted.  ¹⁸ And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.  ¹⁹ Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,  ²⁰ and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

Mt. 28.16-20 and Is. 66.18-22 are related texts.  Matthew is alluding to Isaiah, I believe, and this allusion is significant.  The following comments demonstrate the relationship between these two texts and then draw out the significant points of such a relationship.

The Relationships Between Mt. 28.16-20 and Is. 66.18-22

Both passages ‘entail a (1) bringing together of the ‘survivors’ or remaining disciples, and both passages involve a (2) commissioning of these survivors in (3) a mission to the nations.[2]  The commission is to announce (4) God’s name (or baptise in the triune name), which, as Isaiah clearly states, entails making God’s glory known over the whole earth.  Earlier in Is. 66, (5) God’s authority is declared over heaven and earth (Is. 66.1), just as Jesus says that all authority in heaven and earth has been given to him.  Also, (6) God says He will look to the one who ‘trembles at my word’ (Is. 66.2), just as Jesus tells his disciples to teach the nations all that he has commanded them.  (7) Similar to Jesus’ promise of His presence with His disciples until the end of the age, in Is. 66 God announces His coming presence with the restored remnant of His people:

As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you; you shall be comforted in Jerusalem.  You shall see, and your heart shall rejoice; your bodies shall flourish like the grass; and it shall be known that the hand of the LORD is with his servants, and his indignation is against his enemies (Is. 66.13-14).

This point is emphasised in Is. 66.20-22, where the restoration of God’s people from the nations to Jerusalem (v. 20) means that they will ‘remain before me’ (v. 22).  (8) Whereas Isaiah says that God will take some of those from the nations to be priests and Levites (Is. 66.21), Jesus speaks of making ‘disciples’ from the nations (there is no priestly group between the people and God among the Father’s children in Matthew).  Finally, it should be noted, that (9) both Isaiah and Matthew conclude with this commissioning to the nations.’

Conclusions

These nine points establish the relationship between Isaiah 66 and the Great Commission in Matthew’s Gospel.  This relationship allows us to draw several conclusions.

First, the ‘twelve’ disciples in Matthew’s Gospel represent the ‘survivors’ or remnant of Israel that returns from exile in Isaiah.  There are more disciples of Jesus than these ‘twelve’ (actually eleven, now that Judas is no longer among them).  Yet the ‘twelve’ disciples stand as a fulfillment of the initial restoration of God’s people from ‘exile’ in their sins. 

Second, the mission of the survivors/disciples to the nations means, for Isaiah and so also for Matthew, that they have the task of continuing to bring back the Jews from exile.  Matthew does not have a replacement theology, where the Jews are replaced as God’s people. 

Third, following Isaiah, this proclamation among the nations includes a proclamation not only to the still dispersed Jews but also to the Gentiles themselves.  Matthew, however, makes the point that this good news for the nations (Jews and Gentiles) involves baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and it entails becoming disciples of Jesus.  That is, only through Jesus is the restoration of Israel and the inclusion of the Gentiles into God’s people possible.  There is no alternative route. 

Fourth, the connection of the Great Commission to the conclusion in Isaiah also shows that the progression in time for God’s salvation has been from  the time of the inauguration of the restoration of Israel from captivity in Jesus’ ministry to the time of the further ingathering of Jews and Gentiles by the survivors from captivity.  Matthew leaves his readers in this time of further ingathering, and so we see that the Great Commission was not just for Jesus’ disciples: it is a commission left to the Church ‘until the end of the ages’ (Mt. 28.20). 

---

[1] Rollin G. Grams, ‘Narrative Dynamics in Isaiah’s and Matthew’s Mission Theology,’ Transformation 21.4 (Oct., 2004): 238-255.

[2] David Pao argues that Luke's version of the disciples' commissioning (Lk. 24.47) echoes Is. 49.6 with reference to 'to the end/s of the earth' (Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002; orig. publ. 2000), pp. 85f).  He notes that this is a theme in Acts (1.8; 13.47).  The same idea is present in being a 'light' to the Gentiles (Acts 26.23--an image also in Isaiah).  While I am not familiar with an argument such as mine that Is. 66 stands behind Mt.'s Great Commission, Pao's argument does seem to support the point indirectly.  Is. 49.6, I would note, not only speaks of going to the nations as does Lk. 24.47, but it also sees the Servant's work as restoring the 'survivors' of Israel prior to a mission to the nations.  Is. 66.19 sees this as the survivors' mission.  Matthew shares the exact same understanding of Jesus' and the disciples' mission vis-à-vis Israel and the nations.