How Does Luke Portray Jesus as Servant of YHWHR.F. O'TooleSome scholars point out that a study of Luke’s christology which limits itself to the titles applied to Jesus necessarily has its lacunae1, and in this they are surely correct. On the other hand, a consideration of any of these titles can potentially offer insights into how Luke portrayed his christology. Nor should the Lucan titles be reduced to one or two of them; rather the titles are similar in that they all refer to the same person, Jesus, and so are naturally associated with one another. However, each time a title occurs, it needs to be studied in its context to see what nuance it carries and thus how Luke may have employed it to develop his christology. This article will reflect on one of these titles, Servant of YHWH2, about whose significance scholars are far from agreement; in their understanding of Luke’s treatment of Jesus as Servant of YHWH, some even doubt that there is enough data to say that the theme belongs to Luke’s christology. Here a case will be made for the opposite opinion, and a claim made about Luke’s meaning of this title. Naturally, a study of the topic must address a number of questions. Although most of Luke’s references to Jesus as this servant do refer to one of the Servant of YHWH hymns3, how many of the other Isaian passages, predicated of Jesus, did Luke regard as falling under this theme4? Furthermore, how many of these references are unique to Luke? Also, although some of Luke’s references to Jesus as Servant of YHWH are obvious, others are subtler; and it must be demonstrated that each of these passages is probably such a reference. For instance, this last observation is relevant as regards what interpretation should be given to paradi/dwmi, ‘I hand over’, and a!gw, ‘I lead’, and the cognates of the latter. Do these verbs also serve Luke to picture Jesus as the Servant of YHWH? Moreover, what is Luke’s word-pattern for his presentation of Jesus as the Servant of YHWH? According to the present interpretation, this pattern would have to include the following vocabulary, a!gw, e)klekto/j, ‘elect’, and cognates, pai=j, ‘servant’, paradi/dwmi, swthri/a, ‘salvation’, and fw=j e)qnw=n, ‘light of the Gentiles’. Nonetheless, our best approach to the question expressed in the title of this article is to begin with a study of those passages in which Luke most probably views Jesus as the Servant of YHWH or as acting as the Servant acted. I. Luke Viewed Jesus’ Death as That of the Servant of YHWH5 Let us begin our consideration here with Acts 8,32-33 (cf. Isa 53,7-8 LXX)6 because that passage leaves no doubt that Luke uses this description of the Servant to summarize how he presents Jesus in his passion narrative7:
The Ethiopian eunuch is reading this passage and asks Philip about whom the prophet was speaking; beginning with this passage, Philip proclaims to him Jesus. We find in Acts 8,32-33 clear references to Jesus’ passion, ‘As a sheep led to the slaughter’, unjust trial and ‘his life was taken from the earth’. Moreover, since Luke elsewhere calls Jesus pai=j (Acts 3,13.26; 4,27.30) and, as we shall see, elsewhere makes other references to Isa 52,13-53,12, it is reasonable to conclude that in citing vv. 7-8 of this chapter he wanted to identify Jesus as the Servant who carried out the mission assigned to him. The citation of the scripture passage locates these happenings within God’s providence and also comments on Jesus’ comportment during the passion; he is meek and humble and does not speak. Nevertheless, he still did not get a fair trial, nor was there any reason to think that someone would care enough to record his memory. This understanding of Acts 8,32-33 as bearing on Jesus’ passion is confirmed by one of the passion predictions and by four Servant of YHWH references which occur during Luke’s passion narrative. The third passion prediction, Luke 18,32-33b, in the Greek reads: and contains two expressions similar to those found about the Servant’s suffering in Isa 50,6: and so suggests that Luke sees Jesus’ suffering as similar to that of the Servant. During the Last Supper discourse Jesus claims that
will come to pass in his regard. Again we have a reference to the Servant passages, Isa 53; and the citation, dei= and the predicted fulfillment (telesqh=nai, te/loj e!xei) all point to Jesus’ being associated with criminals as being God’s will. Later in the garden this association is confirmed; for Jesus says to the high priests, elders and temple soldiers that they came out armed with swords and clubs as against a thief: (Wj e)pi_ lh|sth_n e)ch/lqate (Luke 22,52). Actually, Jesus is crucified with two criminals (23,32-33; cf. vv. 39-43)9. The officials’ mockery, noted above, includes the designation of Jesus as o( e)klekto/j (23,35, ‘the chosen one’; cf. Isa 42,1) and marks the second Servant of YHWH reference during the passion. A further reference to Jesus as the Servant of YHWH lies in Jesus’ not answering a word to Herod’s questions (Luke 23,9; cf. Acts 8,32; Isa 53,7). So, Jesus’ being numbered among criminals surely was a fact; but it stands in stark contrast to his personal comportment. A final reference to Jesus as the Servant of YHWH occurs a number of times during Luke’s passion narrative. A number of scholars contend that Luke presents Jesus’ passion as the martyrdom of a just man10. This statement is true, but is the more generic identification of a literary form. Luke is more specific than this. His own explanation of what he has done occurs in Acts 8,32-35 and is particularly evident in his many declarations of Jesus’ innocence which should be connected with the Lukan portrayal of him as Servant of YHWH. Isa 53,9 reads of the servant:
The previous verse (53,8; cf. Acts 8,33) had already begun to introduce the notion of innocence; for it states:
i.e., Jesus did not get a fair trial. Furthermore, Isa 53,11 asserts that God will, ‘justify the just one (di/kaion) who serves many well’. Luke has definitely portrayed Jesus as innocent during the passion. Pilate says that he finds no guilt in Jesus (Luke 23,4) and in a threefold manner repeats this conviction when he reports that neither has Herod found any charge worthy of death in him (vv. 14-15). Pilate then again a third time states Jesus’ innocence (v. 22). The good thief also affirms that Jesus has done nothing amiss (v. 41). In more solemn fashion, the centurion glorifies God and asserts of Jesus, ‘Truly this was a just man’ (v. 47) while the other Synoptics have ‘Truly, this man was Son of God’ (cf. Mark 15,39; Matt 27,54); and if the beating of one’s breast means an individual knows that he has participated in an evil action, we would have still another statement of Jesus’ innocence when the crowd leaves the crucifixion beating their breasts (cf. Luke 23,48). The theme of Jesus’ innocence also appears in Acts. In his speech in Solomon’s Portico, Peter claims that his audience had demanded that a murderer be freed and denied the holy and just one (di/kaion) and so killed the author of life, even though Pilate had judged he should be freed (Acts 3,13-15). Subsequently, Stephen concludes his speech with the accusation that the members of his audience are the betrayers and murders of the just one (dikai/ou; cf. 7,52). These latter expressions are similar to the words of the centurion at the crucifixion who proclaimed Jesus’ innocence with the words jOntwj o( a!nqrwpoj ou|toj di/kaioj h]n (Luke 23,47). Finally, Paul at Antioch of Pisidia explains that the inhabitants of Jerusalem and their rulers, ignorant of the message of the prophets, even though they found no crime in Jesus worthy of death, still demanded his execution and so fulfilled what the scriptures said (13,27-29). This extensive theme of Jesus’ innocence is later matched by that of Paul in Acts11, and both portrayals relate to the Lukan presentation of Jesus as Servant of YHWH. 1. Acts 4,27 There is reason to think that Luke also intends to refer to Jesus as the Servant of YHWH in Acts 4,2712. It is true that 4,25 (cf. Luke 1,69) speak of David as paido/j sou ‘your servant’, and this fact would naturally lead one to conclude that pai=j is used two verses later of Jesus because he is David’s descendant. Moreover, v. 27 also says of Jesus o#n e!xrisaj (‘whom you anointed’); and thus identifies him with the Christ of the Lord of v.26. However, the context (vv. 25-27; cf. Ps 2,1-2) also speaks of the opposition to the Lord and his Christ and so well agrees with Luke’s use of the figure of the Servant of YHWH to explain Jesus’ passion. Moreover, few authors doubt that in the previous chapter (Acts 3,13.26) Luke does write of Jesus as the Servant of YHWH; and we will see that in the programmatic passage (Luke 4,14-44), which parallels the thought of Acts 4,26-27, Jesus is most likely not to be seen only as a prophet but also as the Servant of YHWH and the Christ. So, Luke may well have joined these last two identifications of Jesus when he composed Acts 4,26-30 (cf. vv. 23-31). Acts 3,13-15 support the above understanding of 8,32-33 (and of 4,27); for as we shall see below, the sentence, ‘The God ... glorified his servant Jesus’ (3,13), looks to Isa 52,13 and to Jesus’ resurrection. First I note that immediately following this phrase in Acts 3,13-15a we find:
These verses support this article’s interpretation of Acts 8,32-33. There is the obvious reference to the Servant of YHWH hymn and the designation of Jesus as servant (cf. Isa 52,13). Moreover, we will contend below that paradi/dwmi, ‘I hand over’, belongs to the word-pattern of this title. Also the adjective, di/kaioj, ‘just’, appears in Isa 53,11 (dikaiw=sai di/kaion eu] douleu/onta polloi=j, ‘to justify the just one who serves many well’) and so in the context which speaks of the servant’s glorification. In addition, it was demonstrated above that di/kaioj is associated with Jesus’ innocence, another aspect of Jesus as Servant of YHWH theme. Since the contents of Acts 3,13-15 resembles that of 8,32-33, the former passage supports the interpretation that the latter provides a summary of Luke’s portrayal of Jesus as Servant of YHWH during the passion13. 2. Paradi/dwmi We are now ready to look at other data in or associated with the passion narrative, namely, paradi/dwmi and a!gw, ‘I lead’, and its cognates which support the argument that Luke in these scenes intends to present Jesus as the Servant of YHWH. M.D. Hooker in agreement with F. Jackson and K. Lake writes, ‘It is hard to see what other word the writers could naturally have used. It seems far more likely that paradi/dwmi was used as the most natural word, though probably it afterwards did much to strengthen the Christian interpretation of Isaiah when the coincidence in language was noted’14. Nevertheless, paradi/dwmi does appear to belong to the word-pattern of Luke’s presentation of Jesus as Servant of YHWH15. This conclusion flows from Luke’s own statement that he so views Jesus during the passion and from his portrayal of this conviction seen thus far, and from two passages from Isaiah:
Of course, we have already seen that this last verse (where paradi/dwmi occurs twice) was applied only by Luke to Jesus in the sense that he was to be numbered with criminals (cf. Luke 22,37). In fact, paradi/dwmi actually appears fairly often in reference to Jesus’ passion. According to the second passion prediction, the Son of Man is to be handed over into the hands of men (Luke 9,44); in the third, he is to be handed over into the hands of the Gentiles (18,32). Later the scribes and high priests send some self-righteous individuals to trap Jesus in what he says so that they can hand him over to the procurator (20,20). Judas plots to hand him over and seeks an opportune moment to do so (22,4.6), and at the Last Supper Jesus shows that he is aware of who will hand him over and predicts that man’s future (vv. 21-22). Later in the garden, Jesus asks Judas if he is handing him over with a kiss (v. 48). Pilate hands Jesus over to the will of his opponents (23,25). The two men at the tomb tell the women to remember what Jesus had predicted while he was with them in Galilee that the Son of Man had to be handed over into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and rise on the third day (24,6-7; cf. Acts 2,23). The two disciples on the road to Emmaus explain how the high priests and rulers had handed Jesus over to death (24,20); and above we noted that Acts 3,13 speaks of Jesus as servant but also accuses the Jewish audience of handing him over. Hence, although paradi/dwmi is the natural word to use for the ‘handing over’ of Jesus, its use about the Servant of YHWH in Isaiah and Luke’s presentation of Jesus like this Servant during his passion as well as Luke’s own association of paradi/dwmi with Jesus, so identified, suggests that this word belongs to the Lucan word-pattern of Jesus as Servant of YHWH, brings out his rejection and, given the references to Isaiah, reveals that what happened was foreseen to be God’s will. One might object that in Isaiah the Lord hands over the servant while in Luke this is done by human agents; but in the latter situation it is ultimately God’s providence which permits this human act. Here we should address the question of what weight to attribute to Luke 22,19, ‘This is my body given (dido/menon) for you’, the words in italics here were added by Luke himself, probably in imitation of ‘poured out (e)kxunno/menon) for you’ (v. 20) predicated of the cup. The latter phrasing finds a parallel in both of the other Synoptics (cf. Mark 14,24; Matt 26,28) and according to most authors represents the vicarious suffering of the Servant of YHWH (cf. Isa 53,4-6.11-12). Surely, Luke has taken over this traditional expression of vicarious suffering and expanded on it with ‘given for you’. Nonetheless, he does not integrate the Pauline understanding of Jesus’ death as redemptive into his own christology16; and probably for Luke dido/menon also carries the nuance of paradi/dwmi, which word actually occurs twice in two verses almost immediately following (Luke 22,21-22). It was God’s will (permissive) that Jesus be handed over to his suffering. Consequently, dido/menon would constitute part of Luke’s portrayal of Jesus as the Servant of YHWH and make the additional point that Jesus himself accepted his Father’s will. The only other passage in Luke-Acts where Jesus’ redemptive death occurs is Acts 20,28 when Paul in his farewell speech to the Ephesian elders speaks of God’s church ‘redeemed through the blood of his own son’. Apparently, Luke in Paul’s farewell speech and in the traditional material of the Last Supper (Luke 22,19-20) was willing to take over these statements of vicarious suffering and redemptive death. However, we find no clear additional evidence that Luke wanted to integrate vicarious suffering or a redemptive death into his own christology. 3. !Agw and Its Cognates
!Agw
Naturally, one could again bring up the consideration of M.D. Hooker and ask what other word would Luke have been able to use, and our response would have to be much like the one given for paradi/dwmi. In fact, during the passion, Jesus’ captors led him into the house of the high priest (Luke 22,54, ei)sa/gw) and later before the Sanhedrin (v. 66, a)pa/gw). Then the whole crowd leads him before Pilate (23,1), and finally they led him away to crucify him (23,26, a)pa/gw). These examples apparently flow from Luke’s desire to picture Jesus as the Servant of YHWH. It may be that the hostile action of the Jewish audience at Nazareth, leading Jesus to the brow of the hill in order to throw him off (Luke 4,29), should be included here since it stands in the programmatic passage which probably portrays Jesus as Servant of YHWH and so would be a foreshadowing of his passion. 4. Luke 22,24-27 What we have said thus far about Luke’s passion story leads us to ask whether Luke 22,24-27 (cf. 9,45; Mark 10,42-45) should be considered part of Luke’s portrayal of Jesus as the Servant of YHWH. Of the Synoptics, only Luke has introduced into the Last Supper scene the argument over who of the disciples is the greatest. Although we find no verbal connection between Jesus’ response to this argument and Acts 8,32-33, Luke probably viewed the two description as similar. In Luke 22,24-27 Jesus warns against being like the kings of the Gentiles who lord it over their subjects and make their power felt and who like being called benefactors. This is not to be the conduct of the Christian disciple; for the older among them should act as the younger, and the leader as the servant. In fact, diakonw=n, ‘serving’, occurs three time in these verses; and is developed by the reflection that it is true that the one who reclines at table is greater than the one who serves, but Jesus is among them as the one who serves. Jesus’ humility and attitude of service resemble the thought of Acts 8,32-33, his being led as a sheep to the slaughter, a lamb to be sheared, silent and not opening his mouth, humble; yet there is no fair trial nor will he be remembered in history. The possible resemblance between Luke 22,24-27 and Acts 8,32-33 finds further support in the context of the former, the Last Supper scene; more specifically, these verses stand between two statements about Jesus’ suffering and are preceded by the woe for him by whom Jesus is betrayed (paradi/dotai) (cf. Luke 22,21-23.28). So, Jesus’ service includes his suffering. We also read in the context, ‘This is my body given (dido/menon) for you’ and of the cup ‘poured out (e)kxunno/menon) for you’ (cf. Luke 22,19-20). These words likewise look to Jesus’ passion and would describe Jesus’ service. To be sure, the evidence is not strong; but it appears that by inserting the argument about who is greatest, Luke has introduced into his Last Supper scene a reflection similar to that found in Acts 8,32-33; and in this sense, Luke 22,24-27 would belong to Luke’s portrayal of Jesus as Servant of YHWH. On the other hand, we note here, too, that, although Luke has apparently taken over some of the thought of Mark 10,45 (Jesus’ coming to serve), he does not do this as regards Mark’s words which speak of vicarious suffering, dou=nai th_n yuxh_n au)tou= lu/tron a)nti_ pollw=n (‘To give his life in ransom for the many’). II. Some Servant of YHWH The passages of interest here are Luke 2,29-32; 4,18-19; Acts 13,47; 26,23 (cf. Luke 2,25-35; 3,22; 4,14-44; 7,21-23; Acts 26,16-18; 28,28 [?]). In the Nunc Dimittis, Jesus is not identified as the Servant of YHWH; but a general description of his mission is provided which is based on that of the servant, who is to bring salvation, imaged as ‘light’17, also to the Gentiles (cf. Isa 42,6-7a [see also 60,1-318]:
The thought of Luke 2,30-32, that Jesus brings salvation, imaged as ‘light’, to both Jews and Gentiles, is partially repeated in Acts 13,47 Te/qeika/ se ei)j fw=j e)qnw=n tou= ei]nai/ se ei)j swthri/an e#wj e)sxa/tou th=j gh=j, (‘I have set you to be a light for the Gentiles, so that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth’19 where Luke explicitly cites a similar passage, Isa 49,6 and the se does not refer to either Paul or Barnabas but to Jesus whose agents they are20. Of course, the last fours words of this citation of Acts 13,47 played a part in the description of the mission in the programmatic Acts 1,8. Luke returns to the theme of ‘light’ but also asserts that Jesus must suffer in Acts 26,23 (cf v. 18) where he quotes Paul as proclaiming:
Thus, according to Luke, Jesus through Paul (cf v. 18) actualizes the mission of the Servant of YHWH who brings salvation, ‘light’, to the people and to the Gentiles, but will be rejected and must suffer. In this way, Luke can justify Jesus’ Gentile mission and his passion, yet contend that this mission is universal, for both Gentiles and Jews. Elsewhere, I have indicated why a number of scholars contend that Luke is also presenting Jesus as the Servant of YHWH in Luke 4,18-19 (cf. vv. 16-30)21. The main arguments for this contention are: (1) the citations in these verses are taken from Isaiah (61,1-2 and 58,6); and the phrase, ‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me’ is quite similar to that found in the first Servant Hymn (Isa 42,1: e!dwka to_ pneu=ma/ mou e)p' au)to/n, ‘I put my spirit on him’), and the ideas of Isa 42,7 (cf 49,9):
resembles those of Luke 4,18; (2) Luke 2,25-35 constitutes a parallel to 4,16-30 and both passages speak of the salvation (‘light’ in 2,32 corresponds well with ‘sight to the blind’ in 4,19) which Jesus will bring, but we have demonstrated that the former passage describes Jesus’ mission like that of the Servant; (3) Jesus’ baptism (3,21-22) likewise constitutes a parallel to 4,18-1922, and the phrase, e)n soi_ eu)do/khsa, ‘in you I was well-pleased’, is a reference to the servant; cf. Isa 42,1:
(4) the mission to the Gentiles and, as we will see below, the rejection and attempt to kill Jesus found in Luke 4,16-30 would square well with the contention that Luke wants to present Jesus as the Servant of YHWH. Furthermore, Luke 7,21-22 take up the thought of 4,18-19, and again specific reference is made to the ‘blind seeing’. Probably, Acts 28,28 (cf. 3,6; Isa 40,5) should be mentioned here since it speaks of salvation to the Gentiles which idea we have claimed Luke associates with Jesus as Servant of YHWH. III. Certain Phrases Point to Jesus as the Servant of YHWH Luke has predicated certain phrases of Jesus which show that he views him as the Servant of YHWH whom God has specially chosen and with whom he is pleased. We have already seen this in the scene of Jesus’ baptism; for the voice from heaven says, ‘You are my son, my beloved, with whom I am well pleased’. This last clause accurately represents the sense of the Hebrew of Isa 42,1, y#&pn htcr. Later at the Transfiguration, the voice from the cloud says of Jesus, ‘This is my son, my chosen (o( e)klelegme/noj), listen to him’ (Luke 9,35); this is a clear reference to the Hebrew text of Isa 42,1 LXX: Israhl o( e)klekto/j mou; MT: yryxb23. Very probably, in the Transfiguration scene Mark’s (9,7) o( a)gaphto/j has been changed to o( e)klelegme/noj (Luke 9,35) so as to identify Jesus with the Servant. Another reference to Isa 42,1 is found during the scene of Jesus’ passion when the leaders mock Jesus with the words, ‘He saved others, let him save himself, if he is the Christ, the elect (o( e)klekto/j) of God’ (Luke 23,35). Thus, we have three clear references to Isa 42,1 and to Jesus as the Servant of YHWH with whom God is pleased or whom he has chosen for a special task. Of course, the last passage stands in Luke’s passion narrative; and so helps to clarify the Servant nature of this task. The phrasing of Isa 50,7 in the LXX:
leads us to ask the question whether Luke sees Jesus as the Servant of YHWH when he writes of him:
Surely, the phrasing ‘I have set my face like flint’ resembles ‘He set his face’. Moreover, Luke particularly portrays Jesus as the Servant of YHWH during his passion; and the journey to Jerusalem leads precisely to the passion (and resurrection). The reference to the OT and ‘fulfilled’ would imply that this is God’s will; and the Servant did receive his mission from the Lord. Finally, Isa 50,7 LXX itself stands in a context of persecution and opposition (cf. vv. 6.8-9). So, it is quite probable that in Luke 9,51 Luke wants us to view Jesus as the servant who is determined to do what God asks of him. Another possible reference to the Servant of YHWH tradition may be found in Luke 11,21-22 where Jesus is compared to the stronger warrior who takes away the armor of his opponent and divides the plunder (sku=la), for it reminds us of kai_ tw=n i)sxurw=n meriei= sku=la (Isa 53,12, ‘He will divide the spoils of the strong’; cf. Luke 3,16). However, the citation of Isa 53,12 in Luke 11,21-22 is not obvious; for instance, M.D. Hooker feels that the reference is actually to Isa 49,24-25:
IV. Jesus’ Resurrection Associated Luke has associated Jesus’ resurrection with his being the Servant of YHWH:
The immediate context itself suffices to justify the claim that e)do/casen refers not only to the miracle which Jesus has just performed but also to his resurrection25. True, the miracle could be the only source of this glory. However, between the two statements of Jesus’ resurrection in Acts 3,13-15, Peter speaks of his audience’s handing over, rejection, and execution of the holy and just one; and so we have a kind of chiasmus which emphasizes Jesus’ suffering and resurrection (‘glorified’ – ‘handed over and denied’ – ‘you denied’ – ‘you killed whom God raised from the dead’). This claim is supported by the Emmaus story where Jesus chides the two disciples because they do not believe what the prophets said, namely, that the Christ must suffer and enter his glory (kai_ ei)selqei=n ei)j th_n do/can au)tou=; cf. Luke 24,26), for in this passage do/can has to be a reference to Jesus’ resurrection. Another passage which probably likewise refers to Jesus’ resurrection is the citation of Isa 53,8 in Acts 8,33, o#ti ai!retai a)po_ th_j gh_j h( zwh_ au)tou=26. It appears that Luke has intentionally not included all of the actual LXX text:
This allows Luke to do two things. As noted above, he apparently wanted not to speak of Jesus’ death as redemptive; but also the wording of the other part of Isa 53,8 found in Acts 8,33, ‘that his life was taken from earth’, could mean that Jesus’ life was moved from earth and so carry the nuance of Jesus’ resurrection. This interpretation finds support in Luke’s almost universal practice of not mentioning Jesus’ death without referring to his resurrection27. Besides, it is not easy to imagine how the Ethiopian eunuch would have been that impressed by a gospel message which related only Jesus’ meek, silent and humble death. V. Jesus as Servant of YHWH is Also Active after His Resurrection At both the beginning (Acts 3,13) and the end of Peter’s discourse in the Portico of Solomon, Jesus is identified as pai=j. According to v. 13 God glorified his Servant; at the end of the discourse Peter asserts that God has raised up his servant (to_n pai=da au)tou=) and sent him to bless the Jews in turning each of them from their evil (v. 26). Elsewhere, I have argued that ‘raise’ in both vv. 22 and 26 refers to Jesus’ resurrection28. Thus, after his resurrection Jesus, the Servant of YHWH, is imaged as a priest sent to bless the Jews; this post- resurrectional blessing consists in the turning each of them from their evil. The other passage in which after his resurrection Jesus, as the Servant of YHWH, would obviously be active is Acts 4,30. Above we argued that in 4,27, Jesus, the holy servant whom God anointed, should not only be understood as Messiah because of the mention of God’s servant David in v. 25, but also as Servant of YHWH. If this interpretation be accurate, then in 4,30, the persecuted Christians would be praying that God work signs, wonders and marvels through Jesus who is likewise the Servant of YHWH. However, the miracles spoken about in this verse must now clearly occur after Jesus’ resurrection, so the Christians’ petition must look to a post-resurrectional activity on the risen Jesus’ part. Two other passages which we have already studied indirectly view Jesus, the Servant, as active after his resurrection, namely, Acts 13,47 and 26,23. Each of these passages attributes to Jesus, with Servant-of-YHWH terminology, an activity which is actually being carried out by his followers. In 13,46-47, Paul and Barnabas tell their Jewish audience that it was first necessary to speak the word of God to them; but since they rejected it and did not judge themselves worthy of eternal life, Peter and Barnabas were going to turn to the Gentiles since the Lord had commanded them, ‘I have set you (se) to be a light for the Gentiles, so that you (se) may bring salvation to the ends of the earth’. Since se surely does not refer to them, Barnabas and Paul must be carrying out a mission which is attributed to Jesus. Much the same statement has to be made about Acts 26,23 which speaks of the Messiah who must suffer and be first to rise from the dead to proclaim light to the people and to the Gentiles; for during his earthly life, Jesus did not proclaim light to the Gentiles. On the contrary, this task is part of the mission given by the risen Jesus to Paul (cf. vv. 17-18) but which Luke identifies as the continual work of Jesus 29. * * * Not all of the above Lukan references to Jesus as the Servant of YHWH may be equally convincing; nor has our investigation been limited only to Isaian hymns, today associated with this theme. Moreover, the word-pattern for this theme is not always as clear as would be desirable. On the other hand, many of the above Servant of YHWH references are unique to Luke (e.g., Luke 2,29-32; 4,18-19; 7,21; 9,51; 11,21-22 [?]; 20,20; 22,19.37.48; 23,9.35; 24,7.20; Acts 3,13-14.26; 4,27.30; 8,32-33; 13,47; 26,23; 28,28 [?]). This is not to deny that a few of these citations might be questionable or that Luke got some of these citations or terminology from his sources, e.g., the use of paradi/dwmi from Mark. So, although some authors have questioned whether the tradition of Servant of YHWH enters into Luke’s christology, the evidence shows that it does: some aspects of the tradition about the Servant form a not insignificant aspect of Luke’s christology. To be sure, for Luke no one Jewish tradition or title was able to express fully who Jesus was. However, a few passages (cf. Luke 2,29-34; 4,18-19; Acts 13,47; 26,23) provide a general summary of Jesus’ ministry in terms of Servant of YHWH terminology. These passages particularly look to Jesus’ saving activity, universal mission and suffering. In fact, although the concept ‘prophet’ provided Luke with a means of explaining Jesus’ suffering (e.g., Luke 4,24-30; 13,33-35), that of ‘Servant of YHWH’ was more suited for this purpose. Also, Luke’s use of ‘light’ for salvation very likely depends on the Servant of YHWH tradition, and this tradition likewise provided him with his best argument for Jesus’ universal mission. Other Lukan passages use Servant-of-YHWH terminology to bring out given characteristics of Jesus. He, as Servant, is specially chosen and pleasing to God and determined to do God’s will as is revealed by his setting his face firmly for Jerusalem; probably he, as Servant, is the stronger warrior who carries off the plunder of his opponents. For Luke Acts 8,32-33 provide a summary of Jesus’ passion. Obviously, as a citation, the passage underlines that these events somehow fit into God’s providence. It is true that during the passion Luke also names Jesus the Christ, King and Son of God; but, granted that the Christ must suffer, none of these designations serves to provide a broad summary of Jesus’ passion. Nor is it sufficient to assign Luke’s passion story to the genre of the martyrdom of a just man. Rather Luke is more specific and presents Jesus as the Servant of YHWH who is humble and silent, but who is still deprived of a fair trial and will not even be remembered. Gentiles, Jews, king and procurator unite against him; he is handed over and led before both Jewish and Roman authorities. However, the fact is that, as the theme of Servant of YHWH confirms, he is innocent. Probably, dido/menon in Luke 22,19 should be taken in the sense of handed over, but Jesus’ willingness to follow his Father’s will is clearly present in the context. The correct interpretation of what is said about Jesus as ‘the one who serves’ in Luke 22,24-27 is not easy to establish. However, given the correspondence of these verses to their immediate context and their similarity to the thought of Acts 8,32-33, it is reasonable to conclude that they identify Jesus’ passion as ‘service’ and constitute part of the Lukan portrayal of Jesus as the Servant of YHWH. The portrayal of Jesus as Servant of YHWH likewise relates to his resurrection because God glorifies his servant; and probably the words of Acts 8,33, o#ti ai!retai a)po_ th=j gh=j h( zwh_ au)tou, are a reference to the resurrection. Surely, as the Servant of YHWH, Jesus remains active after his resurrection; for he blesses the Jews in turning each of them from their evil, and the persecuted Christians pray that God work signs and wonders for them through the name of his holy servant. Through his followers he also carries on his mission. If one asks what
specifically Luke achieves through his presentation of Jesus as the Servant of YHWH, the
followings points should be noted. This presentation does belong to Luke’s
christology and can function as a summary of Jesus’ mission. He is God’s
chosen one. The Servant Tradition particularly served Luke to explain Jesus’
suffering and passion and to underline his innocence. Moreover, the theme of Jesus as
Servant of YHWH expands Lukan ‘salvation’ with special reference to the image of
‘light’ and justifies Jesus’ mission to the Gentiles. SUMMARY This article explains
Luke’s meaning of Jesus as Servant of YHWH and claims this title as part of
Luke’s christology. Many references to Jesus as Servant of YHWH are unique to Luke,
and a few summarize Jesus’ ministry. These summary passages particularly look to
Jesus’ saving activity, universal mission and suffering. Other Servant of YHWH
passages point out that Jesus is specially chosen and pleasing to God and determined to do
his will. In particular, Acts 8,32-33 summarize Jesus’ passion during which Luke
views Jesus as the Servant and thus humble, innocent and silent. As the Servant Jesus is
also risen and active. NOTES 1 For instance, H. CONZELMANN, The Theology of Luke (New York 1961) 170, 172, 179, claims that Luke is no longer aware of the original peculiarities of titles such as ‘Son of Man’, etc., that Jesus the prophet, the holy one, the righteous one and the pai=j have become traditional and in Luke’s view have the same meaning as the other titles, Christ and Lord, and that in the use of titles Luke makes no distinction between the historical and the Exalted Christ. However, Conzelmann’s interpretation does not square well with Luke’s knowledge of the LXX nor with his actual use of the titles. 2 The title, ‘Servant of YHWH’, seems to be more prevalent than ‘Suffering Servant’, although either expression applies to Jesus. 3 Isa 42,1-7; 49,1-9a; 50,4-11; 52,13–53,12; not all scholars would agree on the verses belonging to the first two hymns. Of course, neither the NT nor Luke limits use of the Servant of YHWH hymns to Jesus. Paul sees himself as the servant (Gal 1,15-16 [cf. Isa 42,6; 49,1.6]; 2 Cor 6,1-2 [cf. Isa 49,8]; Rom 15,20-21 [Isa 52,15]); and Luke portrays Christians as carrying out Jesus’ ministry as the Servant, e.g., Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13,46-47; cf. Isa 49,6) and Paul himself (Acts 26,18; cf. Isa 42,7; 61,1). 4 Other passages from Isaiah which Luke uses and probably were attributed by him to the theme of Servant of YHWH would be Isa 35,5; 40,5 (LXX); 50,7 (LXX) (?); 58,6; 60,1-3; 61,1-2. 5 On this point see A. GEORGE, "Le sens de la mort de Jésus pour Luc", RB 80 (1973) 186-217; J.B. GREEN, "The Death of Jesus, God’s Servant", Reimaging the Death of the Lukan Jesus (ed. D.D. SYLVA) (BBB 73; Frankfurt a. Main 1990) 18-28. Green’s article is particularly relevant. 6 Up to the present, no one has convincingly demonstrated that Luke knew Hebrew; and his OT references are to the LXX. However, the possibility remains that some Lucan texts were formed by earlier church tradition and based on the MT. Of course, some references to the Servant of YHWH could be Luke’s own phrasing. 7 Confer M. KORN, Die Geschichte Jesu in veränderter Zeit (WUNT 2/51; Tübingen 1993) 254-257 and I.H. MARSHALL, Luke, Historian and Theologian (Grand Rapids 1989) 171-173. 8 This article will follow the translation of The New American Bible (Wichita 1983), unless for some reason it is not judged to be precise; then the translation is my own. 9 For a consideration of the influence of Luke 22,37 on the context of the latter passage, see M. RESE, Alttestamentliche Motive in der Christologie des Lukas (Götersloh 1969) 155-160. 10 During the course of the passion Luke has likewise either explicitly or implicitly and through irony, identified Jesus as the Christ (Luke 22,67-69; 23,2.35), king (23,2-3.37-38; cf. 22,16.18.29-30.69) and Son of God (22,70-71; cf. 23,34.46). No one title or statement suffices to express fully who Jesus is; but the Servant of YHWH tradition helps Luke explain the reality and shock of Jesus’ passion. 11 See Acts 23,9.29; 24,18-20; 25,7-11.18.25a; 26,31-32; 28,17-19. 12 See J.J. KILGALLEN, "Your Servant Jesus Whom You Anointed (Acts 4,27)", RB 105 (1998) 185-201. 13 Coming at things from a different angle, J.A. FITZMYER, The Gospel According to Luke (I–IX) (AB 28A; Garden City 1981) 212, contends that the suffering predicated of the Son of Man comes from the Servant of YHWH tradition. 14 M.D. HOOKER, Jesus and the Servant. The Influence of the Servant Concept of Deutero-Isaiah in the NT (London 1959) 80. Unlike the present one, Hooker’s approach is historical. 15 Confer F. HAHN, The Titles of Jesus in Christology (New York 1969) 59-61, who sees Isaiah as the source for Luke’s use of paradi/dwmi. 16 E. LOHSE, Märtyrer und Gottesknecht. Untersuchungen zur urchristlichen Verkündigung vom Sühntod Jesu Christi (FRLANT 46; Göttingen 1955) 187-191. In his citation of Isa 53,7-8 (cf. Acts 8,32-33) Luke leaves off the end, a)po_ tw=n a)nomiw=n tou= laou= mou h!xqh ei)j qa/naton, which could be rendered ‘because of the iniquities of my people he was led to death’; and at the Last Supper the citation of Isa 53,12 (cf Luke 22,37), does not include what immediately follows in the LXX, ‘and he bore the sins of many and was delivered because of their iniquities’. Nor does Luke cite any other Isaian passage which speak of vicarious suffering (e.g., 53,4-6.11). See also RESE, Alttestamentliche Motive, 98-99. 17 (Pace) KORN, Die Geschichte Jesu, 51-52,159 and G. VOSS, Die Christologie der lukanischen Schriften in Grundzügen (SN 2; Paris 1965) 167-168, ‘light’ for Luke does not refer primarily to preaching, but to the salvation Jesus brings. 18 RESE, Alttestamentliche Motive 184, discusses the probable OT influence on Luke 2,32 but makes no mention of Isa 60,1-3. 19 See P. GRELOT, "Note sur Actes XIII 47", RB 88 (1981) 368-372, on this verse. 20 B.J. KOET, Five Studies on Interpretation of Scriptures in Luke-Acts (Leuven 1989) 110-114, provides a summary of the various interpretations of se in this verse. However, Koet’s claim that the reference looks also to the Jewish audience conflicts with the actual context that speaks of Jesus’ and then Paul and Barnabas’ mission which at that moment is not being accepted by their Jewish audience. 21 "Does Luke Also Portray Jesus as the Christ in Luke 4,16-30?" Bib 76 (1995) 498-522; see also KOET, Five Studies, 32, 51, and MARSHALL, Luke, Historian and Theologian, 119, 127-128. 22 KORN’s, Die Geschichte Jesu, 66, contention that ‘anointed me’ (Luke 4,18) is best clarified by Luke 1,32-35 fails to appreciate that v. 35 of the latter passage is speaking about the unique relationship between God and the child Jesus, not about Jesus’ mission. 23 Confer F. BOVON, L’Évangile selon Saint Luc 1–9 (Gèneve 1991) 488-489. 24 M.D. HOOKER, Jesus and the Servant, 73. 25 G. VOSS, Die Christologie der lukanischen Schriften, 133, cites other authors who hold this position. See also M. RESE, Alttestamentliche Motive, 112-113. (Pace) E. HAENCHEN, The Acts of the Apostles. A Commentary (Philadelphia 1971) 205. 26 See A.F. LOISY, Les Actes des Apôtres (Paris 1920) 379-380 and F. SCHÜTZ, Der Leidende Christus (BWANT 5/9; Stuttgart 1969) 103-104. 27 Perhaps, the only example which one can find where Luke writes of Jesus’ death without reference to his resurrection would be Luke 9,44. In all the other instances, the mention of Jesus’ death is accompanied by the message of his resurrection. 28 R.F. O’TOOLE, "Some Observations on Anistêmi, ‘I Raise’, in Acts 3:22,26", ScEsp 31 (1979) 85-92. 29 See R.F. O’TOOLE, Acts 26: The Christological Climax of Paul’s Defense (Ac 22:1–26:32) (AnBib 78; Rome 1978) 118-122. |
|
|
|