THE DAVIDIC MESSIAH IN LUKE-ACTS The Promi: in Lukan Christolo; presented for the Degree of Ph.D. at the University of Aberdeen Mark L. Strauss B.A. Westmont College MDiv., Th.M. Talbot School of Theology 1992UMI Number: U046073 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI Dissertation Publishing UMI U046073 Published by ProQuest LLC 2013. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. Allrights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346Abstract ‘The Davidie Messiah in Luke-Acts ‘The Promise and Its Fulfillment in Lukan Christology Mark L. Strauss “This work examines one theme within Luke's Old Testament cristology, that ‘ofthe coming king from the ine of David. An examination of the frst century context St meaning reveals that atthe wn ofthe Christan era there Was a widespread and ‘elatively sable hope fora Davdic messiah within a broader context of eschatological diversity” ‘The earl Christian communities tok up dese expectations and applied them to Jesu, confessing him to be the Christ now “raised up* tn fulfillment of scripture. (chs. 1-3) “An examination of the birt narrative and the speches in Act reveals that Luke shows a song interest in this Davie theme, inivoducing it into passages which are introductory and programmatie for his christology ata whole” Jesus isthe promised messiah, who through hs fe, death, resurecton and exaltation-enlivonemen has Tatil the promises to Davie. (eis. 3-4) Despite this sttong royalsmessianic presentation in the nativity and in Aes, Luke's programmatic Nazareth sermon porn Tess a the prophet herald of Isaish GL. 1-2. This has caused many scholars to deseribe Luke's chistogy as esentally prophci, rather than royal. ‘The present work argues that a beter Solution lies in Eaters reading of lsaiah asa unity, where the eschatological deliver is a the samme {ime Davie king (Isa 9,11, suffering servant of Yahweh (sa 40-88), and prophet herald (Isa 61). ‘This symihesis not only fits Lake's chastological portrait and strong, interest in Tsach, but i also explains why Lake presents Jesus’ messianic ask as an "exodus" he is about ofl in Jerusalem (Ek®.31). Tn fala and othe prophets, the coming Davidie king is oten presented asthe agent ofthe eschatological new exodus {cir lsa 11-1-16) For Luke Jess isthe Davidie messiah who (like Moses) leads Goa's peopic om un eschatological sew exodus through suffering asthe servant OF Yahweh, (chs. $6)DECLARATION ‘This thesis has been composed by me. It has not been accepted in any previous application for a degree and is fully my own. Alll ils word-for-word quotations have been distinguished by quotation marks or by indented block quotations and all sources of information properly acknowledged Thok f Alacaz Mark L. StraussTo Roxanne ‘and Daniel‘CONTENTS Acknowledgments. ‘Abbreviations PARTI INTRODUCTION AND SETTING CHAPTER ONE ~ INTRODUCTION... 1.1 "Proof from Propheey* and Lakin Purpose 12 Recent Research on the Davidie Messiah in Lake“ Acs 13. Methodology, cn 1-4 Plan ofthe Sti Beene (CHAPTER TWO~ SETTING: THE DA VIDIC PROMISE TRADITION IN FIRST CENTURY JUDAISM AND FARLY CHRISTIANITY ...... 24 2.1 Introduction. os : 24 2.2 Origin and Sources ofthe Davide Promise Tradition: ‘The Old Testament Background : 26 2.2.1 Primary Statements: 2 Samuel 7, Palin 89. rd 2.2.2 Ideal Kingship andthe Royal Psalims.r...02.. 28 2.2.3 Other Texts Logiimizing the Davicie Dynasty. 30 2:2:4 Judgment and Renewal: Isiah and His Contenporaies 32 2.5 Prophecies of Exile and Restoration: Jeremiah and Ezekiel 35 2.2:5.1 Jeremiah, a ce a5: 2.2.5.2 Brake... i is ae. 2.3 ‘The Davidie Promise Tradition in Post Eilic and Second Temple Judaism 2.3.1 Inlroduetion and Overvio 2.3.2 Altec the Bale: Zechariah aad Haggai 23:3 The Septuagint (LXX). 2.3/4 Waning Messianic Hopes? Davidic Promise Tradition without a Messiah 2.3.4.1 The Wisdom of Ben Sia. 23.4.2 1 Maccabees svenseerevie 7 2.3.5 Renewed Davidie Expectations The Psa of Solomon 2°3.6 Dyarehie Messianism: The Qumran Scrolls and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.. 2.3.6.1 Qumran sr . 2:3.6.2 Testaments of the Twelve Pairiarchs... 2.3.7 Apocalyptic. Literatures... 23I1 1 Enoch. 23.72 Fourth tara 23.73 2duruch £8 Eat Chistian Witnesses 2°3.9 Barly Rabbinic Thought 2.3.9.1 Synagogue Prayers ‘The Shemonel Esreh and Sirach S112, 2.3.9.2 The Targums and Rabbinic Literaiure 2.3.10 ‘Summary and Conclusions. i 2.4 The Davidie Promises in Early (Pre-Likan) Christianity 24.1 arly Traditions, . a 24.2 Pall vaserniesnrnres 2.43 The “Gospel of” Mark. 2.4.4 Birth Traditions. 2.4.5 Conclusion...PART II PROMISE AND FULFILLMENT: ‘THE DAVIDIC MESSIAH INTHENATIVITY ANDIN ACTS. (CHAPTER THREE - THE FULFILLMENT OF THE PROMISE ANNOUNCED: ‘THE LUKAN BIRTH NARRATIVE. 3.1 Introduction 3.2 The Significance ofthe Birth Narrative in the Context of Luke-Acts. 3.2.1 Luan Language and Sivie 3.2.2 Characteristic Lukan Themes and Common Theological Perspectives.nrne 1 3.2.3 The Role ofthe Birth Narrative Se 88 3 in the Structure of Luke-Acts ce ioe 33 The Dave Mesa nike ara Develop So 107 3.3.1 The Annunciation, Lk 1.2638 ae 100. 3.3.2 The Benodictus, Lk 1.68-79,.... 7 7 3.3.3 The Birth of Jews, Li 2.1-26. a 126 3.3.3.1 The binth story, wv. 177... a6 3.3.3.2 The angelic annunciation to the shepherd, w. 830... 130, 3.3.4 The Presentation inthe Temple, Lk 222-38"... 133 3.3.8 The Boy fess nthe Temple Lk2.4-31 136 3.4 Conclusion, ji 139 EXCURSUS: *Son of David of "Now DaVid"?cssisesesettensneneesetee HAD (CHAPTER FOUR - THE FULFILLMENT OF THE PROMISE ACHIEVED: ‘THE SPEECHES OF ACTS, us 441 Introduction ve. 145 4.2 Peter's Pentecost Speech, Avis 3:14-4i. 146 4.2.1 ‘The Significance of the Speech inthe Narrative of Acts 146 4.2.2 Overview, Structure and Unity : 17 4.2.2.1 Overview. : 147 4.2.2.2 Structure... 7 148 4.2.23 Unity... fe So a8 42.3 Chriviologeal Themes and’ Purpose SES 4.23.1 The dah and resection othe Davids Clas We ado 9 42.3.2 The exon sisi fi wasn Lad” wr S335 : 14 4.23.3 A’ Mone Sil Typology oe 42.4 Concasion co te 443 ut Semon a Paha Ais BABA” is $3 Te Stntaens oft Sn he Nema Ai tea 43.2 Litemy Form snd: Stucures eo lt 43221 Lier Form : Semen 43.22 structures eo 433 Te Brome and is Bln ins the Savon. ts 4.3.3.1 Th hsv survey trough David vo cas saa emt teh ™m 43.3.2 Theapplcalon ofthe micage ists hears mens 2631 176 43.4 The Conlon th Soon 4nd the Evens of th Following Sabbath. snes 187 413.47 Anolfer of slvaion ands waning of ocon, wea 197 43.4.2 Thecrenis of ts flowing Sabai ie 4a 18 443.5 Summary and Conanon. 190 4. James? Address atthe Coun i of derusalom, Acts 1313-21. 1924.4.1 ‘The Significance of the Adress in the Narrative of Acts, 192 4.4.2 The Citation of Amos 9.11-12 and Its Narrative Significance... 7 195 4.4.3 Conclusion. ee ice oan 4.5 Conclusion to Chapier@ oS eee 200 PARTIIL ‘THE DAVIDIC MESSIAH IN THE GOSPEL NARRATIVE, Introduction 0 Part Ions soe ae eer 208 (CHAPTER FIVE - THE INAUGURATION OF MESSIAH'S MINISTRY: ‘THE NAZARETH SERMON IN CONTEXT. 207 5.1 Introduction at oe 5.2 The Royal-Mesaianie Context of the Nazareth Seemon. 5.2.1 John the Baptist and "the Chris" Lk 3.15-17, 5.2.2 The Baptismal Anointing, LK3.21-22.... 5.2.2.1 Lk3.21-22 as Jesus Spiri-anointing 5.2.2.2 Allusions in the divine voice... 210 5.2.2.3 The yproté litle and Jesus’ baptismal anointing... 213 5.23 The Genealogy, 1k 3.23.38. : oN 2a 5.2.4 The Tempation, Li-d.1-13 220 5.2.5 Jesus! Kingdom Proclamation and Demonie Recognition of "the Christ", Lk 4.14-15, 40-43, aa 221 5.2.6 Conclusion 233 53 The Nazareth Serinon, Lk 416-36. 2 ‘SB Introduction eevee oe 33.1.1 Overview... oS OD mas 5.3.1.2 Sources, _ oa. 5.3.2 Isaiah 61.16 (58.6) and Jesus! Sell-Revelation : 228 5.3.2.1 Prophetic features inthe sermon 229 53.2.2 Royal characteristics of Lk 4.18.19 (isa 611-2; 586). 231 5.3.2.3 The first century unity of Isai... : 24. 53.2.4 Luke and Isaiah... a 235 5.3.2:5 Isaiah 61 and the servant songs of isaiah 40.53.0000.) 238 5:3.2.6 The herald, the servant and the Davidie king (Isaiah 9, 11) 5.3.2.7 Conclusions: Jesus as prophet, servaii and king 242 ‘5.4 ‘The Role ofthe Christin the Nazareth Sermon and in the Gospel Narrative .. ‘Sl The Words and Deeds ofthe Chris (4 18:31) — Climaxing in the Confession of Peter (Lk 9.20). 248 5.4.2 The Suffering Role ofthe Christ (Lk 4-22-30) — iimaxing in the Emmaus Account (Lk 24 13-35). ‘5.5 Conclusion to Chapter 5... : : (CHAPTER SIX ~ TO JERUSALEM AND BEYOND: ‘THE "EXODUS" OF THE ROYAL MESSIAH. 258 6.1 Introdvetion...... aoe 258 6.2 The Transfiguration: Preview of the Jenisalern *Exouius™ ° 259 ‘6.2.1 Lukan Purpose in he Transfiguration Account. 259 } 6.2.2 Christological "Motifs... 260° 6.2.2.1 Royal and servani imagery... : 260 6.2.2.2 Moses/Sinai_ imagery. . oo 263 6.3 ‘The Central Section. eee 266 6.3.1 Lukan Purpose in the Central Section. :6.3.2 Deuteronomy parallels: The Travel Narative athe Now Exod? neers 269 63.2.1 CF BVaNS even aaa "269 6.3.2.2 B. P. Mocscncr : on 270 644 The "New’ Exodus" in Lukan Perspective, ol mm {6.4.1 "The Signilicance of Moses in Lske-Acts 2m (6.4.2 The OT Model for the Lukan New Exodts: Deuteronomy oF Isaiah? x. : 278 6.4.2.1 The Isaianic new exodus : SII 280 6.4.2.2 The "servant" and the new exodus. 22 6.4.2.3 The coming Davidic king and the new exodus «0. 286 6.43 Conclusions: ‘The Significance and Extont of the Lukan New Exodus. 290 6.4.3.1 Evidence for an Isaianic new exodus it Luke... 291 16.4:3.2 The extent ofthe Lukan new exodus. 295 6.5 Jesus’ Royal Approach to Jerusalem, 6.5:1 Inbrodetion er. 6.5.2 The *Son of David* Approaches Jerusaiet, Lk 1835-43 298 6.5.3 The Parable of the Pounds, Lk 19.12-27... 299 6.5.4 The Triumphal Entry, Lk 19-28-40. 302 ©. The Dovidsoinjage: Davi son nd Bai Lad LK 20.4144, 305 6.6 The Passion ofthe King as Serva 307 6.6.1 Intvoduetion % S90 6.6.2 Jesus as King in his Passion (6.6.2.1 The Jewish tal Charges of messianic pretensions, Lk 22.66-71 ov... 309 6.6.2.2 The Roman tial andthe crucifixion: "Chris, aking®... 311 6.6.2.3 The criminals crucified with Jesus, Lk 23.3943 -..-. 312 6.02.8 The king feces a ingdon, Lk 2228-0. 314 6.6.3 The King’s Role as Servant. SIT 316 6.6.3.1 Jesus as servant elsewhere ia Like-Acis 316 6.6.3.2 Isaiah 53.12 in Lk 2237, ee ai6. 6.6:3:3 Isaiah 53.7-8 in Nels 833-33 .scissccncciaes 318 6.6.3.4 The passion predictions... Ol 319 6.6.3.5 Jesus on the Mount of Oiives, Lk 23:39:46 .00000000 321 6.6.3.6 The tral and crucifixion: Jesus a8 & Stxaios 322 6.6.3.7 The exalled. 8eFVaNL nn eens 38 6:7 Conclusion to Chapier 6. CHAPTER SEVEN — CONCLUSION. nnn = 238 7.1 Summary and Conclusions. 328 72 Implieation or Lk Parpose aid Thesiogy ‘Suggestions for Further Research, a) “Ta. The Davie Mesh a Laka Burpee. 33d 722 Fer inplcalons fer Lk Thecogy SII 338, 7.2.2.1 Christology 338 72.2.2 Soteriology. : 3a 7.2.23 Eschatology... os CO baz BIBLIOGRAPHY .sscsercnreesee . eens 345, THESIS SUMMARY. eer eeseeere 364ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS and friends this thesis would not ‘Without the support and encouragement of Fam have been completed. First, | would ike to thank the postgraduate community at Aberdeen, who were ‘continual source of bot intellectual stimulation aad spirit support ‘My wife and I also owe a great debt to our friends at Deeside Christian Fellowship. ‘Throughout our slay in Aberdeen they have welcomed us into thet heals and homes and have tly bocome our second Fail. ‘Special thanks also go to my adviser, Dr. Max Tumer, whose careful reading, ‘and insightful guidance helped me to avoid many errors and inconsistencies which ‘would otherwise have entered the work. In addition his frequent assurances that my resources were adequate for the task provided much needed encouragement (0 persevere. Tam very grateful to my parents for their loving support and readiness to help with any need which might aise. ® Most of all, T want 10 thank my wife Roxanne, who has supported me ‘throughout this endeavor. She is truly the Proverbs 31 woman, working 10 sustain the family, loving and encouraging her husband, and providing us with a beautiful son — the joy of his fathers heart, "An excellent wife, who can find? Her worth is far above Jewels" (Prov 3110),ABBREVIATIONS. Abbreviations of biblical books, pscudepigraphical and early patristic works, ‘argumic and rabbinic matctal, periodicals, reference works, and serials, are from Journal of Biblical Literature 107 (1988), 584-596. ‘The only exceptions ae the four ‘Gospels, which ate abbreviated MM, Mk, Lk and Jn, Abbreviations of Dead Sea Serols are from J. A. Ftamyer, The Dead Sea Scrolls, Major Publications and Tools for Study (Auianta: Scholars, 1950, revised edition). Abbreviations forthe works of Philo and Josephus are from G. Kittel, editor, TONT, :xviexl. The Following general abbreviations are also used. (All other abbreviations are cistomary, self-explanatory or explained inthe text) circa, about chapter, chaps incontast dissertation ‘editor, editors (dited by) ‘exenpigrata, for example expecially English Transation and following Greek Hebrew dest, thats imperfect erature Septuagint i: ‘manuseript, manuscripts Massoretic Text number note, notes New Testament ‘Old Testament age, pages perfect parallels) {tanslato, translators (ranslated by) volumePART I INTRODUCTION AND SETTINGCHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION LL "Proof from Propheey* nd Lukan Purpose ‘Since the publication in 1957 of Paul Schubert's seminal essay, "Phe Structure and Significance of Luke 24," it has boon widely recognized that what Schubert describes as *proof from prophecy" is one of Luke's primary interests throughout his two-volume work. Schubert's essay picks up and develops a line Inid down by HJ Cadbury in The Making of Luke-Acts, namely that Luko-Acts is pervaded with the theme of divine control and purpose ~ a purpose set forth beforchand in the scriptures? Schubert focuses especially on Luke 24, which he views as the climax of Ltke's Gospel. He examines the three resurrection seenes in Luke 24: the discovery of the empty tomb, the Emmaus account, and Jesus' appearance to the eleven and “those with them". While each ofthese scenes contains a traditional core, Luke links ‘them together with the sume redactional climax, which Schubert designates *proot from prophecy” that Jesus isthe Christ3 ‘This theme is “the structural and material lenient which provides the literary and theological unity and elimax of the gospel,” ‘and which assures the reader “thatthe altested events ofthe life, death and resurrection of Jesus as the Christ are guaranteed beyond doubt, by the long-foretold and on-going, prophecies which unfold in history the Will and plan’ of God (see Acts 2.23; 4.28; 13.36; 20.27). In the second part of his work Schubert examines this theme in various passages in Luke 1-9, suggesting on the basis ofthis summary that this pro: rom-prophecy theme pervades the whole of Luke-Acts. While substantially agreeing with Schubert that a promise-Fulfilment motif plays a central role in Luke's chtistological use of the Old Testament, Darrell Bock ‘challenges his designation “proof [rom prophecy", suggesting instead the description "proclamation from prophecy and patierS "Proclamation” because Luke's use of the OT for christology is not primarily in terms of a defensive apologetic, but rather involves the direct and positive proclamation of Jesus. ‘The church is "on the offensive Ip Schubert, "Me Score and Significance of Lake 24," in Neaestamentiche Sten fr dof Buln (1957), 165-186, ces. 116. 24.3, Cadbury, The Making af Lak Aas (1927 198%), 308-30. For Schubert's deb to Cadbury 60 *Srtne nd Sgn 15.1 Schubert, *Sinctoe and Sialic *Scuter, Stace nd Sipiicmes” 176, 5p. Bock, Proclamation rom Prophecy and Pater: Lacan Old Testament Christlogy (4987). Docks work spray aculleage tM. Rese, Aitestomentiche Motive dr Christos der Lukas (1960), wo argue ta promi sn filseat we nota jor moti a Lake's chratlogical we of she Od Teste. fa or open, Bock hat conclusively names Rese othe pointChapter 1: Introduction ‘concerning Jesus." Bock insists on *pattern™ as well a prophecy because Luke sees ‘he scriptures Fulfilled in Jesus not merely in terms ofthe fulfillment of OT prophecy, Dut also in terms of the reintroduetion and fulfillment of OT patterns (i.e, typology) ‘hat point to the presence of God's saving work.7 While Bock i surely correct in his inclusion of typology and his emphasis on postive proclamation, proclamation per se ‘does not necessarily rule out "defensive" and apologetic interests on Luke's part. By Positively proclaiming the significance of Jesus words and deeds in the context of OT prophecy, Luke would both reassure believers in their faith and defend the church's claims against external attacks.8 That apologia is part of Luke's proclamation is suggested by Acts 9,20-22 where Paul "proclaims" Jesus in the synagaogues, confounding the Jews...by proving tha this one isthe Christ." ‘The present work isan examination of one Old Testament theme within Luke's “proclamation from prophecy and pattemn* motif. ‘This theme is the Fulfilment of the promises to David through Jesus the messiah. In addition to examining this theme within the Lukan corpus, we shall seek to relate it to questions of Lukan purpose and cology. Our justification forthe present study is the lack of a comprehensive and satisfying treatment of the theme, despite a numberof important contributions on its individual aspects. The need fora more comprehensive study may be demonstrated by a survey of recent research 1.2. Recent Research fon the Davidie Messiah in Luke-Acts ‘The majority of work on the theme of the Davidie messiah in the New ‘Testament has centered on the ehristological Hohetstiel "son of David, with primary focus on the pre-synoptic tration. These works have dealt espocially with three arcas (1) the entrance and significance of the tie in earliest Cheistianity:? (2) the interpretation of the traditional Davidssohujrage pericope of Mk 12:35-37;10 and, (3) the relationship of the healing son of David to the figure of Solomon.!1 Space ‘constraints permit only a summary of the most important and influential of these works. Ground-breaking work on the title was done by W. Wrede,!2 who argued that Bock, Proclamation, 275. Tock, Proclamation, exp. 274.215, witout expliciy sayings, Bok, Proclamation, 277-278, 279, sens tallow fora ‘apologetic purpose of wots when he stags Lake swing for acc sulsing doubt cased 1 the presaeof persecution, ‘ee $24.1, andthe works cited low. 10s 52:43, pp. 94.95, 295, see §243, p. 94, 292. 'W. Wane, “Seuss Davidsson Vortetpe nd Staton (1907) 187-177(Chapter 1: Introduetion "son of David" should not be viewed as an historical statement of genealogy, but as a ‘theological affirmation of Jesu! messiahship.!3 Weede claimed that beside this early ‘church belief affirming Jesus' Davidic descent was another tradition which contested ‘and opposed it, claiming that Davidie descent was irrelevant to the question of ‘messialiship. Traces of such a tradition are to be found in Barn. 12,10-11, Mk 12.35- 37 (originally a denial of Jesus' Davidie descent), and elsewhere in catly CChristianty.!4 Weede alo asserted that in Paul the concept ofthe pre-existent Son of| God reduced the son of David predicate from an affirmation of messianie dignity a designation of Jesus' Medrighelt (ef. Rom 1.3-4).15 1m his magisterial work on the origins of christology, 16 F. Hahn devotes a chapter tothe "son of David? tlle, Fundamental to Hahn's work throughout is the assumption thatthe functions and significance of the chrstological titles developed ‘hrough three distinct chureh communities, the Palestinian-Jewish, the Hellenstic- Jewish, and the Hellenistic-Gentle7 In relation to "son of David", he argues that it ‘was the early Palestinian church's belie that Jesus possessed a Davidie lineage which ‘caused them to apply to him a royal messianism they had at first repudiated.!® Yet while Jesus was viewed as the son of David already during his earthly ministry, the fulfillment of the OT Davidic promises ~ i, the establishment of the Davidic reign — awaited the eschatological future. Davidic descent was thus viewed as a "legitimizing presupposition" for the messianic dignity Jesus would receive at the parousia ‘According to Hahn, such a perspective may be discemed in the traditions incorporated in the following passages: Mt 1.1-17; Lk 132-33, 68-75; 3.23-38; Rev 3.7; 5.5; 22.16b.19 “That Jesus could be called *son of David" while the promises remained ‘unfulfilled inevitably created tension, ‘This was resolved in the Hellenistic-fewish ‘church by a two-stage christology in which Jesus’ earthly dignity was distinguished {rom his exaltation glory. In this context "son of David came to represent an earthly and preliminary stage of exaltation which was superseded by Jesus’ heavenly exaltation as Christ and Son of God. This view may be discerned in the traditions ‘behind Rom 1.3-429 and Mk 12.35.37 (which, contra Wrede, was never a denial of | Syed, "ess als Dvidron” 177 46. Halm, Christlogsche Hohl lve Geschicie in fren Chisentan (1963), [BE The Ties of lsat n Christolagy (903), 240-27, cr R.1L Puller, The Foundations of New Tetamen Christology (1965) ian, Tes, 240-242, Han opposes Wrol' view th Jesu’ David descent was spun the it etary chueh. Mi 12387 nana be viewed section an arabes is tester explained agaist he backgroud he lation nT soa ary Tes, 232) 20yyite Han views th confession found in Row 13-48 oigisting in Hellenistic fowish (Cuitanity, Faller, Foundations, 16, inks Wt exe from he ict Pletiancomanunity He Interprets Eeieeg as "pre dined oe Sono Go, acta "append Sow of oad 99Chapter 1: Introduction Jesus! Davidic descent). Asa designation for Jess! earthly dignity “son of David" here came tobe associated especialy With Jesus a8 helper ofthe sick and ufTering (ct Mk 10.46-52; Mt 9.27; 15:22)21 ‘The view of Davie sonship asa preliminary stage of exaltation could not be long sustained, however. Passages ike the rumphal etry (Mk 11.1-10), where Jesus earthly dignity is portrayed as a preliminary Davidic “kingship" and "where the splendour of the heavenly messianic office already radiates the earthly work of Jesus,” stretched this two-stage chvstlogy to the imit22 twas sot long, therefore, before the messianic dignity was asigned without qualification to the earthly Jesus (as happened with the tiles Christ and Son of Gos). Turing to the Lukan and Mathean birth stories, Habs disesrs son of David trations ~all rom the ellenistic-Jewish church ~ introducing two new moti, the Bethlehem birth andthe Virginity of Mary. In is earliest form, the seolegumenon ofthe virgin birth dd not affect the two-stage christology since the emphasis on Joseph's legal paternity preserved the significance of Jesws' Daviic sonship (ef. Mt I.1-16; 18-25). Soon, however, the special character of Mary's conception fed fo the idea that Jesus was the ‘Son of God andthe messiah already on earth, so that David sonship lost much ofits significance as a preliminary high stage in Jesus existence (ef. Lk 1.26.38) 24 Another major attempt odiscem the earliest Chistian use of Daviie-messianie ‘material is D, C. Duling's University of Chicago dissertation, the most comprehensive tradition-historical study of the Davidic promise tradition in Judaism and earliest Christianity:25 Duling traces the promise tradition from its origin in antiquity to its entrance into Christianity. In his study of the Old Testament and Jewish background (chs. 2 and 3), he Focuses especially on the cltic background of the promise tradition texts in royal ritual and ideology, and the origin and development of the various metaphors used (o depict the coming Davidie king ~ metaphors such as "seed! “shoot”, "branch*, "scepter, "star", "hom", "lamp", e.25 He points to three main ‘components of the promise tradition present in the foundational promise texts of 2 ‘Samuel 7 and Psalm 89: descent from David, a father-son relationship with God, and the promise of an etcnal throne. Subsidiary themes include the building of the temple and the temporary chastisement of David's son(s). Duling coins the phrase "prophetic ‘esi afr o Jon’ pro glory 2 conta oeuent pinion Hal consider Mathew ato "on of Davi dees to be eaiona thr tan een (ites, 255), 22h, Tite, 25h. Dy, Ts, 246.258 2st, Tite, 261-265. 250, . Dung, Traditon ofthe Promizs to David and is Sons in Early Judas ant Primitive Cristionty (PAD Diss; Univer of Cieago, 1770). Dulin’ basic een aps abbreviated fom in is arel, "The Promise lo David and Thi Eten nto Chistauty Neaing ‘owen alike Hypo" HS 19 (1973), 38-7. ing, radon 85-260,Chapter 1: Introduetion perpetuation formula" to describe the frequently recurring promise for the perpetuation of a Davidic descendant on the throne of Israel (the first and third components of the promise tradition). This formula occurs in both conditional and unconditional form, sometimes dependent on the obedience of David's sons. Duling traces these themes ‘and motifs throughout the Old Testament, post-enilie Judaism and into the rabbinic Period. He concludes this section by affirming that hope for a descendant from David to come and save "srac! cut across all forms of Judaism both before and after the rise ‘of Christianity, nd that it was always based on the promises of 2 Samuel 7 and other ‘OT passages which either continue and expand this tradition or relate directly wo itin terms of royal ideology. In postexilic Judaism the father-son relationship moves into the background and primary emphasis is given to Davidic descent and an eternal reign ‘onthe throne of Isael. The lltris quite dominant, inspite of - oF perhaps because of ~ the collapse of the monarchy; after the Roman conquest, especially, this theme experiences significant renewal.27 One of Duling's major contentions is that earlier traditions tend to utilize non-ttular metaphors (such a8 "shoot, "horn, *scepter"), rather than the till "son of David, to describe the coming Davidic king, The title "son ‘f David! occurs only once ina Jewish document from pre-Christian times, in Ps. Sol 17.23. Bven this use, however, may have arisen as a later Greck translation of an original Hebrew metaphor such as *shoot"28 If the “son of David" Judaism contemporaneously with Christianity, as Duling considers likely, then non- tle arose in titular metaphors in the NT are likely to indicate earlier traditions. Duling concludes that one should attempt to find the earliest Christian uses of the Davidie descent ‘traditions (1) in those passages which altempt 1 exogete the promise tradition, and (2) at those points where the tile itsolf does nor occur: 29 From his study of Jewish background, Duling turns to examine the factors ‘hich prompted the entrance ofthese promises into primitive Christianity (chs. 4 and '5). Examining, in tur, early Pauline formulas (esp. Rom 13-4), traditional material in the speeches of Acts 2 and 13, and traditional material in the Luka birth narrative, the concludes thatthe eatliest NT aditions indeed use the non-titular, metaphorical ‘materials ofthe promise tradition, and relate them closely to Old Testament and Jewish fexts, Further, the fact that dhese passages frequently use the "raising up* language ‘common to the Davidie promise tradition suggests thatthe early Christians took up. these traditions as an aid for understanding the resurrection of Jesus as his enthronement in the heavenly spheres.390 *pulng, Tradons, 28:29; idem, "Promises o Davi” 68 28ror move on this question se $23.5, pp. 47-48. 2®puting, Tradions, 227230, 289-260; idem, Promises to Davi 8-69, 74-77 ing, Tradions, 261; dem, "omises o David," 70-7. For thers who take & sinilr view of te "raising up language ofthe rose lion so 834.1 p 86, 258(Chapter 1: Introduction ‘The works so far cited, though important to our general theme, do not relate Aireetly to the topic at hand, since they deal only with the Jewish andlor the pre- synoptic material 3! ‘They may thus be seen as background and prolegomena for the present work; some of the issues they raise will be dealt with in our ehapter on the Davidie promise tradition in its ist century setting chapter 2).32 More relevant to the Present work are those studies which focus on the redactional interest of the [Evangelists themselves. While various works have examined the *son of David" title in Matthew39 and Mark,*# Luke's sceming lack of intrest inthe tide fas resulted in ‘elatively few studies on Davie messiahship in Luke-Acts. This may lead tothe false conclusion that Davidie descent is unimportant for Luke, On the contrary, as we shall see, the Davide descent and the kingship of Jesus is leading motif in Luke's work ‘The most important iradionsgeschichiche sty of Davide messiahship inthe ‘New Testament in general, and Luke-Acts in particular, is C. Burgers Jesus als Davidssoti: eine traditionsgeschichliche Untersuchung (1970). After a brief chapter ‘on Jewish background, Burger trices the Davidie promise tradition from the early pre Pauline credo incorporated in Romans 1.3, 4, through the New Testament corpus, With chapters dealing, respectively, with Christian confessional formulas, Mark (separate discussions of pre-Markan and Markan material), Matthew, Lake-Acts, John, ‘and Revelation. ‘Though the primary interest of the present work is in Burger's conclusions on Luke-Aets (ch, 6), this chapter must be viewed in the context of his Work as a whole. A general survey is therefore in order. Burger's work is both a response to and an expansion on Hahn's study. While holding firmly to Hahn's Aistinetion of three stages of carly churca communities, Burger challenges the view that Jesus’ Davidie descent was confessed in the early Palestinian church. For Burger the lille isnot a genealogical statement of origin buta theological affirmation (s0 Wrede), and was applied (o Jesus fist in the Hellenisti-lewish church a an affirmation of his messianic dignity. Burger follows E. Schweizer, Halu, etal, in his interpretation of Rom 1.3-4, concluding thatthe pre-Pauline formula arose inthe Hellenistic-Jewish church and bears witness lo a two-stage christology.. Jesus! earthly dignity as son of 3 tectonic afew comments ty Hahn (Te, 277-278 a. 162) anda bet section in Ding on aon rite the bth aati he cones ta Las ppose is tosoive te genealogical (on of Jap [vio So o Goan geographic! (Balen Navarth? colt rtd to es ith (radon, 338-0, 2Dulng himself describes his thei lying he foundation fora sy ofthe Davie ssh om aretaction ciel pepetive (radon, 8-8). 3%in adton tothe commentaries, J M Gibbs, Purpose an Pater in Matthew's Use ofthe Tile Som of Davi.” WTS 10 (1963-61), 446-6 A. Sub "Dex Davidson i Mths. Evangelina," ZVWV $9 (1968), 57-81: 1D. Kingsbury, "he Tie Son of Davin aicw's Gospel JBL 95 (1976), 891-601; D.C: Duly "The Therapeutic Son of David: At Eee a “Maitews Chistalgical Apoogstios ATS 24197778), 390-10. 34g alin othe commentaries and Bue’ work cit tow ace V.K, Robbins, “The eoting of Blin Baim (1046-3) ia Mine Thesogy JUL % (193), 224289, 1. Kingsbury, The Chrisoogy of Marks Gospel (1983)(Chapter 1: Introduction David is surpassed by his heavenly existence as Son of God.35 As Jesus! status as ‘Son of God was applied to Jesus’ earthly existence, and eventually to his pro- existence, the tendency to contrast the two tiles increased. In Paul's interpretation of Rom 1.3-4, in other NT confessions, and in Ignatius, son of David becomes less title ‘of majesty and more a biographical statement, unt it acquires the sense of the earthly humility of the eternal Son of God. 2 ‘Turning to the pre-synoptic and synoptic material (chs. 4-6), Burger argues that ‘though Matk's HellenisticJewish community confessed Jesus’ Davidie sonship, the ‘raditonal material availabe to him contained only meagre and problematic evidence for Jesus’ Davidic descent.37. Mark made up for this lack through his owa redaction, adding the *son of Davia" cry to an originally unmessianic Bartimaeus account (Mk 10.46-52) and using the story to prepare the reader for Jesus! royal entrance to Jerusalem (Mk 11.1-11).38 Further, it was Mark who transformed the Davidssohnfrage (Mk 1235-37) ~ originally a denial of the Davidie descent of the messiah (s0 Wrede, contra Hahn) — into an affirmation of the two-stage chrstology his ‘community affirmed. In his essential dignity, Jesus is more than the son of Davi is the Son of God.’ The only difference between Mark's two-stage ehristology and that reflected in Rom 1.3-4is the timing of Jesus’ installation, In Rom 1.34 itis at the resurrection, in Mark itis in stages: Jesus is adopted Son of God at his baptism, he proclaimed as such to the disciples at his transfiguration (in line with the messianic secre), and openly revealed as such at his death Turning to Matthew's Gospel, Burger argues that though Matthew had no additional son of David material in his Gospet sources, he picked up the tile from Mark's Bartimaeus account and redactionally introduced it throughout the Gospel (Mt 20.29-34; 9.27-31; 12.22-24; 1521-28; 21.9), thus greally expanding Mark's portrait and raising "son of David to aan Hoheitstite. Jesus appears throughout asthe compassionate, wonder-working son ‘of David, opposed by the unbelieving Pharisces.#1 In the Davidesoluyrage (Mt 22.41- 46), Matthew further indicates that after Jesus earthly origin as son of David, he was installed by God in the heavenly dignity of the Lord. Lordship thus supersedes Davidie sonship.42 Burger turns next to the Matihean bisth narrative, In a detailed analysis of the genealogy, he concludes it is not authentic, but was composed by 3Spurger, Jesus als Davidsson, 25:8, 36g Jets als Dado, 33-4. Surges, Jesus als Davidson, 8-59, 70-1. 8pcgc, desu als Dando, 42-82, 59-64 Ppurger, Jer al Dovidsohn, $2-58, 64.70. {Pang Je ls Bodoln 5.48, Coty Wake, Dogs view iin of th ean ere nat a the ese, bul al the ean, “tsugs Jesus als Davidson, 7291 42g, Jeous ale Davidson, 849.Chapter I: Introduction Greck-speaking Christians borrowing from the LXX. Matthew added the *son of Davia! ttle in the introduction, using thelist to strengthen his presentation of Jesus as David's son.#3 On the rest of the birth narrative, Burger makes (wo main points Firs, he argues it was Matthew who added the designation *son of David" to the description of Joseph in the annunciation account (Mt 1,20); the original story spoke only of the virgin birth, not of Jesus' Davidic descent! Second, the fact that, in ‘Matthews tradition, Bethlehem was not ealled the "ety of David shows that there was zo pre-Matthean link between Jesus bisthplace and his Davidic descent 45 In short, ‘Burger concludes that Matthew's picture of Fesus asthe son of David obtained nothing rom Palestinian traditions, bu rests entirely on the presentation of Mark's Gasp ‘Burger next urns to Davidic sonship in Luke-Acts, examining, in turn, the Gospel passages dependent on Mark, the genealogy, the bith narrative, and the book of Acts. He argues that throughout his two-volume work, Luke maintains a consistent {heological perspective on the Davidie promises, While Jesus is indeed a descendant of David, he reccives his royal authority notin Jerusalem but a his exaltation to God's right hand, Davidic messiahship thus plays no role in Jesus" earthly ministry. While [Lk tends to follow his Markan material quite closely, his minor changes may be seen to reflect this theological interest, Whereas Mark uses the "son of David ery in the Bartimaeus account to prepare for Jesus! Jerusalem entrance, Luke follows his version (Lk 1835-43) with the Zacchacus story, and so obscures this Markan coancetion, The ‘emphasis thus shifts from an acclamation of the Davidie messiah o one miracle among ‘many in Luke's travel narrative. Unlike Matthew, Luke places no special emphasis on the son of David tile in Jesus! earthly ministry 6 In his version of the approach to Jerusalem (Lk 19.28-40), Luke stresses the non-political character ofthe entrance: he ‘omits the reference (o the kingdom of David; he adds a reference to *peace in heaven land glory in the highest"; and he presents the story as a descent from the Mount of ‘Olives rather than an entrance into Jerusalem. In addition, various contextual factors pint to Luke's view ofa delay of the parousia and a non-political kingdom? ‘Though “Sb unger Jer ols Davidson, 91-102. 4 4burger Jesus als Davidsson, 102-104, Contra. lina, The History ofthe Septic ‘Tradition (1963). 292-293, who ree the ppt th ton ected byte unteosican ofa vingn bh nd Davie sonst see rm the ion of he pn br oa ga seca Fefeng tg ss" Davie descent roa Joseph Spurgr, deus als Davidsson, 102-108. This later covelsion is dubious, 1s unlikely tha th uadiions of su Betlebem brs Would nl have asciatl Dllehen wth David, Dasger ‘gg the rath plausible view that Jesus was Pacienally(uverselen) mae Balen whe aoc tation conceming a Hedin massacre nas ine twa was treed ohh, ‘Thelepend ofthe irthplac then cqreddaoperigeace when Chistian ees uncovered i Mica prophcy. Here as elcwhre, Burger slr o cna talon Davie marl fom ‘he Matton tard aerate pestered Aetyuger dete ae Deed TU, AMyuge Jesus ae Dokdo, 12-U,Chapter I: Introdvetior Luke takes the Davidssofijrage over almost unchanged from Mark (Lk 20.41-44), his presentation in Acts resolves the question left open in the Gospel. Jesus can be David's Lord as well as his son because he has been exalted as Lord at God! right hhand.$8 In his study of the Lukan birth narrative, Burger reaches source conclusions in tine with his study of Matthew. ‘The Evangelist himscif is responsible for the references to Jesus' Davidic sonship. Only in the Benodictus (LK 1.68-79) was a traditional piece used, but this came From Baprist rather than Christian circles, The story of Jesus' Bethlehem birth (Lk 2.1-20), though traditional, was supplemented by Luke with references to the virgin birth and the Davidie sonship of Jesus, The annunciation to Mary (Lk 1.26-38), with its reference to Jesus’ Davidie reign, is ‘wholly the work of the Evangelist. By the "tone of his Father David (¥. 32) Luke does not mean an carthly kingdom, but the enthronement of the son of David oveloped in Acis 230-3649 ‘This Lukan theme of Jesus' exaltation as his Davidie enthronement is prominent in speectes in Acts (2.25.36; 13.23, 32-37 and 15.16-18). The perspective in all three speeches is the same: Jesus did not Fulfill the promises to David in his ‘earthly life, but in his resurrection and exaltation to the right hand of God. While Jesus is anointed (Lk 3.22; 4.18) and proclaimed as Son of God (Lk 9.35) during his ‘ministry, he isnot yet enthroned. The tite "king* applied to him in his earthly life is proleptic. Finally, Burger examines the Old Testament citations which Luke wilizes ‘o prove that Jesus fulfilled the promises to David (Ps 168-115 132.115 110.152,7; Isa ‘553; Amos 9.11-12). He seeks to show thatthe combination of these texts is Lukan, and is meant to support the theological perspective affirmed in the speeces.S1 Burger's study as a whole is comprehensive and wellargued, and is justifiably “pe, ea Dvds, 1-11, Durga existe Lak geen, eneling hat ste ake shows once erin Adan Cais iypogy ore? TT Stace he mt have recived the whol ot rome ron ts pot he xeon of 0 Grek peaking ars: the ist eloped a gteogy fon Dari oagh Net, ntetonly oiing he ugody lino ings he second we he bok of Choncls to kee enslogy fom David Adan: Lake the neopets work ose ft oes Dae deen (op-118-123). “ger er al Davidson 127-19 Spare few ls Devs, 3714 Sisnger fer oe Dando, 12-2. tn vo more ctr, Burge exis ess! Davi deen Gone fakin the Apc po, nob 940-4, Bae jess ti em that thea. knowing tron eu th hy stony ove i gore of he ‘es Katte thors palentcng gs tenet cog vd ak ho. ‘Ghisins whotavelavened tinh tq Dave pnsoge pone et ness. “The {sage tha afr elute non Devi cvtlgy an tes th sc anes ch opt ead ‘ic 18.35.97 py. 158-158- On the Aga, rger ges tht ine relent" avi dsen (Ro 37,55 22.10, aor dems Od Temes Jesh etl ‘nel ~ bot nto Cis waits o poy the erie an xe nen th Davie, {bes (Cone Hab ho taka bo pages te ety Panny svc ts Scr il ecve messi tte nonin) White he son th xeon sala to {Sin Let pesemn ifs em i y pacing the aig nth cotton ok thereat nt alo ofthe tie soccer (139. 9Chapter 1: Introduction 10 ‘considered the standard work in the ied, The work's greatest strengths ate is witness to the diversity of perspectives within the early church, especially with regard to the contributions ofthe individual Evangelists. Various weaknesses, however, may be noted. For one thing, many of Burger's conclusions are based on a rigi distinction between Palestinian and Hellenistic communities as set forth by Bousset, Bultmann, Hahn, ef af). It is now widely accepted that such a strict distinction is somewhat artificial, and that from the earliest period the predominantly Aramaic-speaking, ‘communities of Palestine were in touch with Hellenistic ideas and contained Greck- speaking members.s? This raises doubis concerning Burger's. methodology, particularly when he altempis to eliminate Davidie material from the eatly Palestinian tradition. Even if a rigid distinction between communities were allowed, Burgers arguments in favour of a Hellenistic origin are frequently strained and unconvincing, particularly in relation to the birth narratives and the Markan material. Indeed, Burger's consistent attempt to separate claims of Jesus" Davidie descent from the ‘earliest period is puzzling in light of two of his other points, Firs, in Burgers all-too- brief background study, the sourees he examines to confirm the widespread Jewish ‘expectation for a coming Davidic king are almost all Palestinian, suggesting (though he ‘docs not say $0) that this expectation was particularly prominent among Palestinian Jews. Second, he consistently claims that *son of David® was a theological, rather than a genealogical statement, and was frst ascribed to Jesus because he was considered to be the messiah. When these two points are brought together, it seems that the early Palestinian church would be the community most interested in affirming Jesus! Davidie descent, Yet according to Burger, this community had no interest in {his designation. 1t was the Hellenistc-Jewish church which first confessed Jesus as the son of David. One wonders whether Burger's insistence on the non-Palestiian ‘origins of the son of David material is not influenced by a dogmatic desite to separate the church's claims from the historical Jesus. Other criticisms of Burger relate more directly to the present work. By concentrating solely on explicitly Davidic passages, Burger is not able to deal sufficiently with related themes, such as Jesus’ messiahship in general, his divine sonship, his kingship, or his role as saviour. Since these themes are all closely related o Davidie messiahship, the need remains for a more comprehensive study of royal ‘messianism. In the present work we will examine these wider issues by focusing on fone New ‘Testament author (Luke). While a response to Burger's individual ‘onelusions on Luke-Acts must await the body ofthe thesis, the following points wil ‘52x, Henge, Judas and Hellen, Studs in ther Encounter olestne during the Earl Helene Period (1978), ep 1: 104-106: dem, Dato era and Pal 1983) ep 1-1 ‘Marsal, "alsinian and Hellesaic Chitty: Some Cato Connente NTS 19 (7S 7), PTLD exp 73-214, he terre ie ae(Chapter I: Introduetion 11 indicate our goneral direction. First, while Burger s surely sight that Luke's redaction ‘depicts Jesus exaltation as a Davidic-enthronement, he doesnot suficienty relate this ‘conclusion to Luke's wider purpose in Luke-Aets, nor does he suggest a community situation(s) which Luke may be addressing. More specifically, there is litte ‘consideration of how the Davidic theme relate to the churehs preaching to the Jews of to Luke's attitude toward Judaism. The need remains for an examination of the Davidic promise theme in the wider context of Lukan purpose and theology. In addition, while Jesus’ heavenly enthronement is corainly a central theme in Luke-Acts, we will neod to ask whether Burger's claim that Jesus does not function as the Davidie ‘messiah during his earthly ministry is adequately founded, Many scholars have followed Burger’ conclusion that Davidic messiahship is ‘essentially an exaltation category. An example may be found in the work of E. Krink, Who examines the salvation-historical place of Jesus in the speeches in Acts:$ Krink ‘concludes that at the centre of Luke's christology is Jesus’ exaltation and enthronement atthe right hand of God, and this enthronement is viewed by Luke asthe reception of ‘the Davidic throne promised in Lk 1.32-33.5+ Luke's presentation of Jesus as David's son no longer describes the appearance and status of the earthly Jesus (as in Rom 1.3- 4, Mark, and Matthew), but his heavenly dignity. Jesus’ descent from David predestines him for the throne at God's sd and isthe salvation-historical condition of his installation as Son of Goa S$ ‘Though Burger's work isthe most comprehensive examination of this theme, ‘many other works have deal in some way with Davidie messiaship in Lake-Acts. In shor article, P, F, Bruce examines passages in Luke-Acts which relate tothe Davidie ‘messiah.56 After mentioning the relative lack of emphasis on the promises to David by both Jesus and Paul, Bruce points to the significance of the theme in Luke's birth narrative and inthe speeches of Acis 2, 13 and 15. Bruce's primary purpose is not to determine the significance of Davidic messiahship for Luke, but to point out the importance of festimonia drawn from the Davidie promises (Ps 2.7; 16.10; 110.15 Isa 553, etc.) in the exegetical activity of the early church, Two of his subsidary points, however, rise important questions which must be dealt with inthe present work. (1) ‘Sp Kn, Jesus der Knecht Goes: Die hellgechcliche Stellan Jes in den Reden der ‘Apostegeshiche (1972), eau, Knecht Gots, 85-87; 207-208; "Dic Crstologe, wise sich n du Reden der “Apostelgeschicht und Jn beige Tele dey uke Dope dati, hal ine ites Bs ist der car fechten Gotesthronende Lk 2269; py 2, 83-3; 33; 7S) wd oan seiner ‘Meclifile eitabonde Jesus. hat Goin ANt dr Ex in ic nig mace Davibesrschalt(Apg 230, 13.34: 1816: L4 120 wo dn a ern ua Chistes (Ap 236), ‘in Fe wed Heiiinge pg 5,31 gmc.” ‘Skah, Knecht Goes, 8687, Cllowing Vurgr, Jer als Davidson, 174 50. F. Bruce, The Davide Mesa in Laks-Aeain Bll and Noa Eastern Sais 1, a7),(Chapter 1: Introduction — 12 ‘The firs isthe paucity of Davidic material between the birth narrative and the speeches im Acts, Bruce points to the surprising fact that in spite of the dominance ofthe theme inthe nativity, no mention is made of Jesus' Davidie descent throughout the Gospel, the only exception being the incidental reference by the blind man of Jeticho. Then, “like an underground stream...the Davidie motif emerges into the light of day again When we come to the apostolic preaching in Luke's second volume." The dearth of Davidie references in such a large body of material demands explanation, (2) A sovond Point is the centrality ofthis theme in three key speeches in Acts, Specifically with reference to the Pentecost speech, he offers the observation that while the "Davidic- Messiah group of festinonia is by no means the only one found in the speeches in the carly chapters of Acts..Luke may have reasons of his own for pulling it in the forefront of the apostolic preaching." IL is part of our purpose to determine what these reasons were. In a somewhat rambling article, S. E. Johnson traces royal and Davidie imagery through the four Gospels, secking to establish the Site im Leben of various pericope and a plausible line development from the historical Jesus onward.5? In his section on Luke-Acts, he pons out that while the Davidie-royal moti is prominent in the nativity and in Acts, "there is hardly anything inthe gospel to suggest that Jesus ‘vas regarded as an earthly, political Messiah." 1, as has often been suggested, the reason for this is Luke's desir to minimize the political element for apologeti reasons, hhow do we aécount for the strong Davide expectations inthe birth narrative and Acts? Picking up on a point made by P. S. Minear,! he suggests that since Luke does not precisely discriminate among christological les and images, one need not suppose he senses the political dynamite ofthe royal-Davidic language.®2 Johnson next turns (0 the Jowish background of Davidie messianism, pointing to the similarity between, Luke's nativity, the Psalms of Solomon, and the writings of Qumran. ‘Though the Psalms of Solomon contain the theme of the destruction of the Gentiles, they are less activistic than other writings of this time and portray the messiah as one who is ‘endowed with the Holy Spirit and who trusts in God rather than horse, rider and bow. ‘AC Qumran, the Davide "braneh* does not lead armies to vielory but appears as a man ‘STryc, ‘Davie Meas," 9. Another exception ~ nol note hy Brac—i the goneaogy, ‘which lg alms Jeu Davie descent ‘Sac, cDavidic Mos, 59S. son, "The Davide Royal Moi in the Gospel," JO 87 (1968), 136-150, Johnson goes so far aso dae vations paicope the base of torical ovens nthe Tie century (Gnd Batic, c. A.D. 7075; feeding of he five thousand, AD. 46.6). Hels kes he “ater implausible sgestion Us the irae fr ahi the uch, ean of esos aimed leadeship by ritue of te Davi neg ‘Piclusoa, "Davide Royal Moi” 144 tp, S. Mina, "Lukes Use of the Bit Sores, in Sales n Le Act (1966) esp 117 119, 125.126 ‘2iolasoa, “Davide Royal Mot 145Chapter 1: Introduction 13, of peace afler the battle. Johnson concludes that Luke was willing to utilize the traditions he did in the birth narrative because they originated within a circle of Palestinian Christians who viewed the Davidie promises with the special emphases of the Psalms of Solomon, and so were not inclined to be political activist. 69 ‘Two of Johnson's points may be questioned: First, whether Luke's Gospel proper is as non-royal as he suggests (a question we will examine in detail), and ‘second, whether the Psalms of Solomon would dis It seems any messiah who "smashes the arrogance of sinners like a potter's ja." “shatters their substance with an iron rod and *éestroys unlawful nations with the word of his mouth (Ps. Sol, £7. 22-23; ef. 17.35.36) is a political (and military!) force to be reckoned with. While Johnson's conclusions appear to be inadequate, he raises the important question of why Luke, if he views Jesus' messiahship as line anyone to political activism. ‘essentially non-political, provides such a strong Davidic and nationalistie-sounding inteoduction to his two-volume work. Ina good summary article, A. George adresses the issue of the royally of Jesus in Luke-Acts.64 He teats the theme in two paris. In the frst the Lukan expressions of royalty are examined, including “descendant of David", facinesc, ypwords, ewrip, and dpymysc. George concludes that Luke places great stress on the royalty of Jesus, using the messianic language of Hellenistic Judaism to mark the fulfilment ofthe promises o David. Luke's Hellenistic readers could comprehend this -message through their knowledge of the Septuagint, and, depending on their cultural background, through Hellenistic titles ike képtos, ewe and deynyés. Luke takes special care to demonstrate the uniqueness of Jesus’ royally for both Jews and Gentiles. ‘This is evident from the emphasis on Jesus’ humble origins, his suffering and death, and the divine transcendence of his royalty over that of all eathly kings. In the sccond part of his work, George turns to examine the texts in which royal terminology is conceatrated. In the birth narrative Jesus is presented in Old ‘Testament terms as the messianic king promised to Israel, Yet he fulfills the Old ‘Testament promises in a new and surprising way — in the obscurity of is birth, in his poverty, his servic, his universal dominion, and his mysterious participation in the holiness of God, he only Lord, Significantly, only one text points explicitly to Jesus! future status (Lk 1.32-33); all others reveal Jesus a the present messiah (Lk 1.43, 693, 2.11, 26): "Ces deux chapitres, en effet, sont beaucoup plus expliites sur le mystére de Jésus que toute Ia suite de 'évangile." They are meant not 89 much to describe the ‘Sioharon, ‘Davide Royal Mi 146-148, Gt, George, “a oye de Jeu in Eder sur Fred Lc (1978), 257-282. Cf. avons, Tene of Sake (1970) ch L. Caf, “Le ite Kyo ot gate royale de ss.” infcualE- Corfu (1988), 343. ‘George, “La royal de Ju" 257-272 emp, 271-272(Chapter 1: Introduction time before salvation, but to provide a revelation of Jesus' royalty in ils fullness, perceived in the light of Easter. In the prelude to Jesus’ ministry (Lk 3.1-4.13), Luke discreetly introduces features of Jesus' royal identity. The question of John the Baptist (Lk 3.15-16) and the enthronement language of Ps 2.7 (Lk 3.22; George follows the Western text) give the baptism of Jesus a messianic interpretation. This is reinforced with the Davidie genealogy (3.23-38) and the temptation account (41-13), where Jesus refuses Satan's offer of earthly kingship. In this section, then, Jesus! kingship is inaugurated by the word of God (Lk 3.22), but itis not yet Fulfilled 7 After the nativity and the prologue of 314.13, litle is said of Jesus’ royalty until the re-emergence ofthe theme inthe last days of Jesus! ministry. With the *son of David" cry in Lk 18.38.39, the parable of pounds (19.11-27) and the royal entrance 10 Jerusalem (19,29-38), Jesus is portrayed asthe legitimate king of Israel, Yet he will, receive his kingdom not in Jerusalem, but in a “distant land’, from whence he will return to judge his servants and adversaries. Already Jesus rejection by Jerusalem is in view (Lk 19.14, 27, 42-44), In the passion account he is tried and crucified as a royal pretender. Throughout this section Jesus' royalty is contrasted with the ‘kingdoms of the world, and is marked by a growing lack of comprehension by both Jews and Gentiles. With the Easter revelations of Luke 24 and the apostolic ‘proclamation in Acts, the suffering role of the Christ and the true nature of his kingship is revealed. ‘The ascension of Jesus completes the revelation in two ways: it represents his royal enthronement as Christ and Lord atthe right hand of God (Acts 230-36), and it prefigures the eschatological manifestion ofthat kingship at his glorious return (Acts 3.18-20).68 Finally, George points to the seeming incoherence in the revelation of Jesus! royalty. How can Jesus be proclaimed "Christ the Lord” at his birth (Lk 2.11), confessed the "Christ of God” and "king” during his ministry (Lk 9.20; 19:38), "made Lord and Christ" at his exaltaton-enthronement (Acts 3.36), and returning as the "Christ appointed for you" (Acts 3.20)? While these statements are no doubi partly a tesull of diverse sources, it must be asked whether ther is not some internal unity in Luke's perspective. George suggests progressive stages in the manifestion of Jesus! kingship. By virtue of his descent from David and divine sonship, Jesus is king already ftom the beginning. Yet this royalty is manifested and recognized only litle by liule in the development of salvation-history. Only Jesus hears the divine voice at the baptism (Lk 3.22); only he knows the temptation by Satan to seize ahead of time his royal authority (4.5-7). Its first Peter, then the disciples in general, who recognize Score, "La ryan de Say" 273. Ione, "La oya de Be," 273.274 ‘Sco, “Lasoyaus de J 4Chapter 1: Inwodvetion 15 Jesus! messiahship during his ministry (9.20; 19.38). After Easter itis only believers ‘who recognize his heavenly enthronement. Finally, at his return atthe end of time his kingship will be fully manifested (Acts 3.20; Lk 19.15.27). Though "real" from the first moment of his existence, the royal lordship of Jesus is accomplished in slages, ‘nti its final manifestation in the kingdom of God ® [By examining royal messianism in general, George's article represents a positive correction to Burger’s more limited approach. He correelly demonstrates that royal messianism in Luke-Acts extends beyond explcily Davidic passages and that various royal terms and tides are closely integrated by Luke, Many of his individual conclusions will be confirmed in the present work. George's concept of *stages" in the revelation of Jesus' kingship also represents an improvement on the purely “proleplic” view of Jesus! messiahship. As we shall se, there is a sense in which Jesus is acting with messianic authority and petforming the scripturally ordained deeds of the Christ already during his earthly ministry. Indeed there may be more royal ‘messianism in the Nazareth Sermon and Jesus’ ministry than George notes. On the other side, however, George probably does not make enough of the uniqueness of the status attained by Jesus at his exallaion-enthronement, Being "made Christ and Lord* (Acts 2.36) suggests more than just a wider manifestation of a royalty Whi already possessed: it is not merely a greater degre of revelation, but a supreme status (of authority and dominion to which Jsus is now appointed, A. RC, Leaney is another seliolar who stresses the importance of Jesus! Jesus royally in Luke-Acts, In his commentary on the Gospel, Leaney claims that Luke’. purpose in his two-volume work is "to make, explain, and defend the claim that Jesus was a king."79 In fine with this purpose, the main theme of his theology is *the reign (of Christ, ow it is established and how it must be maintained.” From birth Jesus is ‘destined to inherit the throne of David, and throughout his ministry he exercises his kingly power, raising the dead, healing, and orgiving sins. He enters Jerusalem as a king and on the eve of his death he bequeath a kingdom to his apostles. In Acts, they will wield this royal authority delegated to them, Jesus’ Kingdom is aiained through suffering, and at his resurrection and ascension he cners his glory. "This entrance into lory is deliberately chosen by Luke as the keystone of his theological arch,* = in preference to the Future coming in glory emphasized by Mark and Matthew. While Luke envisages a final manifestation of the kingdom in the Future, he places all the sess on Jesus' present heavenly glory as reigning king.7! Leaney's results are significant and sightly stress the importance of Jesus’ kingship in Luke's christology. Peon, a oy de Ha 281.282 OA, RC. Leaey. The Gaspel According 0S Late (19662), 7. Tieawey, Lake, 37Chapter 1: Introduction 16 Itis particularly significant, as we shall se, that Luke introduces the theme in sections hich are introductory and programmatic (or his work as a whole. While Leaney ‘connects this motif particularly to Lukes desire to demonstrate the non-political nature ‘of Jesus! kingship (and hence the political innocence of Christianity), 72 we will link it ‘more strongly to his promise-fulfillment motif. The reality and nature of Jesus! royalty ‘and present heavenly rcign confirm that he is indeed the messianic king promised in scripture, ‘Other works on Lukan christology deal to a greater or lesser extent with Davidic messianism in Luke-Aets. A number ofthese suggest the importance of royal- Davidie categories, but subordinate them to her titles or designations.73 In his work ‘on the Grundefige of Lukan christology, G. Voss devotes a chapter to *Jesus, the messianic king".74 While Voss acknowledges the foundational christological significance of Lk 1.28-37 in its "te-awakening® of the Davidic covenant, the essential ‘content of this covenant isnot the Davidic descent of Yahweh's agent, but the message ‘of "God with us" inherent init. God appears to his people, leading and redeeming them through his chosen agents (the patriarchs, Moses, the judges, David). Such a Perspective is evident in Acts 1038, where itis said of Jesus that God "anointed him* and *was with him.* Jesus asthe "Christ" the anointed one ~ may thus be seen as the basis of all other chrstological statements and titles since it expresses this sense of God's intervention through his chosen agent?5 From this foundation Voss argues that Jesus! messialship docs not rest on his legitimate descent from David, but on his unique sonship to God. (The Spitt-conceived virgin birth confirms this uniqueness). Indeed, Luke intentionally avoids designating Jesus as a descendant of David: he is ‘not the son of David, but a new David, the shoot from the root of Jesse (Isa 11.1)76 Ina sense, then, Luke subordinates Jesus’ royal-messiahship to his divine sonship. It is by virtue of his special retaionship with and obedience to the Father that Jesus is ‘messiah and king.7? In addition to these points, Voss solves the dificult question of how Jesus can fulfill the messianic role prior to his exaltation-enthroncment by asserting that Jesus' baptism represents his enthronement into his kingly offic, [is from this point forward that Jesus, by the power ofthe Holy Spirit, bogias to Full the “7A cane, Lake, 7: “Lk wits asf 0 sy nels, "We Chistian do nec hat ‘our Lord wat aking bot tis imposible to ulead ~ ad vry ey to mindsets what we ‘em by his kingship and his Kingdom ules you be he try fo the ery beng. 73tyaiion tothe studs cited blow, se our discussion of D. . Mocs workin $6322 and §64, Mocsne believes roy Davide esate of lie mportance in Lake Acts ‘cs compared to poi like Moss estoy. 7A. Voss, De Cristologie der lukanscon Sven iu Grandin (1965), 6197 250s, Christlogie, 1-65. “evo, Cristo S72. ‘Theta fs neretation is Vou understanding of Ls “144, apastage Lake alll 1 (oscording to Vou iu Lk 131, Secon excasp 142-0 "TWoxs, Chrstologe, G7 ea. 7881, 9497(Chapter I: Introduction 17 commission prophesied about him.78 A number of Voss pos wll be dealt with in subsequent discussion, Here we would merely point out that it is unlikely that Luke enigrats Jesus! Davide descent as Voss suggests, or that he draws sucha dichotomy between Davidic and divine sonship. In addition, while the baptist as a toyal- ‘nthronement isan appeaing solution to tho difficulty of Jesu! *messiane" activity Prior to his exaltation, it is doubtful whether Luke's statements elsewhere can sustain this interpretation. In his work on Lukan theology and purpose, E, Franklin claims that Lake's aim in writing is to strengthen and confirm faith in Jesus asthe present Lord®? While yo.orés is an important tie for Luke, describing Jesus 8 God's instrument in {uring tie Old Testament promises, Lok subordinaes itt xipis since the Former “was no able todo ful justice to the exaltation. "Bt ypiocé is for Luke "a secondary ‘erm, used nearly always in an argumentum ad hominem, expressing the conviction ‘hat Jesus is truly God's decisive instrument, and that the details of his career prove this rather than confound it "82. Franklin ighlly points to the apologetic value Luke gives to yprorés with reference to the salvation-historical status of Jesus. He also. correetly notes the importance of xiptog in Luke-Acts; there is litle doubt this is Luke's favourite title to express his faith (and the faith of his church) in Jesus the ‘exalted one, AC the same time itis questionable whether iti correct to say that ypvoxés isa "secondary term* which Luke subordinates 1 mipios. In subsequent discussion of ‘Acts 2 and other passages, we will suggest that Luke uses "Lord" primarily as an expression of Jesu! authority, while "Christ" expresses his salvation-historical status, ‘The two terms thus serve different, but parallel, functions. In his exaltation status Jesus isthe messianic king now given authority (lordship) over all. The two titles ‘together express the signlicance of Jesus exaltation glory. Its important to note that in three key texts expressing Jesus’ salvation-historical significance (LK 2.11; Acts 2.36; 10.36), wipios appears together with ypiarés, suggesting that the two tiles are ‘complementary (in these contexts); together they express the slalus and authority of Jesus. Franklin's own presentation unintentionally suggests this parallel importance of| the titles. In defining xépios in Acts 2.36, he claims the title does not reflect divine status, but expresses the authority of one who is the instrument of, and wholly “Bons, Cristlogie. 92. Vou base this view party on his aoceptnes of the Wester text (©) of L322, which fellows P27 “om the question ef som of Davo ow David ve the excus, pp. 2-14, 804 Frain, Civ the Lord A Study the Purpose and Theology of Late Aes (1775), Straka, hoist the Lord, 56, Fewktin tse this contusion pon an inadequate Interpretation of LE22.66°71. See $662.1, pp. 309-3, etal notes 183185. ‘2h, Cha the Ld, S65 48‘Chapter I: Introduction subordinate to, the Father. Franklin thus presents Jesus! lordship as essentially a ‘messianic lordship. ‘The juxtaposition of wpiog and ypuorés in Acts 2.36 designates Jesus as the messiah (status) who reigns as Lord (authority). This distinction is not a rigid one, of course, and particularly in the context of preaching to Gentiles, xipiog often carties the sense of status as well as authority. Our point is that in the proctamation to the Jews (i. in the context of Luke's “proclamation from prophecy" ‘moti, the wo titles complement one another; xotars is not subordinated to xipios, In Darrell Bock's work on Lukan Old Testament christology, he too ‘emphasizes the supremacy of lordship over messaiship, but in a different manner than Franklin. Bock places strong emphasis on the Davidic promises as a key theme in Luke's promise-flfllment scheme. In dhe infancy material, Luke presents Jesus as the Davide messiah who is also the vitorious servant of the Lord, This "foundational ‘chrstological category" of messiah-servant continues throughout the Gospel. In the accounts of the baptism, the Nazareth sermon, the transfiguration, the approach to Jerusalem, and other passages, Jesus is portrayed as both Davidie messiah and Isaianic servant. In Jesus' last days in Jerusalem, however, a "more than messiah* tension begins to emerge in such texts as Lk 20.42-48 and 21.27, which refer to the messianic figures of Lord and Son of man. This tension is resolved in Acts when Jesus is openly declared to be Lord (Acts 2.36; 10.43), "By Acts 10, there i litle doubt that Jesus as the Messiah-Sorvant is actually more than a regal messianic figure. Hie is Lord of all as he uniquely exercises many divine prerogatives with God, functioning as mediator of His salvation in His presence at His right hand. "84 In short, Bock proposes that "The ‘christofogical presentation of Luke consciously takes the reader from sesing Josus as the regal Messiah-Servant to sccing him as Lord of all."85 (Our results will suggest that Bock isto be commended in recognition that the Davidie promises play a key introductory role in Luke's birth narrative, and that Luke connects this portrait to the Isianic servant. In addition, he rightly points to the strong link made in these chapters between ypworée and Davidie messiabship, a link suggesting that the Davidie portrait established in the nativity continues implicitly in the Gospel narrative. While these points are fundamental to the present work, we will ‘question Bock’s further claim that there is a decisive shift in Luke's christology from ‘messiahship to lordship. The following points ~ developed in more detail in subsequent discussion — represent some important difficulties with Bock's ‘conclusions. First, what does Bock mean by *more than messiah"? More than which Crist the Lon 4 ‘Ad, Proclamation, 265 ef pp. 79-82; 12; 187, 24-240, Spock, Proclamation, 278; p. 236, 240,262,270 18Chapter I: Introdvetion 19 messiah? IF he means “more than of the Davidic messiah, show that Jewish expe incomplete. Luke subtly begins this "more than the expected messiah" mou already in the birth narrative with the messiah’s humble birth, his unique sonship to God (by erent from) the traditional Jewish expectation then we would agree that one of Luke's central purpose isto ‘ations concerning the messiah were inadequate and virtue of the virgin birth), and the division of Israel his coming will cause. This theme ‘continues throughout the Gospel, climaxing initially in Luke 24 and finally in Acts, Yr it seems what Bock aetually means by "more than messiah" is more than Luke's understanding of this Old Testament figure. In other words, for Luke the Old Testament portrait of the royal-messiah is not adequate to describe Jesus; 90 this category is exceeded by that of "Lord, in a divine sense, It must be questioned, however, whether Luke actually views "messiah" as an inadequate category. ‘Though itis true he broadens the messianic description of Jesus to include scriptural passages ‘hich the Jews did not traditionally apply to the Davidie messiah, it may be argued that {or Luke these passages refer to, and have always reerted to, the Davidie messiah. I ‘was because the Jews were “foolish and slow of heart” that they missed them, Since Luke's conception of the messiah exceeds that of the Jews, his apologetic may better bbe regarded as "the truth about he messiah, rather than "more than messiah’ IL is also questionable whether *Lord” carries the unique and climactic revelatory significance thal Bock ascribes to 186 Already in Lk 2.11 Jesus is ‘dentitied as both Christ and Lord (Lk 2.11), the same two tiles applied to him in the cexallation declaration of Acts 2.36. Bock responds to this objection by claiming that ‘while Jesus is introduced in the birth narrative as "Christ, "Son of God” and *Lord", only "Loni" is wor defined through the use of an OT allusion or text.87 "The Lucan ‘meaning of that ferm only emerges leer in his work when Lord is explicitly tied to OT passages about David's Lord and the confessing of Jesus as Lord."®8 Yet the ‘withholding of the full content ofa tie until Acts isnot unique to xpvag: it applies also to yptoxée (and other christological titles). While Jesus is said to be ypovés already in Lk 2.11, the suffering role of the messiah is the surprising revelation of Lk 24.26, and his reception of the messianic throne in the heaventy sphere i the startling declaration of Acts 2.30-36. As mentioned above, in Acts 2.36 "Christ” and "Lord* stand parallel 1o one another, suggesting they are integrally related in the context of Jesus! exaltation glory. One isnot subordinated tothe other. 89 It should also be noted that in this passage Lake reveals Jesus to be more than the traditional expectations of 8600 Likes ue of pt aleady ding Jesu missy see Franklin, Crit the Lord $9 ‘55, For Books response to it arpunea se Proclamation, 268268, tag, Proclamation, 266. Bock, Proclamation, 26; ct pp 72. For re on pig in Acts 236 son dscson of his passage in chapChapter 1: Introduction 20 the Davidie messiah, but not more than what scripture said he (the Davidic messiah) would be, ic. exalted to the right hand of God as the messianic Lord (Ps 110.1). Again we have not a "more than messiah scheme, but a "more than the expected smessiah* ‘Third, the vermon of Paul in Acts 13 does not fit Bock's view of climactic tole for xGpios over xptotés in Luke's narrative, If Luke presents a progressive revelation of Jesus identity from messiah to Lord ~ climaxing in Acts 10 , why ‘would he then return toa thoroughly royal-Davidie portrait of Jesus in Aets 13 (in the inaugural speech of the most important character in Acis!%9), It could perhaps be suggested that a new cycle of *messiah to Lord begins with the Pauline material in ‘Acts 13; but this does not really work, since Acts 13-28 does not climax with a "more than messiah" motif. In any cas, such a two-eyele theory would not fit Bock's thesis, since he views Luke's Old Testament chrstology as ceasing after Acts 13. It seems, then, that a *more than messiah® scheme, with lordship surpassing messiahship, docs not adequately describe Luke's use ofthe Davie promise motif. ‘Many more works could be cited which touch in some way on the theme of Davide messiahship in Luke-Acts.21 This brief survey, however, has highlighted the ‘main questions which will be addressed in the subsequent discussion: (1) How does: Luke view Jesus as fulfilling the Davidie promises? Is it only in his exaltation- enthronement, or also in his death? resurrection? earthly ministry? (2) Ifthe latter, hhow do we account for the relative paucity of explicitly royal-messianie material in the Gospel proper? (3) Does Luike subordinate thi Old Testament category to any other, cither from the beginning of his Gospel, or in his subsequent narrative development? (4) How does the seemingly nationalistic sounding material inthe birth nasratve relate 'o Lukes perspective on these promises elsewhere? (5) More generally, how does Luke relate this theme to other theological emphases: his chrstology in general, hi ‘eschatology, soteriology and ecclesiology? (6) Finally, how does this theme relate to Luke's overall purpose(s) in Luke-Acts? Are there clues heve to his community siwation? 13 Methodology ‘The methodology of the present study is eclectic, combining redaetion- and sce $431 letewory in he ops i RC. Table titcalanalis of Lake-Adt, The [Narrauve Unity of take Acts: A Literary Inerpretetion (Vel. 1 The Gospel Aecortig to Lie, 186, Vo. 2 The Act ofthe Aposits, 190), Teil repentelyecacs eiportance royal smesiani categories for Luke (espeially 1.28.25, 38:3, 56-60, 63, 223, 268.270, 238-99, 164 175, 381-352)