Craig Gaunt 5/1/08 New Testament-Dan Ulrich

1 B) An apocalyptic worldview is a paradigm that one adopts (and adapts) to see how the end of history will commence and to see how and what way God will bring the end of the old and the beginning of the new and better (Barr, pg. 86). Future refers to having any eschatological qualities happening strictly in the future, and the present is filled completely with evil (Barr, 399). Realized is exactly the opposite because everything eschatological that needs to happen for the good era to come has already happened (pg. 399). Inaugurated splits the difference by having the good era start in the present but not fully realized until the future (pg. 399). Throughout the New Testament, different eschatological outlooks are presented depending upon writer, book, and even different chapters within the same text. The three examined below are 1 Thessalonians, Mark, and John. All three have a layout of an Inaugurated outlook but express it with pieces of other models above.

When examining 1^st Thessalonians, one can see Paul ascribes to an Inaugurated paradigm, keeping consistent with his other letters. For Paul, Christ’s death and resurrection has brought the beginning of the new age, but the old one has not yet come to an end (Barr, 87-88). Throughout the letter, Paul urges believers to live as if the kingdom has already completely come because of Christ’s resurrection, but they also need to realize that all is not finished yet (1:10; 2:16; 3:8, 13; 4:3-8, 13-18). Judging by the content, Paul wrote this letter expecting the visible return of Christ to happen immediately. Therefore, he encourages believers to trust that Jesus is going to rescue believers from the wrath of God (2:16). It also charges believers with living holy and consecrated lives, keeping themselves separate from the world (4:7). Paul’s teaching held that, through Christ’s death, death has no power over the faithful living and dead in Christ, but doubt had crept into the Thessalonians community, urging Paul to write a response (4:13) (Nadim, 145). When he writes this section, Paul implies that only non-believers have no hope and only grief in the face of death (pg. 145). In contrast, a believer trusts in the victory over death Christ has brought by his death (pg. 145). Paul had to stress to these believers that the kingdom of God was not fully manifested because they are worried about their loved ones dying and never seeing them again. (4:13-15). In order to accomplish this, Paul says that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep so that both living and dead will see Jesus in all his glory (4:14-18). In the next chapter, Paul echoes the theme of the “Day of the Lord” spoken in places like Isa. 2:2-4 and Joel 2:1 & 3:14, 18. These verses have already been seen in Acts. However, one fact that supports an inaugurated eschatology is that parts of Joel 2:28-32 have already happened and parts have not. Despite all of this, Paul says in 5:4 that this great and terrifying day of God’s wrath should encourage people not to be ignorant but sober and alert. All in all, Paul is saying that believers are on the “inside” and should live as such to be an example, but the destruction of the “outside” has not yet come.

Mark’s gospel places Jesus baptism at the beginning of the text which is also Jesus first appearance in the gospel. Immediately following the baptismal miracle where God’s voice is heard from heaven, Jesus begins to preach the kingdom of God (1:14). Barr notes something in that this is the first time the gospel is preached (pg. 274). Here is found that the kingdom is already here. Jesus’ presence among humanity signals that he is the bringer and announcer of God’s reign (class handout). Additionally, the temptation of Jesus is placed at the beginning of this gospel, presenting an interesting theological point (1:12-13). That is, because Jesus is the first one in history to resist the temptations of Satan, he has defeated the “prince of this world”. In doing so, Satan’s kingdom of evil has taken a fatal blow and Jesus has opened the way to gain freedom to those in bondage to it and into the kingdom of God. Furthermore, Mark places the stories of Jesus healing the Gentile woman’s daughter to show that the kingdom is inclusive of categories outside that of being Jewish males (7:24-30). On the other hand, despite many references to eschatology having present implications, discourses of Jesus toward the end of Mark also carry futuristic characteristics. Mark 13 gives a discourse where Jesus warns of a future where false prophets will come and pull believers away from the faith (v. 6, 21-22). Additionally, there will be wars, rumors of wars, and natural disasters to show the end-times but still there is more destruction to come (v. 7). Jesus goes further to say that believers will be persecuted by both Jews and Gentile rulers during the times when anarchy reigns and the name of Christ is hated among all (13:9-13). Continuing, Jesus warns that days are coming when suffering will be unparallel to any time in history. However, God has not lost control and, in fact, will cut the days short because they will be so severe (13:20). Finally, Jesus charges the disciples to watch because, although they do not know the exact day of these tragedies (13:32), they can tell “the season” of them (13:28-31). Similar to Paul, Mark lays out an eschatology outlook that is both in the world through Jesus and yet will come at a time marked by disaster.

Finally, while Mark combines a low Christology with an inaugurated eschatology that places more emphasis on the future than the present, John swings the opposite way by emphasizing Jesus’ divinity. His gospel messages says not only has the kingdom of God come, but that the King himself walks among us. The first example that sets the stage for this is John very first verse which employs the term logos to describe Christ. Barr sees this as being perfect to convey the message to all three potential audiences: Jews (Logos as Torah), Greek (Logos as Reason), and even mystics (Logos as Wisdom) (pg. 394). One sees it numerous times in this gospel because Jesus gives characteristics about the kingdom and himself in the present tense (4:35-38; 5:17-47; 8:12-20,59; 10:7-18; etc.). Jesus also identifies himself as having powers that are Godly (2:19; 10:18). This brings to life the fact that the Son is not inferior to the Father but equal in nature and glory. Again, these aspects do not come after he has been raised or at a future second coming but in the present time. Another example is John 3:18 about those who do not believe stand condemned already for not believing. Additionally, John includes women and Greeks in his gospel showing a repeated theme throughout all gospels that God’s reign includes those not otherwise allowed (John 4, 12:20).

However, John also puts emphasis on future events, realizing that eschatological events have not fully been realized. Mostly these are seen in Jesus later speeches with his disciples. When Jesus talks about the sending of the Holy Spirit, he notes the Holy Spirit will teach the disciples everything and remind them of his words (14:26). Jesus also warns that, after his departure, the disciples will weep and mourn, but it will be turned into joy (16:20-24). Finally, Jesus says that he will continue to make his name known (17:26). To restate the initial synopsis, John believes in an Inaugural eschatology because the kingdom of God has arrived with Jesus coming into the world but has not been fully realized yet because believers have and continue to endure hardship. Not only will people face a final judgment before God in the life to come, but judgment comes in this life as well when people are given a chance to accept the life that Jesus offers and reject it for whatever reason.

2 B) There are several similarities of all four gospels and, for this question, the gospels of Matthew, Luke, and John will be considered. All of these gospels record Jesus performing miracles. Within themselves, Matthew gives accounts of casting out demons (8:28-32), feeding multitudes (14:15-21; 15:32-38), and healing the sick (8:5-13; 9:22). Luke exclusively brings to the table Jesus giving the disciples a great multitude of fish (5:4-6) and the raising the widow’s son at Nain (7:11-17). John’s gospel has Jesus changing water into wine (2:6-10), and healing at the pool at Bethesda (5:2-47). On a broader spectrum every gospel also includes Jesus teaching in one way or another. Whether it is in short quips (Mark 12:17) or long discourses (Matt. 23-25). Furthermore, we have very similar passion narratives in all four gospels (Matt. 26:36-27:61; Mark 14:32-15:47; Luke 22:39-23:56; John 18:1-19:42). With all of these in mind, there are also interesting differences in the development of each gospel.

Looking at the different historical backgrounds, Matthew is trying to enforce and prove Jesus is the Messiah the Jews have been waiting to arrive. One piece of this evidence is how Matthew repeatedly uses Old Testament prophecies and their fulfillment to confirm Jesus as the Anointed One. Also, a good portion of Matthew is dedicated to Jesus’ teaching role as expressed in long sermons and parable discourses (Matthew 9:35-11; 13; 18; 23-25). Because of this, it is natural to theorize that Matthew is portraying Jesus as the new Moses as Moses is viewed as Israel’s most righteous Jewish teacher (Montefiore, 71). Christ has surpassed Moses by bringing a newer, holier law (Matt. 5-7). As Dan Ulrich has noted in our handouts, the teaching ministry is a vital part of this gospel because not only does it lay forth sound doctrine which points to Jesus having authority given by God (Matt. 28:18), but it also gives sound instruction for discipleship not simply conversion (class handout). This is also evident by the fact Jesus is often called “Rabbi” throughout this gospel. Matthew also sets itself against Judaism by noting when Christ criticizes the Pharisees in chapter 23, weeps for Jerusalem for rejecting him, and predicts the destruction of the temple in chapter 24, and notes the rumor spread by Jewish leaders concerning the resurrection in chapter 28 (Barr, 325-26). Overall, Matthew presents Jesus as the epitome of what Jewish faith is to be about and how to fulfill Torah to its highest. Although by including stories like the healing of the gentile in chapter 15 as well as the great commission in chapter 28, Matthew is also saying that the gospel is not strictly for the Jews but for all nations worldwide (Barr, 313). Although Matthew has hints of sectarianism (13:14-17), it is clear that the disciples of Jesus are to engage with the world.

Luke, on the contrary to Matthew’s audience being heavily Jewish, is writing as a Gentile to more Gentile recipients. He writes with the purpose of emphasizing God’s kingdom based on Christ, and it is open to anyone who would receive Jesus (NIV 1529). Luke’s egalitarian outlook includes Gentiles, women, the poor, the sinner, and the marginalized. Not only is this true in the deeds of Jesus, which include characters that would be otherwise overlooked by society, but also quite simply, Christ knows us as people because He was a person and lived through the hardships that it entails. Barr gives further insight by Luke depicting Jesus’ crucifixion as the faithful servant suffering because it is God’s plan for him to do so (pg. 359). Throughout the gospel, Jesus is seen as less of a Jewish Messiah and more of a Greek hero, facing trials and suffering yet conquering them all to obtain the greatest reward (pg. 359). This pro-Greek (Gentile) reading is also verified when we examine Luke continuing into Acts because the salvation that originally came to the Jews (Luke 2:29-32) is now gaining a more Gentile following as the Jews become less and less prominent in the story (Barr, 371). However, Jesus’ confrontation with the religious leaders is not as stark or clear-cut as it has in previous gospels. For example, while there are tense moments between Jesus and Pharisees (11:37-54; 16:14-18), Jesus also eats with them (14:1-6) Additionally, as both Barr and our handouts mention, Luke portrays Jesus as more “Gentile-friendly” because Christians are mistrusted in the Roman Empire (pg. 372). In response, Luke attempts to portray Jesus as being innocent of any crimes against Rome and Christianity being a legitimate religion and sect of Judaism (Barr, 372). Overall, while Matthew focuses on Jesus’ teachings and actions in an attempt to prove he is the Messiah, Luke takes a more all-encompassing approach to say that Jesus has come to include all people, young and old, rich and poor, male and female, into the kingdom of God which is already among them and within them (Luke 17:21).

While Matthew focuses on the community of Jews and Luke-Acts turns more attention to Gentiles and minorities, John emphasizes Jesus’ (and ours) direct relationship to God. While Matthew and Luke show mild or low Christology, the author disagrees with Bultmann about giving John a likewise rating and instead goes complete opposite end of the spectrum (1:14). No other gospel records Jesus making claims like “I and the Father are one” (10:30; 14:8-14). These are other “I am” statements are proof the Jesus is making his equivalent with God, which he explicitly states in John 8:58. This gospel emphases Jesus’ divinity while the others emphasize his suffering humanity. The author can certainly understand then why John had to explicitly stress that Jesus had human qualities to combat Gnostic tendencies forming during the first century and could be read into this gospel (1:14; 3:6; 11:35; 19:17-42; class handout). Additionally, this gospel is different because, while others could be taken as focusing on the deeds of Jesus and behaving according to his actions and teachings to exemplify God to the world, John is explicitly concerned with what a person believes about God, and Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life in all things, especially to/of God (14: 6, 7; 20:30-31). Interestingly enough, this gospel is similar to Matthews in that it has long discourses of answers from Jesus (3:3-21; 5:19-47; 6:26-65; etc.). Rather than eschatology, which is found in Matthew’s discourses, John pays more attention to theological symbols that Christ uses to testify about himself (rather than the Kingdom of God found in other gospels). Examples of this include Jesus talking about being ”living water” (4:10) and “bread of life” (6:50). Also similar to Matthew is John’s sectarian mentality between who is “inside” and “outside” the church (class handout). However, also comparable to Matthew is John’s concern and engagement with the world rather than those withdrawing from it (20:21-23). Finally, although dealing with heavily Jewish theology in terms of the Messiah, John also incorporates Gentiles and women (ch. 12 & 4), showing a theological conviction that the gospel is for all people.

3 B) There was great tension between Christianity and Judaism in the first century as the church became more Gentile and less Jewish. Romans, written in 56 A.D. by Paul addressed several issues including pointing out that all are under the curse of sin’s power, Jew and Gentile alike (3:9). Jews viewed the Torah as their key of superiority over the Gentiles and with it, boasted in their relationship to God (Toews, 83). This led to Jewish nationalism, prejudice, and spiritual arrogance that God was God of the Jews only, and even the later Jewish writings tried to curb this pride (pg. 84). Plus, the Gentiles sin against God’s law, while the Jews are guilty because they have the law and still commit sin (Keck, 82). Paul explicitly shows in these chapters that being a Jew biologically and ethnically does not guarantee God’s favor (pg. 82). Additionally, Paul argues the Jews have failed in their mission in proselytizing and being an example of God to the nations (Toews pg. 84). Hence, Paul defines true Judaism’s core as trusting in God rather than biological ethnicity, citing Deut 30:12-14 to build his case of Jewish emphasis on godly attitude rather than hollow acts (Finger, 97). The conclusion of Paul’s approach is that Gentiles are guilty because they commit heinous acts and have no knowledge or fear of God, and Jews are guilty they have a law that is righteous by pointing out sin but the keeping of it cannot save anyone (3:19,20). Whether you are a Jew or Gentile, works will not save you.

Even though he places both groups as guilty before God, Paul does say that the Jews are special because they have been entrusted with the “oracles” or the Scriptures (Toews, 89). By citing these oracles, Paul means the promises that were stated to Abraham, which said that the Jews would be a blessing to all Gentile nations (Keck, 90). Further on in Romans, Paul writes that the Jews (as a nation and ethic people) have the privilege of having the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the Law the worship, the promises, the patriarchs, and finally, the Messiah (9:1-5).

Charles Cosgrove notes that there have been three common mentalities when looking at the issues of Israel and the Jewish people within Christian theology. First, ecclesiastical Israel says that the true Israel is the church that encompasses all nations including the Jewish nation, and Jewish ethnic identity no longer holds true (pg. 1). Second, national Israel says that despite rejection of the gospel, God’s faithfulness to Israel has not been extinguished and is still in God’s final eschatological plan (pg. 1). Third, elect remnant Israel says that the true Israel has always been composed of an elect, faithful few among ethnic Jews who have believed in Jesus (pg. 1). With all these views, the crucial point to remember that Paul points out in Romans 9-11 that God has not rejected Israel despite their lack of faith in the Messiah. Rather, he says that the Gentiles should not be arrogant about their new position because it is they who have been grafted into Israel like a wild olive branch (Rom 11:17-24). Again, it is worth noting that Paul keeps his outlook that not all ethnic Jews who are faithless represent faithful Israel (Keck, 227-230). Rather a remnant will be chosen by grace because God’s relationship with the chosen people has not been severed, even by much sin (pg. 263). Gentiles should be humble because it is Israel who has laid the foundation for them to be saved (both in their religious traditions and in their rejection of Jesus), and Israel is not meant to be shunned but to still be loved (11:11-24). The reason: all Israel will be saved because their rejection of Jesus is only temporary and will be removed by the Gentile’s faith (11:11-32).

Hebrews takes a different outlook because its author (unknown) is writing to a disheartened, discouraged group who are loosing their newfound faith and commitments (Long, 12). Hebrews encourages these people to hold firm to the newfound faith they profess rather than abandon hope (pg. 13). To do this, Hebrews uses a form of Greek rhetoric known as synkrisis (class handout). With it, Hebrews proves that Jesus is superior to every possible historical figure and symbol that is crucial to Jewish thought and religion. In the first chapter of the epistle, we see this trend when the author says that “in these last days…by a Son” (1:2). Long writes that this “word spoken by a Son” is not superior because it undermines or contradicts what God had spoken before “through many and various ways”, but it is superior because it is the final and supreme in a series of divine words throughout the Old Testament (pg. 13). In Jesus, God’s nature shines forth because he is the divine Word (pg. 15). He does not simply testify to God like all the other Old Testament saints.

First, Hebrews points out, using the Old Testament Septuagint, what God did and did not say concerning angels and how the Son is greater than they (Ps. 2:7; Deut. 32:43; etc.). Next, it brings all three members of the Trinity into the outlook by saying that salvation was first declared through the Son, God verified it through signs and miracles, and the Holy Spirit’s gifts added further proof for the claim (Heb 2:3, 4). Not only angels, but also Jesus is greater than Moses, who is regarded as the lawgiver and the most righteous Jew (Montefiore, 71). Moses is a part of God’s household but Jesus is the founder of that household and the architect always receives more glory than the structure (pg. 72). Hebrews upholds the righteousness of Moses as “servant of God” (a high-honor title) while exalting Christ as Son (3:1-6). He then warns believers not to be like the unbelieving Israelites of Moses’ time who were killed for their disobedience and unfaithfulness (4:7-19). Finally, by staking the claim that Jesus is a high priest in the order of Melchizedek, he establishes that Jesus, through the crucifixion and resurrection, has become the eternal High Priest, not through law but through God’s power (7:16). By using Melchizedek, Hebrews also speaks that Jesus is even greater than the Jewish patriarch Abraham because Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek and Melchizedek blessed him for his worship (7:1-10). In doing so, he showed his superiority to Abraham which showed superiority to Levi and the Aaron priesthood which was incomplete and gave reason to write Psalm 110:4 (7:11-14). Jesus has become the perfect priest because he is eternal, stands before the throne in heaven, needs no atonement for himself because he is perfect, has given himself as an atonement for any who would come to him, and is one with God and separate from humanity. The way of Jesus represents a better way, not because God’s first covenant was not perfect, but because those who tried to obey it naturally failed because it was perfect (8:7,8). Hebrews shows that, while it may be tempting to return to Judaism, Christ is superior to Moses, Abraham, the angels, and the priesthood. Nothing is higher than Christ who is the author and finisher of the faith (Heb. 12:2).

The author’s purpose in glorifying the Son, making Him equivalent to God, is to quash the discouraging mentality of the audience who began to regard Jesus as simply a good teacher but could not help or give comfort in their current struggle (Long, 20). After all, they had heard reports that Jesus was simply a bloodied, humiliated teacher from Nazareth who was crucified and could not save himself let alone anyone else (pg. 20). Jesus shared in their sufferings but there was nothing transforming that suffering (pg. 21). Hebrews reassures them (and us) that Jesus had suffered but is now exalted and risen and sits at the right hand of Almighty God (Heb 1:3; 10:12; 12:2).

Bibliography

• Barr, David L. New Testament Story: An Introduction. 3rd ed. Australia: Wadsworth, 2002.
• Cosgrove, Charles H. Elusive Israel: The Puzzle of Election in Romans. Louisville, John Knox Press. 1997.
• Finger, Reta Halteman. Paul & the Roman House Churches: A Simulation. PA. Herald Press. 1993.
• Keck, Leander E. Abington New Testament Commentaries: Romans. Nashville, Abingdon Press. 2005.
• Long, Thomas G. Hebrews, A Bible Commentary for Teaching & Preaching. Interpretation. Louisville, John Knox Press. 1997.
• Montefiore, H.W. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Black’s New Testament Commentaries. Ed. Henry Chadwick. London, Adam & Charles Black. 1987.
• Gaventa, Beverly Roberts. First and Second Thessalonians, A Bible Commentary for Teaching & Preaching. Interpretation. Louisville, John Knox Press. 1998.
• Tarazi, Paul Nadim 1^st Thessalonians: A Commentary. Crestwood, New York. St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. 1982.
• Toews, John E. Romans. Believers Church Bible Commentary. Ed. Elmer A. Martens & William M. Swartley. Scottdale, PA. Herald Press. 2004.
• Ward, Ronald A. Commentary on 1 & 2 Thessalonians. Waco, Texas. Word Books. 1973