In an effort to trace the history of animosity between the Jews and Samaritans, I acknowledge the various alternatives that exist throughout primary and secondary sources. The Jews of ancient Israel did not view the Samaritans as Jewish. Due to their historical lineage and origination from Assyria during and after Israel’s captivity from 722BC and thereafter, Assyrian males intermarried with Jewish women to produce half-gentile and half-jew people. The seed and offspring of the Samaritan people became inhabitants of the Northern region of Israel known as Samaria. They became occupants of the area known by the people of Judea as the Samaritans.
Intuitively, because of genealogical baggage, it appears to me that there was never a complete unity between the people of Judea and Samaria (i.e., the Samaritans) to begin a split. They were distinct people by both bloodline and heritage separate through Old Testament and New Testament history. In addition to a commonly inherited yet partial set of tribal genetics, there were shared histories about the identity of God, the patriarchs, and various other beliefs. While there were numerous distinctions about Samaritan ideas and beliefs, they all contributed to their state of separation from the Jewish people of Judea.
The views of the Samaritans about scripture, the prophets, worship, geographical inheritance, the temple, sacrifices to God, the priesthood, and others all contributed to their separation from the Jewish people. Regional conflicts that occurred between the Seleucids and the Ptolemy dynasties of Egypt also set the conditions by which their chosen alliances came into opposition or contradiction to the interests of Judea. There weren’t just growing differences in opinion about the facts and nature of God’s relationship with His people. The was growing isolation between Judea and Samaria that formed into animosity during the New Testament period.
It appears that the Samaritans took up residence in the land of Canaan after the exile and became more than ethnic rivals. They brought with them from the North an ideology that accompanied their covenant convictions. It would appear that the separation of thought from Scripture begins at the time of Jacob and extends through David, the prophets, and so forth. I suspect their objections somewhat correlate to the claims between Esau and Jacob since they only recognize or accept the Pentateuch from their Abrahamic ancestry.
Notice also that Jesus used the phrase “a certain Samaritan” in His parable of the Good Samaritan. The “certain” is an indefinite pronoun that could also mean “just any Samaritan who was someone.” This term appears within the root Masoretic text and gets translated to KJV and NKJV, but not NASB or ESV. NLT renders “despised” Samaritan, which is nowhere from the root manuscript. My point is that Jesus spoke His parable to illustrate the necessary love of this Samaritan, who was the neighbor of the Scribe of the law who asked, “who is my neighbor?” The inference was, between Jew and Samaritan, to do likewise and that it was commanded in the law to love YHWH as the Shema proclaims. Yet also of neighbors between the North and South whether nearby, remote, or distant.
I also think it was entirely significant that Jesus revealed that He is the Messiah through a Samaritan woman. This one is probably among my favorite encounters with Jesus. He made known to the public that He is the Messiah, our Christ, through a Samaritan woman. And that is such a beautiful and telling perspective. At least in terms of why He made that choice and what it meant concerning His intentions.
“For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek” / Hellenic (Rom 1:16). The sequence of Jesus’s instructions was also significant in spreading the gospel to the Gentile world in stages. The region of Samaria and its occupants was a bridge between the Jewish and Gentile worlds where the new covenant would become known, accepted, and loved.
If one were to zero in on what the Samaritans objected to, there’s a period entitled, “The Era of Disfavor.” Where they claim the beginning of animosity was from the transfer of worship from Shechem to Shiloh. The dispute began from that point, in their view, which gave rise to growing division and opposition. The fact they believed Yahweh should be worshiped in Shechem and not Jerusalem comports with their view about the legitimacy of David and the whole narrative about the selection of the ancient city of Jebus to include the place and purpose of Mt Zion. The theology of the Samaritans to include the Memar Marqah and others, I would imagine originates from tradition prior to the 4th century. It significantly diverges from the course of Hebrew history, theology, and canon.
It intuitively seems that the Samaritans were a people of opposition while the Sadducees were themselves alienated from the common people of Judea also. Not out of resentment for wrong choices, but simply by a difference of conviction about who they were as people before Yahweh. From that flowed their perspectives about heritage, geography, the temple, and worship that inevitably and often fell into contradiction without long-lasting or meaningful reconciliation until many converted through the gospel. Numerous others migrated to Islam in the middle ages.
This week’s reading through 1st and 2nd Maccabees often had me step back to think about what I just read. Throughout the week, I shared some of the details about events that transpired in both books. The overall pattern of conflict resolution and individual behavior among leadership figures was especially repugnant compared to Western society today. Governments, political strife, and military encounters were historically and utterly corrupt and profane in the worst sense of meaning or semantic range. The fullest reach of depravity in a very short concentration of time leaves the reader to ask how conditions and the extent of evil could have been any worse so far distant from the comparative events of Genesis six.
As compared to the Old Testament and New Testament, the density of cross-national slaughter appears hyper-elevated around the events within this time recounted in the Apocrypha. The constant and at times accelerated rate of destruction and death leaves one to wonder how various regions’ birth rates could keep up. Especially at the rate by which soldiers and mercenaries were subdued in conflict after conflict. Both in Josephus and Maccabees’ written accounts of killed were ten thousand here, then 60,000 there, again and again, 20,000, 80,000, 120,000, and lather, rinse, repeat on a cycle. On and on and on, the regions were at war against each other and the people of YHWH.
These were not just stories we read. These were stories about real people who lived daily lives between the Old and New Testaments. At a time when the prophets fell silent, there was no prophetic voice other than Scripture and the arrival of Christ as prophesied in Old Testament literary work. Each culture and society under trauma by siege, physical and spiritual oppression, persistent violence, starvation, enslavement, torture, and perpetual subjugation.
While the books of 1st and 2nd Maccabees together provide historical details about events during the intertestamental period, there are a number of similar motifs, terms, and conditions that appear in the writings at that time. Common OT and NT use of terms such as “Covenant,” “Sackcloth,” “Sinner,” “Sacrifice,” “Offering,” and “Plunder,” appears both across both covenants and each one is unique to each side of the intertestamental period. Israel and Jerusalem were ever surrounded by hostile nations or temporary allies that really never experienced an extended period of stability. Whether from the Assyrians to the North, Egyptians to the South, Rome, Greece, Sparta, Idumea, Persia, and other surrounding adversaries, the underlying strain of hostilities stemmed from the four generals who spawned after the death of Alexander the Great during his campaign of imperial endeavor.
The prophecies of Daniel have an explanatory power to fully grasp what was to occur in the distant future during the time of the Maccabees. Specifically, the depth and range of havoc and devastation the Ptolemy and Seleucid dynasties placed upon the intertestamental world. Right before the birth of Christ, these events and conditions characterized by the presence of priests, kings, traditions, paganism, religious observances, festivals, betrayal, treaties, and so much strife were to inevitably converge to a time unlike any before it.
As a sort of anchor, it seemed necessary for me to think back about what had occurred to the table of nations from Genesis 10 all the way to the arrival of the Kingdom of God through Christ’s crowning achievement at the cross. I had to revert to my overall biblical worldview.
Another example was back during the Canaan conquest, as Moses and Joshua’s people were led to their appointed land. The loss of life as a percentage (though necessary) was enormous. The later ongoing enmity between ancient surrounding nations, such as Edom, Moab, Egypt, Assyria, and Persia, was self-inherent while an evil spiritual bearing was present and in full force. Remember in Daniel when the archangel Michael was in conflict with the princes of Persia and Greece? The message correlated to this prophesied time recounted 2 Maccabees.
“Then he said, “Do you know why I have come to you? Now I must return to fight against the prince of Persia, and when I am through with him, the prince of Greece will come. 21 But I am to tell you what is inscribed in the book of truth. There is no one with me who contends against these princes except Michael, your prince (Dan 10:20-21).The prince, in this sense, from the root text, references a supernatural being. And I strongly suspect applies to other nations, too.
Who was Michael, the archangel? Who were the “princes” he fought? What were they doing and why? Why was Michael the prince of Israel to defend them? It without question appears to me that the underlying causality was of darkness upon humanity. With humanity’s participation, the evil governance and presence of the fallen angels were given to the disinherited nations scattered in Genesis 11. To me, it is a plausible theological explanation of why and how so much evil and destruction permeated the region across generations BECAUSE THEY WERE AND ARE STILL ACTIVE. More specifically, either by direct or indirect judgment as prophesied by Daniel or through their presence and struggle for control and power to serve their interests in opposition to the “Kingdom of Priests” then and the Kingdom of God now.
Recall in 2 Maccabees the presence of angelic figures that fought for the people of YHWH? It’s the same principle, where the adversaries were not just opposing human forces, but what was behind them. Through them, among them, and upon them to perpetuate the sovereign will of the Most-High.
There were numerous outcomes to the transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant. All largely magnified during the intertestamental period. A series of overlapping and concurrent losses represented both pronounced and fundamental changes in the relationship between God and His chosen people.
Five Major Losses of the Jews after the fall of Jerusalem
1.) Loss of Land 2.) Loss of the Monarchy 3.) Loss of the Temple and God’s Presence 4.) Loss of the Mother Tongue 5.) Loss of Prophetic Revelation
Political, Social, and Geographic
The Jews’ loss of their treasured land of possession to the Hellenists, Romans, Syrians, and Egyptians over their struggles to maintain religious autonomy and regain national sovereignty came with significant and long-term turmoil. With the ongoing occupation and hostilities from foreign nations, there was internal strife between the ruling classes of ancient Israel. The animosity between Aristobulus and Hyrcanus to attain a lasting monarchy translated to alliances among the Pharisees and Sadducees with the backing of social classes. Pharisees were of authority among the common people, whereas Sadducees were upper the aristocratic and priestly class. The struggle between the Hasmonean and the Sadducean parties led to the formation of relationships with foreign nations and leaders to advance internal political causes to obtain power and government control over the priesthood, the land, and religious interests of the Jewish people.
The presence of God never really returned after Solomon’s temple, as made evident by the vision of Ezekiel on the bank of the Chebar River. While the prophet witnessed the spiritual departure of God’s glory from the first temple, he was in captivity in Babylon. Not only were the people of Judah placed into exile, but YHWH had left the temple without any hope of a return to the way things were within the old covenant. Both prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel recorded YHWH’s intent to bring a new covenant (Ezek 11:19, Ezek 36:26, Jer 31:33, Heb 8:10). Until then, the people of Israel were to settle in Babylon for 70 years until their release to Jerusalem and beyond numerous Mediterranean territories. The building of the second temple restored a central location of worship and service, while synagogues served the need of Jewish peoples scattered abroad.
The Jewish solution to all of the strife, oppression, and hardship was a foretold Messiah who would deliver the people to a kind of freedom and prosperity assumed from Scripture. During their time of difficulty, there was an expectation of politically and socially restorative action where the Messiah would be their King and Prophet to bring them to a kingdom of Israel that served their interests.
Religious, Literary, and Cultural
The changes imposed upon the intertestamental Jewish people were comprehensive. The momentum of changes began earlier in Israel’s history around its succession of corrupt kings and its captivity to Assyria and Babylonia centuries before the second temple period. The scattering of the Jewish peoples brought further hardships upon religious and cultural practices that negatively impacted its language, lifestyle, and worship. Whether by security reasons, economic necessity, or enslavement, Jews settled across Mediterranean coastal territories such as Asia Minor, Antioch, Alexandria, Carthage, Cypress, and Rome. They dispersed West to form communities to keep hold of their homogenous identity. Outside Israel and Jerusalem, leadership centered around local synagogues and oral traditions complimentary to the writings of the law and the prophets.
By occupying foreign territories, intertestamental Jews faced significant changes around their indigent verbal and written language. As the people of Israel returned from Babylon, they essentially adopted the Aramaic language. Only to be faced with the dominant Greek language of imperial Greek Hellenization, Israel faced further dilution of social use of their language. Greek, Latin, Aramaic, and Hebrew were disparately in use among the various pagan territories, so preserving the Hebrew language was often a product of religious and elementary education within the home.1 Further loss of Jewish interest around literary work was mitigated by translation efforts, such as the Old Testament into Greek, by the 70 (LXX) commission of Ptolemy. Along with the absence of prophetic guidance during the intertestamental period, apocalyptic or apocryphal writings were produced for historical and religious value.
Scribes and priests were the wise men who came to replace the prophets. Scholars in the sacred writings were considered among the scribes who carried authority and interpretive weight.2 Oral law and the apocalyptic literature provided divine guidance and interpretation of Scripture during the time of prophetic silence.3
____________________________
1. Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003), 112. 2. Ibid, 401. 3. J. Julius Scott Jr., Jewish Backgrounds of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2000), 112.
With the Hellenization of numerous territories throughout the Mediterranean world, ancient Judea, Samaria, Galilee, and Northern Regions of Israel were immersed in Greek culture and philosophical thought. Widespread was Greek philosophy’s influence in places such as Decapolis, Antioch, and beyond Asia Minor. Even to the extent of Alexandria, Egypt, where Judeaus Philo originated, one could say that what Hellenization was to Judaism is what Gnosticism became to Christianity.1 The influence of Greek philosophical thought upon Judaism was largely speculative, and it touched on every area of Jewish life. More specifically, lifestyle, worldview, religion, ethics, social and interpersonal settings, a focus on individualism became a way to “help” humanity2 from a humanistic standpoint.
Introduction
An overall comparison to the revealed truth of Scripture suggests opposing intentionality. The sharp contrast between Hellenistic philosophical schools and centuries of covenantal life among Jews introduced harmful speculations (2 Tim 2:23). Naturalistic observations and presuppositions brought about “reasoned” conclusions, which also guided conduct, thought, and communication. Philo himself formed an allegorical and symbolic hermeneutic to selectively harmonize the Mosaic covenant with Greek philosophy.
As Philo was a Hellenized Jew, he embraced some facets of Greek culture and its worldview that sought to “teach people how to live.” 2 From foundations of lifestyle to soul-care, Greek philosophy emerged as a religion that produced beliefs and practices as a hollow counterfeit to what Yahweh instructed of the Jews. Caesar Augustus intended to bring Greek philosophy and culture to the “barbarian people” of Israel.3 An early form of imperialism was a leavening of religious and social life within Jewish society.
With Greek philosophy and culture exported to Eastern Mediterranean areas, new and different ideas were lived out and advocated by individuals and communities to affect religious, political, social, and civic life. Together they were a portable method of exported assimilation. It was a self-contradictory people-centered way of reason about the nature of existence, creation, and humanity’s purpose. Hellenization and Greek philosophy had a corrosive and corruptive influence on the Judaic way of life. It held itself out as a symbiosis, yet it was a dilution against Jewish covenantal obligations.
The further in time one goes in the examination of surrounding Hellenization and Greek culture, the emergence of Gnosticism first appear among Christian and Jewish sects. As a form of heretical influence upon the Church and early believers in Christ, it has its roots from within Greek philosophy and religion.
The Nag Hammadi Library
According to Wikipedia, Nag Hammadi (/ˌnɑːɡ həˈmɑːdi/ NAHG hə-MAH-dee; Arabic: نجع حمادى Najʿ Ḥammādī) is a city in Egypt. It is located on the west bank of the Nile river in the Qena Governorate, about 50 miles north-west of Luxor. It had a population of close to 43,000 as of 2007. The Nag Hammadi Library is a collection of writings that were discovered and gave further insights into early Christianity and Gnosticism.
Valentinian Exposition (including On Anointing, On Baptism, and On the Eucharist)
Catechism?
Valentinian
XI,3 45,1–69,20
Allogenes
Apocalypse
Sethian—Non-Christian
XI,4 69,21–72,33
Hypsiphrone
Apocalypse?
XII,1 15,1–34,28
Sentences of Sextus
Wisdom Sayings
Non-Gnostic
XII,2 53,19–60,30
Gospel of Truth
(See I,3)
XIII,3
Fragments
XIII,1 35,1–50,24
Trimorphic Protennoia
Revelation Discourse
Sethian
XIII,2 50,25–34
On the Origin of the World
(See II,5)
NAG HAMMADI LIBRARY
The Berlin Gnostic Codex is closely related and contains the following:
Number of Codex, Tractate, Page, and Lines
Name of Tractate
Literary Form
Affiliations
BG 8502,1 7,1–19,5
Gospel of Mary
Resurrection Gospel/Dialogue and Revelation Discourse
BG 8502,2 19,6–77,7
Apocryphon of John
(See II,1)
BG 8502,3 77,8–127,12
Sophia of Jesus Christ
(See III,4)
BG 8502,4 128,1–141,7
Acts of Peter
Acts
NAG HAMMADI LIBRARY
“The charts above list all of the tractates in the Nag Hammadi Library, with some indication of literary and doctrinal affinities. The Nag Hammadi documents are cited by codex number (in Roman numeral), tractate number in the codex (Arabic numeral), page, and line numbers of the manuscript.
The Gospel of Thomas is a collection of 112 to 118 (according to different editions) sayings attributed to Jesus, some of which were already known in Greek from a collection in the Oxyrhynchus Papyri. The Gospel of Thomas is perhaps the earliest of the new texts in the collection and demonstrates the existence of collections of sayings of Jesus (a sayings gospel) in the early church. It has a strong encratite or ascetic tone but otherwise is not so pronouncedly Gnostic, although clearly consistent with Gnostic understandings. Although scholarly opinion seems to incline toward emphasizing the extent of the independence of the Gospel of Thomas from the Synoptic Gospels, the age and originality of its individual sayings in relation to the canonical Gospels are much debated.
The Gospel of Truth may be identified with a work of that name that Irenaeus attributes to the followers of Valentinus (Against Heresies 3.11.9). It is not properly a “Gospel,” but a meditation on the truth of redemption. Its theme is that the human state is ignorance, and salvation is by the knowledge imparted by Jesus.
The Gospel of Philip is another sayings or discourse gospel, also from Valentinian circles. It offers information on liturgical practices.
The Apocryphon of John appears to have been one of the most popular of the Gnostic works, for three copies of it were found at Nag Hammadi and one other was previously known. It provides a close parallel to the Gnostic system described in Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1.29.
The Epistle to Rheginus, On the Resurrection, sets forth a position close to that of the orthodox in terminology but emphasizes a resurrection of the soul.
The Apocryphon of James, like many documents in the collection, is a post-resurrection revelation of Jesus. He gives blessings and woes through Peter and James. It is argued that the work derives from a sayings collection independent of the New Testament.
The Hypostasis of the Archons describes the efforts of the world rulers to deceive humankind in Genesis 1–6. The myth is close to that of the Ophites or Sethians in Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1.30.
The Tripartite Tractate is the most ambitious and comprehensive theological undertaking in the Nag Hammadi corpus. It has points of contact with the Valentinian teacher Heracleon and attempts to present Gnostic teaching, in response to orthodox criticism, in a way more acceptable to the great church.
Eugnostos the Blessed and The Sophia of Jesus Christ are two versions of the same document, the former a letter by a teacher to his disciples and the latter a revelation discourse of Jesus to his followers. The former is important as a non-Christian form of Gnosticism whereas the latter is a Christianized version of the same.
These writings give us more of the inner religious spirit of Gnosticism, whereas the heresiologists concentrated on the bizarre and on the outer structure of the Gnostic systems. Otherwise, the new finds correspond to the picture given by the Christian authors in its main outlines. The non-Christian nature of many tenets of Gnosticism is evident, although it attached itself to the Christian revelation. The concern with the Old Testament points to an area of proximity to Judaism if not to a specifically Jewish origin.” 4
Citations
1 Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003), 308. 2 Ibid, 323. 3 Aaron Valdizan, Historical Background of the New Testament Course Notes, (Unpublished Course Notes, The Master’s University, 2018), 69 4 Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003), 305–306.
The Old Testament informs us about how events unfold by what occurs in the New Testament. More specifically, around the canonical gospels, we see echoes of Jewish life and religious tradition that reach back to ancient norms, customs, mannerisms, practices, and developments. Within this research project, the field of view narrows to how Jewish royal accession serves as a backdrop to the legitimacy of Christ’s kingship. With specific examples, we will walk through what occurred along the timeline of monarchies to validate rulership and governance. Each King’s encounters to station them on their respective thrones were unique yet as part of a consistent pattern that developed an expectation for following kings. More relevantly, concerning Christ as the King of the Jews and ultimately as Christ the King of the Kingdom of God.
Introduction
With scriptural support, the astute bible student can detect overlapping conditions by which the Kings of ancient Israel attained their status through lineage, achievement, and appointment. To perform functions as king to which the ancient nation of Israel navigated through conflict is of paramount interest as it concerns the messianic prophecies and covenant promises that were made by YHWH to a people, unlike any other nation. Down through the centuries to the time of Jesus as the Messiah, we see fulfilled expectations in His intentional activity to demonstrate who He is while supported by a genealogical reality that attests to His legitimacy.
The organization of this paper is segmented into several sections that together demonstrate who Jesus was by what He did and by what occurred in His life. The significance of Jesus’ life as ascendant human divinity who, in His humanity, attains elevated stature is by necessity a required outcome as prescribed throughout Old Testament prophecy. The interrelated functions of kingship and messiah operate together. In one sense, for purposes of rule and administration of justice, while on the other for compassion, deliverance, and mercy as the “Mashiach,” or the anointed one.1
The three-part requirement of the kingship of Christ involved stages of accession that were both spiritual and physical realities. With Old Testament examples of these stages, expectations formed over time across kings that ascended to the thrones of Israel. However, the kings of the Old Testament were not messianic in nature as they were of Christ in the New Testament. While the nation of Israel and its people insisted upon having a king like other nations (1 Sam 8:20), those who rose to power were not of the divine caliber and origin who would also usher the Kingdom of God to Earth. Jesus was King of the Jews and the King of Kings in supreme reign over the Kingdom of God.
Necessity & Significance
It was necessary for Jesus to die to accomplish His mission and fulfill His ministry. Moreover, He had to die to ascend as both the King of the Jews and the King of the Kingdom of God. There were additional reasons why Jesus chose to give His life. Still, the prevailing significance of His accession was preceded by intervals of kingly rule among Old Testament royalty who commonly share attributes. The New Testament gospel writers intentionally reached back to patterns of accession repeated in the Old Testament to demonstrate in narrative form Christ’s life and ministry to satisfy requirements much the same. Numerous kings throughout Israel’s history foreshadowed Jesus’ eventual rise that meticulously previews a coming King who would be Messiah and God.
All the way back during the prophet Samuel’s time, the Lord spoke about Israel’s rejection as King over them (1 Sam 8:7). It was then that the Jews were to undergo a long series of failed or limited excursions into human governance whereby Christ the King and Messiah would in the distant future arise as the rightful and effective King of the people. It was of significance then because YHWH was once again relegated to the inferior preferences of the people. Even along the way of failed covenantal history, they rejected Him as God and then King whereas eventually, their Messiah would emerge to fulfill prophetic utterances. Jesus’ ascension through the Davidic genealogy was to set up the path in which His office as King would be validated.2 Even more, substantiated by the pattern of accession that the biblical writers, in both the Old and New Testaments, articulate as true to Christ.
The announcements of Jesus as King began at the time of John the Baptist as they were both aware of His descendants from King David. While John the Baptist would exclaim, “the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand” (Matt 3:2) to usher in Jesus the Messiah, he made sure that His presence was upon the people.3 Moreover, Jesus Himself would proclaim the same message, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1:17). Together they were reminiscent of a royal procession as earlier intimated by Rome’s coming to Judea when Caesar traveled through Palestine.4 Where before him, the way was cleared of logs and debris, and his path was made straight for his visit to Judea. The coming emperor’s recognition was made clear by what was prepared before him and would, after that, translate in John the Baptist’s proclamations about Jesus as the coming King and God-man. It all comes together about 500 years before the arrival of Jesus, Zechariah, the prophet foretold of Him as the king who would be endowed with salvation while riding into Jerusalem.
“Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout in triumph, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your king is coming to you; He is just and endowed with salvation, Humble, and mounted on a donkey, Even on a colt, the foal of a donkey.” – Zechariah 9:9
There it was in the New Testament, where he arrived in humble yet royal procession into the Kingdom of His own as publicly pronounced dramatically by John the Baptist.
Tripartite Requirement of Kingship
Ever since the time of the prophet Samuel, we see throughout Scripture the progression of three conditions by which individuals became King of Israel. Every time an ancient Israeli individual became king, there wasn’t a precisely familiar ritual to accession, but a general pattern by which a king was anointed who then overcame a foe as a test and after that underwent a ceremony of some type. To follow are various examples in the Old Testament outlined in detail where they together demonstrate a pattern that beckons toward what Jesus lived through as necessary to rise as the legitimate king over the people of Israel and all nations.
The stages of accession were not formal or structured as some ongoing methodology down through the centuries. However, they were part of a pattern to set expectations among Israel’s people to recognize the legitimacy and qualities of an existing or forthcoming monarchy.5 The leaders who took the office of king in ancient Israel arrived at that status by which one condition preceded another by necessity. The first stage of accession (anointing) always followed the second stage (defeat of a foe), which in turn was followed by a third stage (coronation). All stages were accompanied by various circumstances that correspond to the work of YHWH within Israel with respect to its surrounding nations.
Stages of Accession
Consistent with the gospel narratives, the kingly accession pattern follows an Old Testament course of historical events. This pattern of stages is consistent with research and terms concerning their definitions and meaning within an ancient Jewish context.6
Divine Selection and Anointing (Designation) More generally, of a prophet beginning with Samuel and to King Saul, then to David, Solomon, Jeroboam and others, YHWH selects and appoints individuals as rulers over the nation of Israel for a sovereign purpose.
Defeat of a Foe (Demonstration) Before coronation can occur, a designated king-elect must undergo a trial to overcome a foe and set of difficult circumstances. YHWH forms and uses circumstances to validate selected royal accession to achieve redemptive outcomes toward His purposes.
Exaltation (Coronation) Once YHWH’s designation is given to an appointee, and there follows a demonstration of worthy accession, an exaltation occurs to indicate permanence (i.e., “Long Live the King!”) to forever seal the newly arrived power to reign, administer justice, and rule.
All three stages are coherent with one another across time as each is mutually inclusive.
Old Testament Stages of Accession
King Saul
We find in 1 Samuel 10:19 a prayer of the Israelites in which they petition YHWH for a King.7 As YHWH hears their prayer and answers them, He gathers all tribes together to direct the people to their anointed King. The Lord has chosen Saul to reign as King over them (1 Sam 10:24), where his designation was settled and recognized by the population. He was anointed to be the prince of the people of Israel (1 Sam 10:1) by Samuel with oil as a mark of certitude prior to the people’s recognition of their given King.
After his designation, Saul bears the challenge of defeating an enemy. YHWH instructed him through Samuel to attack and destroy the Philistines (10:7), but instead, he attacks and destroys the Ammonites in a feat of victory and triumph. A satisfactory outcome in the view of the people of Israel, but not before YHWH. Nevertheless, Samuel accepts the victory and the second stage of Saul’s accession advances. The people gather in Gilgal and make peace offerings before the Lord, where they also rejoice greatly for their new king. Yet another rejection of their God over them.
King David
The story of the prophet Samuel’s anointing of David is clear evidence of designation by YHWH (1 Sam 16:13). Thereafter, David would face the giant Goliath (1 Sam 17:50) and kill him to defend God’s honor as a set up to deliver a feat of victory in view of Israel to again point to a valid stage of accession after the prophet Samuel anointed young David as King-elect. The following coronation in Scripture is self-evident (1 Chronicles 12:38) to make clear the final stage of David’s permanent reign.
King Solomon
Solomon’s anointing was done by both a priest and a prophet this time. Both Zadok the priest and Nathan the prophet anoint Solomon (1 Kings 1:34) to double-down on the accession’s legitimacy by tradition and divine appointment. King David knew the stages required, and YHWH set the circumstances by which Solomon would become challenged, victorious, and given a coronation to elevate him to reign as king. Adonijah challenges the King-elect by requesting through Bathsheba the concubine Abishag a Shunammite as his wife. This woman, who was previously a type of concubine of David before his death, was a pawn to capture the kingdom even while Adonijah recognized Solomon’s place as king as appointed by YHWH (1 Kings 2:15). Adonijah already had Abiathar, the priest, and Joab, the military commander, as allies and to take David’s concubine was to take a piece of his harem. Adonijah was not done and did not relinquish the kingdom to YHWH and Solomon as king. Adonijah, the older brother of Solomon, had challenged him as a foe with formidable support from the people and the authorities surrounding him. Solomon recognized the challenge as defiance where the next stage of his accession would commence.
Solomon had both Adonijah, and Joab killed, with Abiathar exiled by decree. Solomon’s first and final stages of accession by coronation are recorded in Scripture (1 Chronicles 29:20-25).
King Jeroboam
King Jeroboam’s designation does not come by anointing but by another means that indicate a succession of Solomon from YHWH (1 Kings 11:29-37). Ahijah, the prophet, finds Jeroboam on the road, takes his garment, and rips it into 12-pieces. There were ten pieces of which represent ten tribes of Israel, handed over to Jeroboam. This activity is a prophetic act of designation that sets Jeroboam to the king of these tribes. As Jeroboam was not of a Davidic lineage and the transfer of power originated as a judgment from YHWH against Solomon, the requirement to validate Jeroboam’s kingship was implicitly waived. To therefore recognize him as a king who was simply illegitimate in terms of accession and by comparison.
New Testament Stages of Accession
Old Testament patterns of accession are valuable indicators for recognizing and understanding what prophetic events led to the kingship of Christ. We realize through the biblical text what markers to look for from among legitimate kingly accessions. Namely, from the Davidic line of royalty to validate the office of King toward Jesus, we are to look for the stages of His ascent and ask what is more substantive to gain maximum confidence around the accuracy of prophetic fulfillment. More importantly, what these stages mean with respect to the reign of Christ over the Kingdom of God.
In careful consideration of New Testament events, we observe the anointing of Jesus through His baptism, His demonstration and defeat of a foe, and His coronation at the crucifixion.8 These were the stages He underwent with spiritual meaning at a much greater depth and significance than merely as the King of the Jews (which He was). Old Testament stages anchored the legitimacy of His elevated status that various kings cleared. Still, the translation to events in the life of Jesus was of a spiritual realm compared to a kingdom of a chosen people fraught with politics and religious self-interest.
The difference between the anointing of Jesus and the legitimate Davidic kings that preceded Him was that John the Baptist baptized Him, and God the Father audibly appeared to express His approval. His anointing was unique in this sense because He was designated rightful king both as human and God to become God-king. The prophet’s anointing was a double portion, so to speak, as both John the Baptist and Elijah were there to designate Jesus as King (Matt 11:14). King of both the Kingdom of God and the Jews. Immediately after the anointing of Christ, He was led to the wilderness by the Holy Spirit to face His foe, Satan. The second stage of accession was ushered upon Jesus to prove He is worthy and to set the tone for His ministry and forthcoming work through His apostles. While He was tempted to commit sins against the Father and betray His mission, the hardship He underwent was of enormous spiritual significance. Far greater than conflicts that were upon Him from religious adversaries, or Rome, and the social pressures throughout the Galilee area. Jesus was especially victorious in the face of temptations common to humanity where He would become elevated as the King over the Kingdom of God. Exalted and worthy of all honor and glory befitting Him as King of the greatest stature, His coronation thereafter became inevitable. He proved Himself worthy while holy and blameless as a man to serve as a model for humanity to admire, love, and pursue in righteousness.
Before the final stage of Jesus’ accession, it was necessary to establish expectations toward His forthcoming status. Both Old and New Testament biblical writers knew these patterns of accession, whether they were a matter of tradition or historically customary norms. Jesus likely knew of the tripartite stages of accession as He was entirely adept at Old Testament Scripture since they spoke of Him (John 5:39). His successful completion of one stage after the other had to be public to satisfy the expectations concerning legitimacy compared to the Davidic lineage before Him. Witnesses to His anointing, or designation, and demonstration of kingly stature and position were necessary as a validated correlation to assure maximum confidence in Jewish literature that He was and is, in fact, a King. Both the King of the Jews and the King of the Kingdom of God due to how Jesus advanced along the stages of accession.
It was not until the end of Christ’s life that the Roman Procurator Pilate began to recognize Jesus’ assertion that He is a king. At the time of Jesus’ trial, from among numerous Jewish leaders, Herod, Roman officials, and others, He was referred to as a King several times. While recorded in Scripture as a mockery, His status was recognized if not dismissed as a joke for the privileged class and onlookers to witness. To cast shame upon Him, He suffered as a King not for Himself, but for others to accomplish what the King of a spiritual kingdom would do.
Jesus was placed on trial because He claimed to sit at the right hand of power. Before the Jewish religious authorities, this put Him in a heap of big trouble. Jesus used this intentional phrase to cast certainty upon what the Sanhedrin would do to assure Jesus would die. For Jesus to advance to the final stage of accession, He had to die. As King, for there to be a resurrection and ascension, He first had to die. And die as a messianic king to accomplish His eternal status and reign over the Kingdom of God inhabited by people who would follow Him through salvation by grace through faith made possible. He would return His people to the Father, and they were to become citizens of a Kingdom that He brought in fulfillment of covenant promises centuries before.
The question Pilate posed to Jesus, “are you the King of the Jews?” (Lk 23:3, Jn 18:33), revealed that he did not recognize the Jewish rules of accession. After all, in his words, “Am I a Jew?” (Jn 18:35) reinforces the value of Jesus’ clarity when He acknowledges His reign of another Kingdom. A kingdom above all kingdoms to include both Israel and Rome. Pilate pressed Jesus about His claim of royalty; the words of Jesus resonate in the hearts of millions. He, in fact, was and is a King who bears witness to the truth, and His followers know Him and abide in Him. By His testimony before Pilate, “You say that I am a king. For this purpose, I have come into the world,” Jesus seals His claim and what was to follow by necessity was His coronation. There was nothing Pilate could do to release Him as His redemptive purpose must be fulfilled.
Jews, the political class, the social elite, and religious leaders were oblivious to what Jesus was to accomplish. Even His apostles were not fully aware of what was to occur and why. Only as revealed through Christ’s post-resurrection appearances and the Holy Spirit were they later able to piece together the implications of what was to come. Through the gospel and discipleship, the Kingdom of God was to develop and grow just as YHWH intended from the beginning. Challenges to the Kingdom from the Jews or Pilate were ineffective and absented any coherent understanding of what was forming before them and those for generations to follow.
The crucifixion was the final stage of accession. The crucifixion was the official coronation ceremony of Jesus’ ascent to the throne. His seat of power was given to Him by His death on the cross and by it, He was awarded eternal glory and honor due to such magnificence. As He was held at trial before Pilate and then to Herod and back to Pilate again, the vestments of royal position and notoriety were placed upon Him.9 He was given a crown of thorns (Jn 19:2) to serve as a visual cue that He was a king yet not by derision only. Even while Jewish people as a nation rejected Jesus, they still crowned Him King, and in a spiritual sense, the way they did it was of far greater significance and eternal meaning.
With the three stages of accession now complete, Jesus was irreversibly endowed as King. In accordance with the Scriptures, His intended purpose (Jn 18:37), and by the Jewish tradition of ascent to monarchy, there is no denying that He was marked as King both then and now. Then He was made King of the Jews and now as the ruler over the Kingdom of God both in heaven and on Earth. Objections to Jesus’ status from a historical perspective were made implausible because of what He had accomplished.
The Royal Heritage of Jesus
To further reinforce the historical accession of Christ as He passed through the three stages, His genealogy must be considered. If He did not begin from the correct bloodline, then at the outset, His contemporaries and everyone today must recognize His ascent as invalid. The root of His claim to the throne comes through the Davidic line of kingly advancement. Crucial to the Jews is the genealogy of a family line to trace back generations of heritage. The distinction between the genealogical account in the gospel of Matthew as compared to Luke was centered around His Jewish ancestry.10 The fascination about the lineages from Adam to Jesus rests with the divergence of genealogies after King David. Both Solomon and Nathan were the ancestors of Jesus’ parents, both Joseph and Mary, respectively. While Jesus needed to pass through the kingly accession, foundational to that effort and those outcomes was the royal descent between male and female to originate him through His birth. To this end, the backdrop of Jesus’ lineage was of paramount importance to Jewish populations during first-century Judaism.
The Royal Retinue of Jesus
The emergence of Jesus as King is found throughout Scripture to indicate His royal place among His people. The markers are placed throughout the biblical text to illustrate the means of His kingly office between His role as prophet, priest, and judge. The functional depth and breadth of Jesus’ place among His people and throughout history are unmistakable through various gospel accounts that speak of Him as a teacher, healer, counselor, and further positions of high regard. However, Augustine termed the three chief offices of Christ as the munus triplex: prophet, priest, and king designate Him as the son of David who alone is worthy of the seat of power at the right hand of God. All functions subordinate to the overarching place as the mediator between God and humanity (1 Tim 2:5).
Back toward early Christian thought, the primary facet of Jesus’ kingship was His messianic identity.11 With the royal retinue of the crucified with Him at the cross, there were yet further indications of His station in a literal way. Not in figurative imagery to infer His place, but by actual instances and accounts of royal conduct of the messianic king. When biblical figures referenced Jesus as master, rabbi, Lord, they generally recognized His preeminent status. However, over time, His messianic status became more widely recognized as His ministry grew. As savior, the Christ, His performative function as a rescuer and deliverer was entirely congruent with how He as a God-king serves those of His Kingdom. The Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well recognized His messianic status (Jn 4:29). Peter recognized His messianic status (Matt 16:12-20). In time, all the Apostles, including the early church, recognized His divine nature as Messiah and a King of Kings due to return.
Further evidence of Jesus’ accession is found at the beginning and ending periods of His life. From the time of the Magi in Matthew 2, King Herod becomes distressed about the arrival of the “King of the Jews” (v.3). In fulfillment of Micah 5:2, Herod and all of Jerusalem were alarmed at the birth of Christ as the forthcoming king. As it was written,
“‘And you, Bethlehem, land of Judah, Are by no means least among the leaders of Judah; For out of you shall come forth a Ruler Who will shepherd My people Israel.’”
The phrase, “a ruler over the people of Israel,” has a clear enough meaning to bring out panic within Herod as he would seek to kill the coming king (v.13). There is no mystery here that Jesus was who Micah prophesied about to give an early indication and prediction that he would accede to ruler status and have governance over the people of Israel. There was enough prophetic credibility around the magi’s testimony to end the lives of the firstborn throughout Bethlehem and its vicinity. The valid and plausible threat of a king to impose rulership over Herod’s house of successors was enough for him to recognize its merits and act upon them.
At the end of Jesus’ life, just before the crucifixion, He was referred to as king several times in the space of a day. Between Herod, Pilate, and the Jews, front and center was this notion that Jesus was a king who would become pitted against Caesar as the Jews decried “we have no king but Caesar” (Jn 19:15).
With all the intense upheaval in Jerusalem, in Galilee to the North, and even among Judean territories, so much attention and consternation added enormous weight to the accession of Christ. Not just by the accusations against Him and the claim to power that Jesus said and demonstrated, but by His matter-of-fact status. The gravity of protests against Him added weight to the truth of His kingship.
The Royal Return of Jesus
The return of Jesus as King is not only eschatological. Upon His resurrection, He returned to live among His followers victorious over sin and death. Just as a conquering king does, He defeats yet another foe. Only now to set Him as ultimate Potentate, or Lord of lords and King of kings because of the circumstances around His death and recovery. Having visited the “spirits in prison” to proclaim to them the truth of what He overcame and was now seated at the right hand of God (1 Pet 3:19-22) where angels and authorities were now subjected to Him. The reign of Christ just kept going well after the stages of His accession. His return by resurrection after death by crucifixion was further evidence of His kingship.
Throughout apocalyptic and eschatological work, we read of vivid imagery and symbolic meaning around the return of Christ. Particularly concerning His second coming and of His reign during the millennium era. The “Day of the Lord” suggests a call to authority. The kind of authority that is due to the King who reigns over the Kingdom of God. More explicitly, the Kingdom of God upon the Earth at His arrival is referred to by the Apostle John in his letter to the Churches in Asia Minor. In the biblical text, Revelation 19:16, he writes about the authority and power of the King.
“And on His robe and on His thigh, He has a name written, “King of Kings, and Lord of Lords.”
So as an expression of absolute sovereignty, Jesus appears as having authority over all rulers.12 Yet, while the title “King of kings” is frequently found in early Jewish literature, we find references to the same title in a similar fashion.13 The associations to this ultimate title are referenced by the gospel writers from the Old Testament (Deut. 10:17, Dan. 2:47) and sources available during the intertestamental period (2nd & 3rd Maccabees, 1 Enoch 9:4, among others). For example, to extoll the glories of Christ, “You are Lord of lords and the God of gods and King of the ages. The throne of your glory lasts unto all the generations of the ages, and your name is holy and great and blessed unto all the ages.”14 Throughout scripture and first-century literature is a foundation of references to the significance and meaning around the truth of Jesus’ return and reign in power and glory. As a King would reign over His kingdom, Jesus has a forthcoming mission to settle the Kingdom of God on Earth where renewal of creation and the restoration of His people is made certain.
Conclusion
With exquisite detail, all the way from the birth of Jesus through to the time of His return, there is a mountain of evidence about His kingship. Yet a royalty of a different kind. An ultimate royalty as the messianic God-king who was and is deeply involved in the welfare of His people. In Scripture, He gives the people of His kingdom historic clarity about the stages of accession as His predecessors assume the throne before Him. Sort of precursors to the reign that would follow, we witness human authorities and governments’ failures, whereas, in Christ, we become informed and understand His place as Lord of lords and King of Kings. Throughout His life and ministry, we see the overwhelming certainty of who He is by what He does from His authority.
There is a clear thread of Jesus as King throughout all of Scripture. All of it and then some throughout first-century literature. His prominence and exalted stature throughout creation to include humanity are of utmost astonishing value and meaning. All of creation is in witness of who He is and what He has done. That God the Father is pleased with Him adds to our desire to worship and honor Him as our sovereign King over all the Earth. His life’s events and circumstances in the Old and New Testaments are a comprehensive representation of who He is as King in authority over all rulers. It is without question that Jesus was the King of the Jews. Everyone will bow before Him from then, now, and the future. As Paul wrote to the Romans long ago, “Every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord” (Is 45:23, Rom 14:11, Phil 2:10), we shall honor Him and worship Him because of who He is and what He has done.
Citations
A portion of the research and material here is inspired and supported by the framework of accession as covered by Heiser’s podcast that outlines Shelton’s paper as cited. His review of other academic papers is referenced here as well. For further details and depth, reference Heiser’s podcast 333 “The Israelite King and Jesus as King” posted July 19, 2020, https://nakedbiblepodcast.com/podcast/naked-bible-333-the-israelite-king-and-jesus-as-king/.
Mark L. Strauss, “Messiah,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
M. G. Easton, “Kingly Office of Christ,” Easton’s Bible Dictionary (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1893).
David S. Dockery, “King, Christ As,” ed. Chad Brand et al., Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003), 984.
John F Hall, “The Roman Province of Judea: A Historical Overview.” Brigham Young University Studies, vol. 36, no. 3, 1996, pp. 319–336. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/43044136. Accessed 5 Mar. 2021.
Marc Zvi Brettler – God Is King: Understanding an Israelite Metaphor, vol. 76, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1989), 51.
W. Brian Shelton, “An Ancient Israelite Pattern of Kingly Accession in the Life of Christ,” Trinity Journal 25, no. 1 (2004): 72.
James Parks, All the Prayers in the Bible, Faithlife Biblical and Theological Lists (Bellingham, WA: Faithlife, 2020), 1 Sa 10:19.
Joel Marcus, “Crucifixion as Parodic Exaltation” Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 125, no. 1, 2006, pp. 73–87.
John MacArthur, “One Perfect Life: The Complete Story of the Lord Jesus” (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2012), 455.
Robert Duncan Culver, “The Earthly Career of Jesus, the Christ” (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1991), 17.
David Schrock, “Jesus’ Kingly Office,” in Lexham Survey of Theology, ed. Mark Ward et al. (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2018).
John F. MacArthur Jr., The MacArthur Study Bible: New American Standard Bible. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006), Re 17:14.
Craig A. Evans and Craig A. Bubeck, eds., John’s Gospel, Hebrews–Revelation, First Edition., The Bible Knowledge Background Commentary (Colorado Springs, CO; Paris, ON; Eastbourne: David C Cook, 2005), 387.
Rick Brannan et al., eds., The Lexham English Septuagint (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012), Enoch 9:4.
Bibliography
al., Rick Brannan et. The Lexham English Septuagint. Bellingham: Lexham Press, 2012. Brettler, Marc Zvi. “God Is King: Understanding an Israelite Metaphor.” Journal for the Study of Old Testament Supplement Series, vol. 76, 1989: 51. Craig A. Evans, Craig A. Bubeck. The Bible Knowledge Background Commentary – John’s Gospel, Hebrews-Revelation. Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 2005. Culver, Robert Duncan. The Earthly Career of Jesus, the Christ. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1991. Dockery, David S. Christ As King. Nashville: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003. Easton, M.G. Kingly Office of Christ, Easton’s Bible Dictionary. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1893. Hall, John F. “The Roman Province of Judea: A Historical Overview.” Brigham Young University Studies, vol 36, no. 3, 1996: 319-336. Heiser, Michael “The Israelite King and Jesus as King”: Podcast 333 posted July 19, 2020. https://nakedbiblepodcast.com/podcast/naked-bible-333-the-israelite-king-and-jesus-as-king/. Accessed March 08, 2021. MacArthur, John. One Perfect Life: The Complete Story of the Lord Jesus. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2012. —. The MacArthur Study Bible: New American Standard Bible. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006. Marcus, Joel. “Crucifixion as Parodic Exaltation.” Journal of Biblical Literature, 2006: 73-87. Parks, Jimmy. All the Prayers of the Bible. Bellingham: Faithlife, 2020. Schrock, David. Jesus’ Kingly Office. Bellingham: Lexham Press, 2018. Shelton, W. Brian. “An Ancient Israelite Pattern of Kingly Accession in the Life of Christ.” Trinity Journal, vol. 25, 2004: 72. Strauss, Mark L. “Messiah”, The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Bellingham: Lexham, 2016.
This summary concerns this week’s reading between both texts ‘One Perfect Life, The Complete Story of the Lord Jesus’ (MacArthur), and ‘The Earthly Career of Jesus, the Christ, A Life in Chronological, Geographical and Social Context (Culver).’ The living ministry of Jesus up to His final week of life was to culminate in what He set out to accomplish by the will of the Father as described in the Garden of Gethsemane prior to His capture and arrest. The specifics by which Jesus explained His forthcoming work to His followers were a matter of the hardships and persecutions He would endure and finish. The point of Jesus’ ministry was to bring to the world the Kingdom of God and to satisfy the Father’s justice of sin through the atonement of believers who would call on Him and become born from above. The course of Jesus’ life was about laying the Kingdom’s groundwork while providing a path to redemption before God through the atonement of those in Him.
The final week of Jesus’ life was filled with events of harrowing and significant meaning. The sequence of activity that comprises His arrest, trials, interrogations, abuse, condemnation, torture, mockery, and crucifixion brings into vivid detail the course of His sacrifice as the Messianic King. As traumatic and bewildering the final days of Jesus were to the Apostles, the time shortly after His burial brought delight and joy of substantial measure. In fulfillment of Christ’s words before His death, He was to rise again and do so with certainty. To return to His chosen apostles and thereafter the Father by ascension, He continued about the business of building the Kingdom of God. Rendering eligible new occupants through belief, the terms of a new Covenant was underway.
The Culver and MacArthur texts track with one another as the course of events during Jesus’ final week are described in detail. MacArthur goes quite a bit farther with eschatological details around the gospel and His charge to make disciples of all nations. Culver remains within the canonical gospels during his recount of the passion week. At the same time, MacArthur continues onward through the Holy Spirit’s work and the development of the first century Church as written about through the book of Acts and the various apostolic epistles. While Culver offers multiple points of interest around his views along the passion week timeline, the reader picks up on historical details that are scripturally validated. Moreover, Culver fills in various facts and speculations to provide incidental details that stimulate the reader’s thinking. By comparison, MacArthur’s continued use of interwoven verses among the canonical gospels provides an additional perspective around what occurred with significant clarity with no room for ambiguity and without speculation.
While the Culver text serves as a commentary along with the “career” of Jesus, the reader gains considerable insight about the life of Jesus with details that borrow upon social and timeline research in an effort to comprehensively piece together what occurred. The details around who was active or a part of the unfolding events with Jesus are anchored around the “where” and “when” of what had taken place. To add substantive meaning to the events that occurred, the reader is drawn in to visualize and comprehend what transpired concerning Jesus’ sufferings and victorious outcomes. For the purpose of reclaiming humanity in fulfillment of the prophetic writings long before the entire series of gospel events, which culminated in Jesus’ resurrection and ascension, the reader is presented with hope about a kingdom that, through belief, a promise of fellowship with God and new life follows.
So as a point of distinction the Culver text ends at Christ’s ascension, and the MacArthur text continues with part XI to include various key Scripture areas of interest centered around the gospel. In addition to the work of Jesus just after His ascension, there were various truths that emerged with the help of the Holy Spirit’s arrival. While Jesus was with His followers after His resurrection, He gave instruction concerning the work of the Kingdom ahead and the forthcoming Spirit. The promise of Christ’s return and the method of Salvation of believers would become theological truths to build upon for generations to follow. Until the fulness of the Gentiles were to enter the Kingdom, the Apostles then as it is with believers today, were to make disciples, baptize them, and teach them to obey all that Jesus commanded.
This summary concerns this week’s reading between both texts ‘One Perfect Life, The Complete Story of the Lord Jesus’ (MacArthur), and ‘The Earthly Career of Jesus, the Christ, A Life in Chronological, Geographical and Social Context (Culver).’ Throughout the written comments and observations given here, both texts’ substance is brought together to form a coherent view about the time of Jesus in the Jericho area to the beginning of the passion week. More generally, from the time of Jesus’ travels from Jericho, Bethany, and Jerusalem to His withdrawal to the Mount of Olives just East of Jerusalem. Throughout this period of Jesus’ life, there is a lot of activity packed into a short period. His triumphal entry into Jerusalem as Israel’s King was presented to Jerusalem’s population and its leaders their Messiah as promised and prophesied over the many centuries before.
At the temple, in the midst of many miraculous signs, wonders, events, and proclamations, Jesus appeared before the people to endure numerous confrontations from the Sanhedrin, Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, and others to withstand and counter their trappings. Which altogether amounted to their rejection of Him as their Messiah regardless of all that He had done to fulfill prophecy, heal people, and raise the dead to demonstrate who He is. Nevertheless, as the sovereign will of God came about to seal His rejection as the Jewish Messiah, Jesus and His disciples share a final meal together at the last supper in an Upper Room. Where well-known traditions become formed to establish sacraments such as communion and the washing of feet, their significance is of enormous gravity. Framed around Jesus’ warnings that He was about to be tried and executed, He encouraged His apostles to give them hope and to remind them of what it was to love and serve one another. To live in remembrance of Him and to accomplish what He modeled for them.
As I read through the entire texts of both Culver and MacArthur, the upper room to the following withdrawal toward the Mount of Olives is of utmost importance. Especially due to the events and circumstances that arose throughout the day. Right after His rejection in Jerusalem from Jewish authorities, and the betrayal of Jesus, He and His disciples returned to the Mount of Olives to recount what had occurred and to prepare for the days ahead. Jesus spoke of parables and the coming persecution, which would culminate in His death just hours before where they now would wait for His captors’ arrival. Jesus knew what was coming, where His apostles were not aware of the specifics to which they would become scattered, and He was to be placed on trial and condemned to death.
Just outside Jerusalem, up higher to the East, Jesus spoke to His disciples about numerous principles concerning the Kingdom, what was to befall Jerusalem, and His return as King before all creation. At the garden of Gethsemane in the same general area, Jesus’ prayer for His disciples and for followers in generations to come would echo throughout time to unity, safety, and fellowship as they were to remain in Him as they were given for the Kingdom as a promise fulfilled. The prayer also amounted to tremendous hardship as He knew of His imminent arrest and forthcoming sufferings.
The MacArthur text read through this week stops at Jesus’ arrest. Where the Culver text continues to cover His last night before Annas, Caiaphas, and the Sanhedrin put together a coordinated effort to capture Jesus and place Him before the Roman court. They together sought to have Jesus crucified. Their timing of arrest, interrogation, and method of placing Him before the Roman court were all unjust evils that were permitted. It was Jesus Himself who willingly gave Himself up as a sacrifice as intended. When Jesus’ response to Caiaphas was spoken,
Jesus said to him, “You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.” – Matt 26:64
It would appear from what was spoken at the time of Daniel (Dan 7:13) to then before His accusers, He was in full control of the situation, and He willingly set His face to undergo the sufferings as described by the prophet Isaiah (Is 53). For a purpose that they were otherwise oblivious to, His mission as Messianic King was well beyond them as there was far more at stake. Specifically, as Paul, the Apostle later wrote,
“Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away; but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory; the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory; but just as it is written,
Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard, And which have not entered the heart of man, All that God has prepared for those who love Him.”
-1 Cor 2:6–9
On the surface, it appears that the setup was placed upon Jesus. In fact, YHWH placed upon spiritual forces opposed to Him a set of circumstances by which the Kingdom of God was ushered into creation as humanity was reclaimed. The King who was about to be executed was on the cusp of conquering enemies of far more consequence than the trivial Jewish authorities before Him. They were veritable tools in the tool shed to help form an outcome that nearly everyone was oblivious about.
This summary concerns this week’s reading between both texts ‘One Perfect Life, The Complete Story of the Lord Jesus’ (MacArthur), and ‘The Earthly Career of Jesus, the Christ, A Life in Chronological, Geographical and Social Context (Culver).’ Throughout the written comments and observations given here, both texts’ substance is brought together to form a coherent view about the Perean period of Jesus’ life. More generally, the time of Jesus’ ministry from the end of Galilee to His time in neighboring areas in furtherance of the gospel and the emerging presence of the Kingdom of God.
As events in Galilee and Capernaum transpired, the conditions by which Jesus was able to carry out His ministry became more limited. For various reasons stemming from the people rejecting Jesus as the promised and prophesied Messiah, He transitioned from a public ministry to a more reserved or private and careful presence throughout Northern Israel. In His frustration with Galilean towns (Matt 11:21), He set out to various adjacent areas in Samaria and farther toward Trans-Jordan. To continue in His teaching with the apostles and minister to people while visiting towns in these areas, we recognize in Scripture the many events and circumstances that occurred.
There are two distinct intervals of time that concern the ending of Jesus’ time and ministry within Galilee. Beginning in Galilee, with His apostles, Jesus directed more focus toward the training of His chosen twelve. Namely, He concentrated His efforts toward their spiritual and character development as they grew closer to Him and in the relationship with one another. The many teachings about the Kingdom and His identity toward fulfilling His purpose in Jerusalem were of paramount interest. As He traveled with His apostles to Gentile and pagan areas, His efforts were a direct and overt message to recognize and understand their role within the Kingdom. As Israel was to be a kingdom of priests, as the twelve tribes of Israel, they were to become representatives for God’s Kingdom within the Old Covenant of Israel and the nations.
The New Covenant was to become sealed with the emergence of the Kingdom of God, the death and resurrection of Christ, and the Holy Spirit’s outpouring. To set the stage for them to become kingdom builders. Pioneers of the Church, all twelve, to become representatives as intended all along. Only this time, with direct training from Galilee onward, the Kingdom of God was about to arrive, and it was of utmost importance they were ready. Through teaching, parables, confrontations, healings, casting out unclean spirits, warnings, or events, their retention was aided by their direct involvement. For maximum and meaningful retention as new believers within the Kingdom were sure to come.
The transfiguration was a demarcation point of the Kingdom’s arrival. Due to my Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32 worldview, I happen to believe this occurred on Mt Hermon, in Gentile territory, not on Mt Tabor, for historical, theological, and spiritual reasons I wrote at length about earlier. Nevertheless, from the time of Jesus’ transfiguration culminating from the last six months of His ministry, Peter, James, and John witnessed His glorified state of being. While in the presence of Moses, and Elijah, Jesus, in turn, hears the voice of the Father to exhort His apostles all to cement their conviction and certainty that He is the Son of God. In His transfigured state, the Messiah of Israel appeared before His apostles to demonstrate that the Kingdom had arrived. It was a pronouncement originating from within Gentile and pagan territory as a declaration over spiritual foes opposed to Him and His work. The arrival of the Kingdom of God was that “His house may be filled” (Lk 14:23) and from among the “highways and hedges” in part because Israel rejected their Messiah.
Within the last six months of Jesus’ ministry, from Phoenicia to Trans-Jordan, Judea, Samaria, and into Jerusalem, He covered a lot of territory from town to town, both preaching and teaching. Yet remaining more distant and separated from the crowds, as compared to earlier intervals of ministry, His trajectory toward a final appearance at the temple became a clear and necessary certainty. Interwoven throughout the MacArthur text, the reader can easily see the common thread of Christ’s message concerning the Kingdom of God and His presence now upon the Jews and the surrounding peoples.
Jesus’ ministry was fulfilled as intended. So that we can share in answer to John the Baptist’s question, “Are you the One who has come, or shall we look for another? (Mt 11:3), ” we see by what He has done that He is, in fact, the Messiah, the Son of God, and King for a Kingdom newly arrived.
This post covers research concerning a comparison between the gospel event of Jesus before Pontius Pilate, ruler of Judea. The written text between the synoptic gospels and the book of John offers various perspectives of the same event to fully communicate what took place at the beginning of the trial, prosecution, and execution of Jesus. The familiar story of Jesus, God incarnate before Pilate, was the beginning of an epic nonfictional set of circumstances that cascaded into an irony surrounding Jesus’ status and position. Jesus stood before Pilate with certitude about His intentions there, and He was entirely in control of what was to befall Him. Regardless of what contradictory interests there were at this event, the overriding concern of prophetic fulfillment and what Jesus was there to accomplish weighed on their conversation between each other.
Introduction
The confrontation of Jesus and Pilate was a sovereign appointment (Jn 19:11) as Pilate’s authority over Jesus was given by God to accomplish His purposes. As the written gospel accounts present their historical coverage of what occurred, they together offer a precise whole as they piece together a mosaic image of what took place. As one might look through a prism, the gospels’ reader comes to view a compilation of narrative events that offer synergistic focus. To arrive at an accurate and clear view of what was to occur, the reader gets at a fuller meaning because of preceding foretold predictions involving the kingship of Christ. His authority and rule were not what stood before Pilate, but instead, the person of Jesus who was offered as an inevitable sacrifice against the interests of those who opposed Him (1 Cor. 2:8, cf. Jn 12:31, Jn 14:30).
The momentum of prophetic events leading up to the confrontation between Jesus and Pilate was inexorable. As a lamb led to its slaughter, and under duress, Jesus presented Himself before Pilate through circumstances. In an appearance before His spiritual adversaries, which led them to believe He was captive against His will. Paradoxically, He was in control while He began His suffering (Jn 10:18, Is 52:13-53:12) immediately before His arrest while in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mk 14:32-42) and as a witness to His followers (Matt 26:2). Jesus offered no protest before Pilate. And as the procurator of Judea, Pilate had come to recognize the rulership and authority of Christ by His testimony. Pilate was informed about the kingdom and the Messianic King who stood before him to make clear His innocence in contradiction to His accusers’ lies.
Background & Occasion
Whether in AD 30 or AD 33, the setting of Jesus’ trial, death by crucifixion, and resurrection were under Roman authoritarian rule. In Judea, a Jewish state and Roman province, Judaism culturally governed the prevailing way of life with widespread Greek influence throughout Jerusalem and surrounding areas. Socially, the time of Jesus’ ministry at the time of His trial was mixed with interpersonal apprehension, political instabilities, and religious corruption. As such, Jewish religious leaders leveraged Roman law to accuse Jesus of behaviors tantamount to insurrection. It was where Roman charges against Jesus were a proxy for Sanhedrin’s claims of blasphemy against Him. Pax Romana was violated in their view, and something had to be done about it (Jn 11:50). Jesus, their Messianic King, had to die. Not for blasphemy, but for making himself a king disruptive to Rome (Lk 23:2). Not as the God of their forefathers as Jesus claimed, but as a king in betrayal of their convictions and messiah.
Comparative Gospel Accounts
Matt. 27:2, 11-14
Mark 15:1–5
Luke 23:1–5
John 18:28–37
Jesus Before Pilate 2 And they bound him and led him away and delivered him over to Pilate the governor. …. 11 Now Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, “Are you the King of the Jews?” Jesus said, “You have said so.” 12 But when he was accused by the chief priests and elders, he gave no answer. 13 Then Pilate said to him, “Do you not hear how many things they testify against you?” 14 But he gave him no answer, not even to a single charge, so that the governor was greatly amazed.
Jesus Before Pilate 1And as soon as it was morning, the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council. And they bound Jesus and led him away and delivered him over to Pilate. 2 And Pilate asked him, “Are you the King of the Jews?” And he answered him, “You have said so.” 3 And the chief priests accused him of many things. 4 And Pilate again asked him, “Have you no answer to make? See how many charges they bring against you.” 5 But Jesus made no further answer, so that Pilate was amazed.
Jesus Before Pilate 1Then the whole company of them arose and brought him before Pilate. 2 And they began to accuse him, saying, “We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding us to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ, a king.” 3 And Pilate asked him, “Are you the King of the Jews?” And he answered him, “You have said so.” 4 Then Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowds, “I find no guilt in this man.” 5 But they were urgent, saying, “He stirs up the people, teaching throughout all Judea, from Galilee even to this place.”
Jesus Before Pilate 28 Then they led Jesus from the house of Caiaphas to the governor’s headquarters. It was early morning. They themselves did not enter the governor’s headquarters, so that they would not be defiled, but could eat the Passover. 29 So Pilate went outside to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this man?” 30 They answered him, “If this man were not doing evil, we would not have delivered him over to you.” 31 Pilate said to them, “Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law.” The Jews said to him, “It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death.” 32 This was to fulfill the word that Jesus had spoken to show by what kind of death he was going to die. 33 So Pilate entered his headquarters again and called Jesus and said to him, “Are you the King of the Jews?” 34 Jesus answered, “Do you say this of your own accord, or did others say it to you about me?” 35 Pilate answered, “Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered you over to me. What have you done?” 36 Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” 37 Then Pilate said to him, “So you are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. For this purpose, I was born and for this purpose, I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.”
Already operating with authority, servant-leadership, and work in covenant subrogation over the Mosaic law, Jesus posed a threat to the Jewish religious leaders and their interests. Judaism was the traditional way of life that fueled the Jewish people’s cultural norms at the time. Jesus, who often operated outside of tedious and erroneous Jewish application of the law, drew the attention of multitudes of people. While His following and impact upon Jewish society was deep and widespread, He had a significant effect upon people’s religious lives who attended the temple and synagogues; what He accomplished through His miracles and ministry produced continued contradictions of interest between Him and Jewish religious leaders. The teachings of Jesus did not center around their imposed details of the law and requirements as stipulated by burdensome efforts among common people.
Inevitably, open and ongoing hostilities developed from the Sanhedrin and other religious leaders toward Jesus. Leading to a constant mess about how they sought to capture and prosecute Him, their historical confrontations with Jesus were a series of befuddled efforts to seize Him on grounds contradictory to their religious interests. Matters escalated over time as Jesus continued to minister to people, perform miracles, develop followers, and speak before thousands throughout Israel. The adverse circumstances between Jesus and hostile Jews escalated until finally, they sought to take His life by whatever legal means they could. Accordingly, it became necessary for them to find a way to condemn Jesus according to Jewish law and take His life. Through both religious and political maneuvering, their efforts concentrated on removing Him from the public through false pretenses as asserted by the Jewish chief priests, Pharisees, and Caiaphas, the high priest at the time (Jn 11:47-52).
The first ones at the Roman praetorian court at dawn were the Jews who condemned Jesus.1 Their messiah was to appear before Governor Pilate, where they would petition the death of Jesus stemming from their false accusations that constitute a profane miscarriage of justice. Jesus, who substantiated and proved His standing as the messianic king of the Jews, stood accused from the bloodthirst of the Jewish religious leaders who held an illegal and mock court under the cloak of night. Ultimately to deliver Jesus over to a Gentile ruler for trial, judgment, and execution, the trial began to run its course as an interrogation directed at Jesus to find Him either innocent or guilty by Roman law. Here in the gospels, it is definitively revealed to the Gentiles that Jesus is, in fact, a king. The king of the Kingdom He references to reinforce further His innocence, rule, and authority of a different kind.
Comparisons, Distinctions & Divergences
The passages of explicit interest are outlined in the table above. Specifically, Matt 27:2, 11-14, Mark 15:1-5, Luke 23:1-5, and John 18:33-37 were set in a side-by-side comparison to recognize their unique perspectives about what occurred while Jesus was before Pilate. The common message among all gospels was a question posed by the ruler of Judea. Pilate asked Jesus, “Are you the King of the Jews?” Among all four gospels presented this question to reserve in the mind of readers an assertion that Jesus was cast as a make-believe king.
Whether falsely accused by Jewish religious authorities or not, Pilate asked this question of Jesus to get an answer concerning His view and status. Yet of significant interest to Pilate was the interrogation of Jesus to determine guilt by insurrection or disruptive opposition to Rome.
Pontius Pilate knew the history of Herod the Great as King of the Jews as appointed by the Roman senate. Much later, during the time of Jesus’ ministry, Galilee’s Herodian kingdom was under Herod Antipas, a ruler of Northern Israel.2 Yet while Pilate served as procurator of Judea, he knew the context by which he posed this question to Jesus, “Are you the King of the Jews?” For Pilate to ask Jesus if He was king of the Jews was a test and form of cynicism and condescension. Knowing that Herod Antipas was a successor of Herod the Great, Pilate transferred Jesus to him in an effort to judge Him on the same claim of rulership as asserted by the Jews. Seemingly oblivious to the objections of the Jews that Jesus was the Christ, both Pilate and Antipas separately recognized Jesus as innocent of false charges of insurrection made against Him.
All four gospels present, as a pattern, an account about the delivery or appearance of Jesus before Pilate while under arrest. Both Mathew and Mark specify that He was bound, but the other two do not indicate as much within these analyzed passages. While each is not mutually exclusive of one another, Matthew and Mark give a fuller indication of what occurred with this detail. The absence of Jesus’ restraints in Luke or John while delivered before Pilate does not indicate He was unrestrained, respectively. Accordingly, what is unique about each passage does not present a contradiction as an unresolved matter, but instead a different perspective inherent from each biblical author’s background and concern for relevant detail. While all four gospels share common facts to recount the trial event, separate details are filled in to serve as a complementary view of another.
While the Luke account appears to draw some details from Mark, the verbiage from His accusers as follows: “We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding us to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ, a king (Lk 23:2)” is unique. As all four gospels specify Pilate’s inquiry to Jesus about being King of the Jews, it is a result of this reference that Luke originates the Governor’s interest in asking such a question. Jesus does not validate how Pilate posed this question from hostile intent but only acknowledged the Governor’s inquiry that He is, in fact, a king. Only a King of a kingdom that was not of this world (Jn 18:36), much less what Pilate could comprehend or accept fully. The passage itself does not contradict what occurs elsewhere within scripture. Still, it simply illuminates it to give further depth and substance as to why Kingly authority’s claim was before Pilate as a potential source of treachery and insurrection.
The significance of what the chief priests and crowds said about Jesus “stirring up the people” (Lk 23:5) throughout Judea, Galilee, and Jerusalem correspond to the weight of their accusations. Disturbing the peace whereas rebellion, insurrection, and malcontent among the population was an offense against Roman law that violated Rome’s Pax Romana policy (27 BC – 180 AD).3 To stir up trouble draws unwanted attention and resources to the province where social instabilities were otherwise expected as managed if not suppressed and put to rest. This account of “stirring up the people” is also absent from among the other gospel accounts.
From among all four gospels, the book of John provides a more detailed and comprehensive view of what transpired during Pilate’s interrogation of Jesus. Pilate and Jesus’ interaction included the accusers who were adamant and persistent about what they expected and wanted. Since they were unable to execute Jesus (Jn 18:31), they pressed upon the highest Roman authority to put Him to death.4 Pilate, as the Roman Governor, had the power to take the life of Jesus and had the sole authority to take the life of all individuals condemned within Israel. Therefore, as they were in a Roman province, the Jewish religious leaders found it necessary to bring their case against Jesus to settle their grievances according to their law. – These relevant details are not present within the synoptic gospel accounts. However, the facts surrounding Jewish and Roman authority to execute individuals do not present a contradiction, only another absence from the corresponding gospel records adjacent to John 18:28-37.
Testimony of Christ as King
In getting to the heart of the matter within these corresponding passages, the gospel writers were together to highlight Christ Jesus as King. More specifically, He was recognized as having ruling authority over a Kingdom that He built over the course of His ministry. His Kingdom is among believers on Earth who belong to a spiritual realm governed and ruled by Him for their security, prosperity, and well-being, where their dwelling consists of fellowship and belonging with God and Christ with and through the Holy Spirit.
As Jesus informed Pilate that His Kingdom was not of this world, the Governor is assured that Jesus was of no threat and violated no Roman laws concerning insurrection or rebellion over government authorities. As Pilate assumed that Jesus had done something wrong because he was “delivered over” (Jn 18:35) to him by His own nation and chief priests, his line of inquiry persisted to determine the guilt or innocence of Jesus. At least with respect to the Jewish people’s claims and their objections to Jesus’ conduct or teachings. In any respect, the testimony of Jesus as a King of a kingdom brought about Pilate’s acknowledgment with the question, “So you are a king?” Without regard to the meaning or implications of what Jesus meant concerning a Kingdom that was not of this world (i.e., outside the realm of the Roman empire).
Here it is in John 18:37 that Jesus attests to His messianic rule. Whether Pilate took His assertion seriously or not, the Governor held before the Jewish people the innocence of Jesus. There were no charges of substance to indicate Jesus had violated Roman law. To continue any further with the trial of Jesus within the Gentile court would compound the guilt of His accusers and those who stood in false judgment of Jesus for political and social purposes. Pilate knew that Jesus committed no crimes against Rome or within Judea that led to His condemnation where the praetorian court recognize His royal status even if through mockery, ridicule, and eventual torture.
Between all synoptic gospels Matthew, Mark, and Luke, each one references the silence of Jesus during Pilate’s efforts to get Him to answer to His accusers. Matthew and Mark refer to the amazement of Pilate while Luke and John do not. The presence of this reference in Matthew appears to indicate that the source originated from the gospel of Mark. While Luke only uses portions of Mark’s text to give an account of what occurred. While Pilate was amazed that Jesus “gave no answer” concerning the accusations, the references of Matthew and Mark are significant because of the reference by the prophet Isaiah concerning the Jewish messiah (Isaiah 53:7).
Specifically,
He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth. Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So, He did not open His mouth.
The work of Christ at the encounter between Pilate and Him was in fulfillment of this prophecy from Isaiah. Jesus knew full well that this was to occur by His actions and by withholding His objections or comments concerning His accusers and condemnation. Moreover, the revealing of Christ as the messianic King who rules over the Kingdom of God was also of significant and profound relevance that would stand over all kingdoms both then and in the future.
Conclusion
The confrontation and encounter all written about by the gospel authors were of significant relevance surrounding the circumstances of Jesus’ capture, trial, and following sacrificial death. The work of Christ right up to even into His interrogation speaks to His status and overall identity as prophesied messiah and King over the Kingdom of God. With a close correlation between all gospel accounts, each book’s authors were in unison about the meaning and details of events about Christ before Pilate.
Citations
Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, “Praetorium, Praetorian Guard,” Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988), 1743–1744.
Francisco O. Garcia-Treto, “Herod,” ed. Mark Allan Powell, The HarperCollins Bible Dictionary (Revised and Updated) (New York: HarperCollins, 2011), 378.
Nathan P. Feldmeth, Pocket Dictionary of Church History (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2008), 120.
John Peter Lange and Philip Schaff, A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: John (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008), 564.
Bibliography
Feldmeth, Nathan P. Pocket Dictionary of Church History. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2008. Garcia-Treto, Francisco O. Herod, The HarperCollins Bible Dictionary. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2008. Lange, John Peter, Phillip Schaff, G.F.C. Fronmüller, and J. Isidor Mombert. A Commentary of the Holy Scriptures: John. Bellingham: Logos Bible Software, 2008. Walter A. Elwell, Barry J. Beitzel. Praetorium, Praetorian Guard. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988.
This summary concerns this week’s reading between both texts ‘One Perfect Life, The Complete Story of the Lord Jesus’ (MacArthur), and ‘The Earthly Career of Jesus, the Christ, A Life in Chronological, Geographical and Social Context (Culver).’ As with this written summary, the prior material I wrote during this course culminates into a final project around the ultimate kingship and supremacy of Christ. The spiritual and messianic royalty of Christ as a spiritual reality to reclaim mankind for the Kingdom Jesus frequently articulated in this week’s reading. The “Kingdom of God” was upon humanity within Israel as prophesied centuries before.
In preparation for this post, I rewrote by hand the given content outlines of both books to bring together a coherent synopsis of this week’s reading. Just like last week to reinforce what both texts cover and speak about concerning Jesus’ work and life. This time, most significantly, was during a specific period that covers His time in Northern Israel around Galilee’s towns. Moreover, to prepare this week’s reading summary, I specifically concentrated on the early history of Jesus including the Galilean period of His life and ministry. As a comparison of both outlines between each text, my observations attempt to cover what was presented to get at what Jesus said and accomplished.
Within the Culver text, the author writes about the interval of ministry between the opening and completion of Jesus’ efforts within the Galilee region in Northern Israel. As organized as a written walkthrough, the author establishes that Jesus worked from a centralized location of his ministry and extended His work through time and throughout the region to His sermon on the mount. In so doing, Jesus gathered to Himself men who would become leaders to inaugurate the apostolic age. The Apostolate became formed through teaching and anointing from God through Christ to originate the Church and form the Kingdom of God on Earth.
The work of the ministry of Jesus and His apostles did not come without controversy and confrontation. With the Jewish leadership in opposition to Jesus, numerous recounted miracles, signs, wonders, messages, assertions, and teachings demonstrated a conflict between them and what He claimed. Even further, a growing rejection of Jesus from among townspeople developed due to conflicts of interest. They were especially concerning the Gentiles’ given place within the emergent Kingdom of God and what Jesus spoke about in terms of His flesh and blood as the bread of life for everyone who would believe in Him (John 6:29). To further illustrate the conflict Jesus faced, the synagogue leaders of Capernaum had objections to Jesus’ claim that the prophecy of Isaiah was fulfilled in their hearing (Luke 4:16-23).
In between the opening and closure of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee, He performed numerous astonishing miracles. Undeniable was His impact upon the people of the region and everywhere else among adjacent territories. Through His persistent efforts, He revealed to people His identity as their messiah—a savior from sin made possible through belief as a work of God. A redemption made effective for those who would believe in Him. As Jesus performed miracles, gained a reputation, taught wisdom, and proved his claims, people would place their trust in Him. To each person, Jew and Gentile, the Holy Spirit’s work produced regeneration to cement a permanently restored fellowship before God.
This was the growing Kingdom of God, as people believed in Christ by what He said and accomplished in the area. Many people were led to saving faith, and Jesus’ continued visits to towns in the Galilean area proved fruitful despite the continued opposition and hostilities.
Throughout the MacArthur text, the explicit interwoven scripture references give numerous accounts where Jesus feeds thousands, heals ailments, cures disease, casts out demons, heals the blind, makes the lame walk, walks on water, and speaks numerous parables to those who could hear. Event after event, in action, and by words of the incarnate God, Jesus demonstrates the presence of the Kingdom of God upon people of many types and various locales. To give a reason for the belief that many would come to recognize and accept Him as the Source of eternal life, He performed many supernatural wonders.
From Passover AD 29 to Passover AD 30
Jesus Feeds the 5,000
Jesus Walks on Water
Jesus is the Bread of Life
Reaction to Jesus’ Claim to Be the Bread of Life
Jesus Confronts the Traditions of Men
Jesus Ministers to a Syro-Phoenician Woman
Jesus Heals in Decapolis
Jesus Feeds 4,000 in Decapolis
The Leaven of the Pharisees
Jesus Heals a Blind Man
Peter Identifies Jesus as the Messiah
Jesus Foretells His Future Suffering and Glory
Jesus Is Gloriously Transfigured
Jesus Heals a Demon-Possessed Boy
Jesus Predicts His Resurrection a Second Time
Jesus Pays the Temple Tax
Jesus Confronts the Disciples’ Rivalry
Jesus Warns Against Stumbling Blocks
Jesus Teaches About Forgiveness
Jesus Is Ridiculed by His Half-Brothers
Jesus Journeys to Jerusalem
Jesus Teaches at the Feast of Tabernacles
The Jewish Leaders Try to Arrest Jesus
Jesus Forgives an Adulterous Woman
Jesus Is the Light of the World
Jesus’ Relationship to Abraham
Jesus Commissions the Seventy
The Seventy Return
The Story About a Good Samaritan
Jesus Visits Mary and Martha
Jesus Teaches About Prayer
The Pharisees Again Make Blasphemous Claims
Jesus Warns the Scribes and Pharisees
Jesus Warns Against Hypocrisy
Jesus Teaches About True Wealth
Warning to Be Ready for the Master’s Return
It is notable that through the various accounts of Jesus’ activity, there is a distinct absence of substantive transition between one event or activity and another. Each event is a freestanding occurrence of its own without an apparent reference back to what had occurred prior, where Jesus and His apostles might have called attention to His work in the past as specific recurring types of incidents that gave added weight to His authority, power, and identity.
As intertextually presented by MacArthur, the passages of Scripture account for what Jesus did, where He went, and what He taught. To give an organized rationale for message segmentation and recount what occurred to achieve or produce belief among people to develop God’s Kingdom—made apparent piece by piece to present discrete stories that together inform by staccato (not by legato) a message of supreme necessity. That, per se, this is about the life of Christ, His accomplishments, identity, and teaching, and more explicitly concerning the Kingdom of God as one synergistic and integrated whole around Christ’s body of work in Galilee and beyond.
The differences between content and substance in my reading this week and going forward appear to rest on the character, ministry, and activity of the “Son of God” within One Perfect Life, The Complete Story of the Lord Jesus (MacArthur), and the “Son of Man” within The Earthly Career of Jesus, the Christ, A Life in Chronological, Geographical and Social Context (Culver). While there is a significant degree of material overlap between both authors of these books, the beginning and continuing work of Christ and His ministry speaks to His dual nature as both man and God. The emergence and ongoing work of Christ as cast among both books separate around emphasis and highlighted events in history to convey the two distinct natures of Jesus. Both books indirectly draw our attention to the hypostatic union of Christ. That is, at the onset and continuing reach and effect of His ministry, the differences, commonality, and overlap between His divinity and humanity emerge as separately prominent.
Scripture passages assembled in One Perfect Life to guide the reader through Jesus’ ministry between Passover AD 27 and Passover AD 29 provide substantive depth about His supernatural work. The terms “Heals,” “Raises,” “Appoints,” “Calls,” “Explains,” “Cleanses,” “Casts Out” are repeatedly given across numerous historically recorded accounts to demonstrate Christ’s power and authority. More specifically, with God incarnated in Christ, the range and scope of His supernatural work in the lives of people demonstrated that He was who He claimed. To give cause for belief, to inform allies and adversaries alike, and to bring about the work of the Holy Spirit through the belief of God’s elect. To cause spiritual rebirth among those who witness His work and recognize His identity for belief was an effort of divine origin. As He continued healing people, He also raised the dead, removed demons who inhabited people, and calmed the weather. His ongoing coordination with the Holy Spirit in this way altogether performed the work of the triune God to build His Kingdom on Earth as intended many centuries before. People were brought to a path of reconciliation to YHWH through Christ, the Son of God.
In contrast, Culver concentrates on natural events, travels, conversations, teachings, and exhortations of Christ during His early ministry. Of secondary interest and exploration are the supernatural details of Christ’s work. The meta details concerning His Earthly work as a humanity member are highlighted to give a clearer sense and confidence about His natural relatability as Messiah. During the times of trials, hardships, and charged emotions among people at the temple during its cleansing, His conversation with Nicodemus, and confrontations with the Jewish authorities at His home region in Galilee. The upended social and religious conditions were fraught with opposing pressures during the emergence of Jesus’ public ministry.
We are presented with numerous facts and speculations around Jesus’s forming reputation, public life, and notoriety through the narrated gospels. Only these were details about what He did, what He taught, and how He reacted to various circumstances. These were all facts about Him yet not of him or within him to zero in on more closely who He was a man. To communicate His profession and conduct by what He did, we can come to know who he was in a limited way. As compared to preferences, tastes, mannerisms, sense of humor, favored senses, and so forth, that point to the unique person of Jesus as the Son of Man in a more intimate way. Not just by what He did as a man, but by what He was like in essence as well.
Definitions & References
Hypostatic union used in Christological discussions to refer to Christ’s being one hypostasis or person who subsists in two natures. The two natures in Christ are thus naturally united in his person, somewhat analogous to the union of body and soul in an individual human being. This is contrasted with a conjunction or cooperative union of two persons, such as the indwelling of the Logos in the man Jesus, as in Nestorianism.
William Greenough Thayer Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, ed. Alan W. Gomes, 3rd ed. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Pub., 2003), 956.
Hypostasis is a Greek noun first used by Eastern theologians in the early centuries of church history to refer to the three persons of the Trinity. The Cappadocian fathers, Basil in particular, argued that God is three hypostaseis in one ousia (“essence,” or “substance”). Although helpful, the term also led to confusion. Western theologians described God as one *substantia in three personae, with confusion arising out of the fact that substantia was the Latin equivalent to hypostasis. Technically, hypostasis refers to each of the three concrete and distinct trinitarian persons who share a single divine nature or essence. The hypostatic union, in contrast, is an important christological designation. At the Council of Chalcedon in A.D. 451 the church declared the doctrine of the hypostatic union. The doctrine is an attempt to describe the miraculous bringing together of humanity and divinity in the same person, Jesus Christ, such that he is both fully divine and fully human.
Stanley Grenz, David Guretzki, and Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 61–62.
The phrase “son of man” is found 93 times in Ezekiel and refers to the prophet’s humanity (e.g., Ezek 2:1; 3:1; 4:1; 5:1; 6:2; 7:2). Poetic parallelisms in the Old Testament also use “son of man” in this sense, always in the second half of the parallelism (Num 23:19; Job 16:21; 25:6; 35:8; Pss 8:4; 80:17; 146:3; Isa 51:12; 56:2; Jer 49:18, 33; 50:40; 51:43). A divine, apocalyptic figure known as “The Son of Man” appears in 1 Enoch and 4 Ezra. This figure seems to have influenced Jewish expectations of the Messiah before the time of Christ. Because of the uncertain dating of these Jewish texts, scholars have also drawn on linguistic research to help explain the origin and meaning of the phrase. This line of inquiry focuses on the translation of the original Aramaic phrase כִּבַר אֱנָשׁ (kivar enash, “one like a son of man”)—including the Greek equivalent found in the Gospels (ὁ ὑιὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, ho huios tou anthrōpou)—and its meaning in the context of Dan 7:13–14.
Leslie T. Hardin and Derek Brown, “Son of Man,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
Jesus’ Use of “Son of Man”
Jesus’ use of “Son of Man” language in the New Testament Gospels draw on Jewish traditions regarding the phrase found in both the Old Testament and apocalyptic literature. In particular, Jesus’ “Son of Man” sayings reflect the connection between the themes of suffering, enthronement, and authority that appear in the narrative of Daniel’s vision. There are four general ways in which Jesus uses “Son of Man” language in the New Testament Gospels: 1) to refer to Himself; 2) to describe His authority and earthly ministry; 3) to anticipate His suffering and death; and 4) to anticipate His future exaltation and glory.
Leslie T. Hardin and Derek Brown, “Son of Man,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
