A “Difficult Text”
December 4th, 2006 by JohnO
Sean and I were talking, and he was remarking about Bart Ehrman, and other liberal scholars. He was saying that it annoys him how they ‘skirt’ the verses that oppose their viewpoint by undermining their authority by declaring them ‘un-historical’ or ‘un-authentic’. In some cases they absolutely do wield circular reasoning, something like; “This is invalid because it disagrees with my point, and my point is right!”. And he said one of the verses they do this with is Luke 17. And I said I think I have a pretty good defense, so he asked me to post it! And that is how we got here!
Now having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, He answered them and said, “The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; nor will they say, ‘Look, here {it is!}’ or, ‘There {it is!}’ For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst.” And He said to the disciples, “The days will come when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it. They will say to you, ‘Look there! Look here!’ Do not go away, and do not run after {them.} For just like the lightning, when it flashes out of one part of the sky, shines to the other part of the sky, so will the Son of Man be in His day.
Luke 17:20-24
We could continue quoting Jesus until the end of the chapter – it is a continuation. The context is important to realize here. If we take Jesus’ words to the Pharisees out of context from his words to the disciples on the same matter we will absolutely not understand him (which, ironically, is what most other Christian denominations do with this verse). What he says to the disciples sounds exactly like what he tells them in Luke 21, or the parallels Matthew 24 and Mark 13. So then, is Jesus contradicting himself when he speaks to the Pharisees? He couldn’t be.
For those reading KJV, or NIV the verse reads “within you” – which is incorrect and misleading (for a technical insight click here, and another here in footnote 2). More modern versions like the NASB, NET, NLT and NAB have the correct meaning “among you”, or “in your midst”.
Jesus’ first statement is that the Kingdom does not come with observation. Yet in the continuing discussion with the Disciples afterward he explains it more fully. “Just as it happened in the days of Noah” (v26), “just like the lightning” (v23) – this is how Jesus describes the coming Kingdom. One will not watch the Kingdom come, it will suddenly be there when the Son of Man is revealed from heaven! Of course there will be signs preceding the coming of the Son of Man – but Jesus in typical fashion throws his enemies a parable/riddle.
On to what we consider a “difficult text”, the end of verse 21: “For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst”. The answer to this again lies in the context. Jesus is quoting someone who is speaking in the future ["will say"] that when the Kingdom comes “they” won’t say these things. The two things “they” won’t say are: “Look here!” or “Look [pointing at a place] there!”. They won’t point to a place because the Kingdom will be from sea to sea over the entire world. And that answers the second one that it will be in your midst, or among you. The Kingdom will be around you – you will be engulfed by the Kingdom when it comes. There is no escaping it, you cannot run from it, you cannot hide from it.
I have often thought that it was interesting that he was speaking to the Pharisees when he quotes this. As you mentioned above, directly after he tells them that the coming of the kingdom will not outwardly seen by signs, etc. but in you/among you/in your midst, he says that it would be very clear when it is here The difference here is to whom he is speaking. To the Pharisees he says they won’t be able to see it, to the disciples he says that they would (and we know in other sections he specifically tells his disciples what to look for).
Perhaps the difference is that for the disciples the outward, phyiscal Kingdom signs would be seen before it was fully here because they had the inward kingdom part down (Jesus was ruling their life now, etc). (side note – just to let you know, I am of the perspective that the kingdom is “near, not here.” The church is not the kingdom, etc). But the Pharisees didn’t even have that part down. How were they going to see the literal Kingdom coming and come if they didn’t have the King as their master now?
This may be a stretch…but I think the audience and the bigger issue is being spoken of – unless you have Jesus as Lord now, you won’t serve with him when he is Lord of lords.
Vic,
I’m not sure what you’re saying exactly? Because the disciples are faithful, they will see the kingdom coming? But because the Pharisees aren’t faithful they won’t?
I think these verses actually speak against the “growing”, “enlarging”, “evolving” concept of the Kingdom that so many Christians seem to embrace. I think the coming of the Kingdom will be very sudden for all – not just non-Christians. Like in the days Noah, etc… It was sudden for Noah too. “In an hour when you least expect”…
Do you think Noah was more aware of it’s coming than his neighbors and other inhabitants of the earth? I would say so. And why was that? Because he had inside info that something was coming….same with the disciples vs Pharisees.
Absolutely – but like us, Noah didn’t know when until God said “Noah, get in and shut the door”.
And Christians since the day of Christ have each expected the coming of Jesus in their lifetime since he left. Of course we recognize the signs of the times – but we still won’t see it coming until it is here.
Of course….but what about the non-Christian? For them it will be even more of a surprise…they won’t see it at all
Excellent discussion, gentlemen. May I take a stab?
Fact 1: we know the kingdom is a literal government established by Jesus at his return and headquartered in Jerusalem {Ps 2.6-8; 110.1-7; Dan 2.44; 7.13-14, 18, 22, 27; Is 2.1-4; 9.7; 11.1-16; Mat 25.31-32; 1 Cor 6.2; Rev 11.15; etc.}
Fact 2: we know that the kingdom is to come suddenly like the flood of Noah or like the destruction of Sodom {Luke 17.26-31}
Fact 3: we know that the world will be clueless as it was in the time of Noah {Mat 24.39}
The two questions to be answered are: (1) What does Jesus mean when he says, “the kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed?” (2) What does he mean when he says, “The kingdom of God is in your midst?”
Many (most) Christians take these statements as a redefinition of the kingdom by Jesus from an “earthly/Jewish” nature to a “spiritual/Christian” nature. In fact, this one paragraph (Luke 17.20-21) is the main prooftext used to disprove the kingdom hope spoken of so clearly in the Hebrew Scriptures. There must be a better explanation.
(1) I think Victor is on to something in regards to the kingdom not coming with observation for the Pharisees but, it would be observable by the disciples. However, as appealing as this explanation is, it does not fit the words Jesus spoke. He did not say “for you the kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed,” instead he said, “the kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed.” Thus, it is not a Pharisee-specific comment, rather it is a categorical statement. And the statement cannot mean “the kingdom will not have signs to indicate its coming” because Jesus clearly lays out the signs of its coming in Luke 21 [i.e. "when you see these things happening (wars, earthquakes, plagues, famines, signs in heaven, persecution, Jerusalem surrounded by armies, powers of the heavens shaken, etc.) know that the kingdom of God is near" Luke 21.31]. Thus, we are left with John’s original explanation, “One will not watch the Kingdom come, it will suddenly be there when the Son of Man is revealed from heaven!” In other words, the kingdom does not grow, there is not a continuing improvement of the conditions of the earth until paradise is reached, rather it will be sudden. We cannot grow or build the kingdom of God today. We grow, and our belief/obedience grows but we are not the kingdom, we are the people of the kingdom.
(2) The phrase “Jesus ruling in my heart” is unbiblical, although true. We cannot assume that this is the meaning of the phrase, “the kingdom of God is in your midst.” First of all, the word “your” is plural while “the kingdom of God” is singular. We are talking about one thing in the midst of a number of people, not an individualized concept of Jesus reigning to different degrees in the hearts of different people. This is simply not implied here. Also, the statement “the kingdom of God is in your midst” is connected to and contrasted with the previous statement, “nor will they say, ‘Look, here’ or, ‘There.’ ” Thus it is not in a locality, but like the stone cut out without hands that became a mountain and filled the whole earth {Dan 2.35, 44} it will be everywhere. Infact the kingdom of this world (presumably the united world government under the anti-christ) will become the kingdom of our God and of His Messiah {Rev 11.15}.
What do you think?
I didn’t want to comment specifically on negative definitions (i.e. what it *does not* mean) but you’ve done that quite well in your second (2) point.
I see your point about Jesus not saying “the kingdom is not coming for you with outward signs, etc…
But at the same time, perhaps Jesus speaking directly to both groups and saying specific things might give us enough evidence to say perhaps Jesus was making a statement (although seemingly general) that was specific to the group he was addressing.
maybe…
John
Just a quick point that’s nothing to do with this discussion…
I’m picking up on your opening statements about Ehrman. Specifically his assertion that certain ‘strata’ of the gospels are less authentic or historical.
I’ve just got through reading a fascinating book called ‘the Jesus papyrus’. It goes into depth explaning that there are at least 2 extant manuscript fragments which date back to before AD 68.
The first, 7Q5, is from Mark and was found at Qumran (Hence the indisputable pre-68 date). This is a fragment, not of a saying of Jesus, but of a narrative section of the gospel. This does away with the theory that various collections of Jesus’ sayings floated around before being compiled into a coherent story much, much later.
The second is from Matthew and makes his gospel more or less contemporary with Mark’s- both being well within the lifetimes of the eyewitnesses of Jesus ministry and resurrection. Just these facts combined, if correct, do away with the so-called Q source theory from which Ehrman’s ‘strata’ are drawn.
It would mean that both these gospels including all the events and the sayings they record were written by eyewitnesses and not compiled by communities based upon second hand information.
As such they undermine the efforts of many scholars today such as Ehrman and the ‘Jesus seminar’ to try and play one of Jesus’ saying off against the other. Instead they vindicate articles such as this one, based as it is upon the conviction that his message harmonises with itself.
Alex
guys,
how would you interpret the following “difficult texts”
“Destroy this temple, and in three days a I will raise it up”…he was speaking about the temple of his body…I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down a of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again…” John 2:19, 21; 10.17-18
some believe that the ‘divine nature of Christ’ was active in his resurrection. That’s why he was able to “take up” his life again.
Others that Jesus himself would have a part in raising himself from the dead, though other verses mention that the Father and the Holy Spirit were also involved (cp. Acts 2:24; Rom. 6:4; 1 Cor. 6:14; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:20; cf. Rom. 1:4; 8:11).
What say ‘yous’?
Mark Clarke wrote a post on this verse. Click here
“The active verb egero in 2.19 (“I will raise it up”) indicates that the protagonist [Jesus] has the power of resurrection and that accordingly he himself is the source of life. Death cannot hold the giver of life. Jesus, the source of life, raises himself from the dead. His resurrection power does not depend on outside power [cp. 1,4, "in him was life"]…
Moreover, the narrator speaks also of the resurrection of Jesus as the work of God by using the passive verb egerthe (“he was raised”) in 2.22. Jesus not only raises himself but also is raised by God from the dead. Thus the resurrection of Jesus is the manifestation of the power of both Jesus and God.”
New currents through John: a global perspective By Francisco Lozada, Tom Thatcher, p130