I CORINTHIANS 15:35-58 -- THE RESURRECTION

In this epistle, Paul deals with a number of specific questions with which the church there was wrestling. Padilla explains, “The Corinthians had developed problematic thinking about this gospel, which they had previously received as a word of salvation. In chapters 1-4, Paul corrected their view of the crucifixion of Jesus. And in chapter 15, he corrected their view of his resurrection. First, some were making the claim that resurrection was not possible (15:12-19). Paul contradicted this claim by reminding them that Christ himself had been raised from the dead! This was what the Scripture had promised and what the apostles (Paul included) and many others had witnessed.”

Thus, the first 34 verses of the chapter deal with the reality of the resurrection. But there was a second, related issue to deal with – the exact nature of a believer's resurrected body. It is this issue which forms the background for the second half of I Corinthians 15. We might have expected Paul to have based this discussion on the nature of Jesus' resurrected body, but there is perhaps a good reason why he didn't. It is the same reason why it is naïve to think that we can simply model our earthly life on Jesus' earthly life and constantly ask ourselves, “What would Jesus do?” We can't, and shouldn't ask that question since we do not have the same divine nature He did even while on earth. Without His divine power and omniscience, we are bound to fail in our attempt to copy Jesus. However, the above is certainly not to deny that there is a sort of identification between the believer and Jesus.

“A leading motif [in the Epistles] is the linking of the believer' experience with Christ's resurrection, which is viewed as the model and source of the believer's future resurrection from the dead...In a sense baptism becomes the prime epistolary image for the believer's link with Christ, with imagery of dying with Christ and rising with him linked with the physical act of baptism.” (Dictionary of Biblical Imagery)

I can sympathize with Paul at this point since this whole theological subject is somewhat of a mystery to all of us believers. That no doubt includes Paul himself even if he was granted unique access to certain wonders in heaven. In attempting to explain the nature of the resurrected body, Paul falls back on a series of comparisons with earthly phenomena to which his audience can relate.

“Paul is in no mood for foolish questions, yet...he turns them to the world in which they live, to things that they can see and understand.” (Marsh)

I Corinthians 15:35-38 – First he compares the resurrected body to the growth of a seed into a plant.

“To help the Corinthians overcome their unbelief, Paul gave them an analogy: When seed goes into the ground, it looks like one thing. Then, after going through putrefaction, it comes out looking different. It is a different body. In a similar way, Paul said, the human body goes through corruption and putrefaction but then – by the power of God – is raised in a new material, glorious body of a nature we do not understand.” (Padilla)

That concept should be even easier for us to understand today since we know that the DNA of the seed carries through to that of the plant. We thus see both a continuity and a differentiation between our old existence and our resurrected one. The Christian view of the afterlife is totally different from teachings in Eastern religions where after death a person is either melded together with all others into a mega-soul or is reborn as an entirely different earthly creation with nothing at all in common with its previous existence.

As Marsh says, “while in appearance different, it is in essence the same, for wheat yields wheat – to each kind of seed he gives its own body – suggesting continuity of essential character or identity.”

Regarding the phrase “God gives” in v. 38, Hillyer says, “The new life is not automatic but dependent upon the predetermined will and the creative act of God.”

I Corinthians 15:39 – This is followed by a look at the animal kingdom with its myriad of different living creatures.

Fee points out in respect to the four kinds of animal life mentioned in this verse: “These are the four specifically mentioned, in reverse order, as being created on the fifth and sixth days of creation.” This practice of quoting earlier passages in reverse order is actually quite common throughout the biblical writings.

I Corinthians 15:40-41 – Next comes a consideration of the skies where he differentiates between the heavenly bodies and earthly ones.

Lowery points to “Dan 12:3 where resurrected saints were compared to stars; also Matt. 13:43.”

There is a sort of symmetry to verses 39-41 as can be seen in Figure I, adapted from Gordon Fee's analysis:

                                             Figure 1: Structure of I Corinthians 15:39-41

    A. Not all earthly bodies are the same (39a)

            B. People have one kind (39b)

                Animals another (39c)

                Birds another (39d)

                Fish another (39e)

                        C. There are heavenly bodies (40a)

                                D. There are earthly bodies (40b)

                        C'. Heavenly bodies have one kind of glory (40c)

                                D'. Earthly bodies have another kind of glory (40d)

            B'. The sun has one kind of glory (41a)

                 The moon has another kind of glory (41b)

                 The stars have another kind of glory (41c)

    A'. Not all stars are the same (41d)

Paul's argument so far might be summarized as Marsh puts it: “If therefore in the present universe these personal characteristics are evident within the various categories of creation, God is well able at Christ's coming to invest each individual believer with a new resurrection body which will be in perfect harmony with his own essential being.”

And Fee adds that “the long debate over whether the stress lies on continuity or discontinuity is a bit misguided. Paul's concern obviously lies with both.”

I Corinthians 15:42-44 – In these verses Paul revisits the seed analogy.

“Paul...summarizes this discussion with two adjectives which are difficult to translate concisely and have often been misunderstood (v. 42). The contrast is not between physical/material and disembodied/ immaterial, but between different bodies, the present one psychikon, i.e. animated by soul, the future one pneumatikon, i.e. animated by spirit.” (P.S. Johnston)

“In 15:44a Paul introduces the principle that 'an opposite presupposes its counterpart: If there is a natural body, then there is also a spiritual one.” (Ciampa and Rosner)

I Corinthians 15:45-49 – The argument here centers on a contrast between the first Adam (the man of dust) and the last Adam (the man of heaven). Their respective origins are going to also be their final destinations.

Horsley “suggests that he is borrowing and reversing a Corinthian interpretation of Gen. 1.26-27 as the origin of the prototype (or perhaps 'image') of the 'spiritual' person and Gen. 2.7 as the origin of the 'physical / soul-like' person.”

“Paul picks up on the Adam-Christ analogy from vv. 21-22. Just as believers have shared the earthly body of the first man, so also will they bear the heavenly body of the second man. This of course is the key to everything.” (Fee)

I Corinthians 15:50-58 – The end of the chapter concludes with a description of the time of the Second Coming when the perishable bodies of those alive at the time will be instantly transformed into imperishable ones.

Lowery says concerning v. 58, “Paul's doctrinal declarations led to practical directives and his chapter's conclusion was no exception. The Corinthians were urged to stand firm in the apostle's teaching (v. 2) unmoved by the denials of false teachers (cf. Eph. 4:14). This certainty, especially concerning the Resurrection, provided an impetus to faithful service (cf. 1 Cor. 3:8; Gal. 6:9), since labor in the resurrected Lord is not futile (kenos, 'empty'; cf. 1 Cor. 15:10,14,17,30-32).”

THE RAISING OF LAZARUS (JOHN 11:38-44)

 

                              “Never Too Late” (collage, 2009)

I have already written two posts on this subject: “Martha: Part 2 (John 11)” and “Jesus Wept.” But I would like to concentrate on the last part of this resurrection story, utilizing only articles in the very helpful IVP compendium Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (J.B Green, J.K. Brown, and N. Perrin, ed.).

John 11:38

Bauckman points to John 11:3,33,38 and 12:27 as places where we can clearly see Jesus' human emotions coming to the forefront.

John 11:39

“In John 11, the editorial comment in John 11:2 provides us with a clear Christian use of ho kyrios ['the Lord']. Also, Martha's address to Jesus in John 11:27, uttered together with a christological confession, is probably more than a respectful way of addressing her teacher, but the other uses of kyrie in the chapter (Jn 11:3,12,21,32,34,39) could be rendered as 'sir.' But even here ambiguity remains...”

(Witherington III)

“Prior to burial in a rock-cut tomb, the body was washed and then wrapped in a cloth shroud (e.g. Jn 11:44), though the decay of such clothes makes it a rare archeological discovery. Mourners applied ointments and aromatic spices to the corpse, not as a preservative (the body was expected to decay within a year for possible reburial), but in order to reduce the unpleasant small in the tomb [see the comment by Martha in this verse].” (Chapman)

John 11:40

K.L. Anderson: “As the last of the seven authenticating miracles or 'signs,' it points to the climax of divine revelation in Christ and reveals God's glory (Jn 11:4,40; cf. Jn 1:14). It demonstrates that Christ is the one who gives eternal life (Jn 11:25; cf. Jn 5:25).”

Dennis: “'Glory' is used more often in John's Gospel (noun 19x, verb 23x) than in any of the Synoptic Gospels, indicating that the concept is of particular importance for Johannine Christology. John carries over the basic uses of 'glory' in the Old Testament and the Synoptics, such as glory as social praise, honor, approval and reputation (Jn 5:44; 7:18; 8:50; 12:43), and glory as the radiant presence of God (Jn 11:4,40; 17:5)...In John's Gospel....Christ's glory is exclusively a present reality in that John insists that the divine glory is present in Jesus' incarnation, ministry and death.”

Twelftree: “In using 'sign' for the miracle, John is saying that, like the parables of the Synoptic Gospels, the miracles point beyond the immediate to the identity or glory of Jesus and his filial relationship, even identity, with the Father...the reader is alerted to the glory of Jesus being seen not only in the story of Jesus' death, but also in the signs [such as John 11:40]. As in the Synoptics, the miracles are realizations of God's present reign...Even in the most spectacular miracle – the raising of a dead man – Jesus is still a human who weeps (Jn 11:35), for he is 'the Word become flesh' (Jn 1:14).”

“The statements [in John] related to the sending of Jesus focus on his obedience to and dependence on the Father. Jesus as the one sent is to bring glory and honor to the one who has sent him (Jn 7:18; 8:50,54; 11:4,40).” And that involves doing His works and speaking His words. (Schnabel)

Parenthetically, it should be noted that the ubiquitous number “seven” in John's writings appears here in that the 42 references to “glory” is the product of 6 and 7. Also, this verse with the parallel expression in verse 4 serves as an inclusio to bracket the whole resurrection story:

“This illness does not lead to death; rather it is for God's glory, so that the Son of God may be glorified through it.” (John 11:4)

“Did I not tell you that if you believed, you would see the glory of God?” (John 11:40)

John 11:41

M.M. Thompson notes, “Although not appearing as a character in the narrative [i.e. John's Gospel], the Father nevertheless remains active.” Among the many examples he cites is v. 41 in which He hears the Son.

John 11:41,43

Wahlen tabulates the various healings in this gospel, including the three occasions in which Jesus raises the dead: Jairus's daughter, the widow's son at Nain, and Lazarus. The first two examples involve Jesus commanding the dead to rise as well as Him touching them. Only in the case of Lazarus is the raising accomplished without touch, but it was accompanied by a prior prayer to God, unlike the other two times. Jesus' miracles can't be reduced to a simple formula.

John 11:41-44

Crump: “The resurrection of Lazarus (Jn 11:1-44) serves to demonstrate that Jesus' petitions are always answered positively (Jn 11:21-22; 41-44) because he only asks according to God's will, which means that he always prays 'in the name of the Father.'”

John 11:42,44

“As in the Synoptics, Jerusalem divides in response to Jesus. Some believe (Jn 2:23; 7:40-41; 8:31; 9:36-38; 11:45; 12:11), even among the authorities (Jn 11:42; 19:38-39), although their faith can be of the wrong kind (Jn 2:24; 8:31-59), insufficient (Jn 7:40-41) or fickle (Jn 11:45; 12:11).” (Walton)

“Signs often lead to faith in this Gospel [as in John 11:15,42]. But while faith in response to signs is better than no faith..., it must mature, if given time or testing, to full faith...Genuine, saving faith must both recognize Jesus' divine identity (Jn 20:28-31) and persevere to the end (Jn 8:30-32).” (Keener)

John 11:44

“The miracle also foreshadows Jesus' own death and resurrection. The description of Lazarus' tomb and grave clothes (Jn 11:38-39,44) parallels the details concerning Jesus' burial and empty tomb (Jn 19:40; 20:7). However, Lazarus came out of the tomb still bound in wrappings; the resurrected Jesus left his wrappings in the tomb, neatly folded.” (Anderson)

"KEEP THE FAITH" (II TIMOTHY 4:7)

 When I was living in upstate New York there was a devout Catholic coworker of mine who would always tell me “Keep the faith” every time we parted. I just realized that I had never looked through the Bible to see if that phrase actually occurred there and if so, what meaning it had.

Word Definitions

Faith: Consulting an exhaustive concordance, one can easily see that “faith” appears only rarely in the Old Testament. As for its meaning in the New Testament, the most common Greek word translated in that way is the noun pistis (or its corresponding verb pisteuo). Vine says this concerning pistis: “primarily, firm persuasion, a conviction based upon hearing..., is used in the N.T. always of faith in God or Christ, or things spiritual.” Then, most importantly, Vine outlines the three elements that are encompassed by pistis: “(1) a firm conviction, producing a full acknowledgment of God's revelation or truth, e.g., 2 Thess. 2:11,12; (2) a personal surrender to Him, John 1:12; (3) a conduct inspired by such surrender, 2 Cor. 5:7. Prominence is given to one or another of these elements according to the context. All this stands in contrast to belief in its purely natural exercise, which consists of an opinion held in good faith without necessary reference to its proof.”

Note that Vine's definition includes not only an internal mindset but also the practical outworking of that mindset in our lives. In this manner, we can see that there is really no contradiction between the writings of James and Paul on the subject of faith.

Michel adds, “'Repentance from dead works' and 'faith in God' were important elements in the teaching of the primitive Christian catechism (Heb. 6:1). More important is the pointed use of pistis in the context of Pauline theology to denote the reception of Christian proclamation and the saving faith which was called forth by the gospel (Rom. 1:8; 1 Thess. 1:8). For Paul pistis is indissolubly bound with proclamation. Early Christian missionary preaching thus brought faith into sharp focus.”

Keep: Then we come to the verb “keep,” which translates several Hebrew and Greek words. In the OT there are three main words which convey this basic meaning. Natsar means to watch or reserve and appears often in the Wisdom Literature; asah denotes doing or performing and often refers to ceremonies and holy days; and the most common word shamar has the basic meaning of “observe, take heed.” In the NT, the verbs tereo (keep, watch, observe) and katecho (take, possess, retain, hold fast) are the most commonly employed terms. It is from that latter Greek word that we get our English “catechism,” that which is to be held fast.

Old Testament Formulations

As far as I could determine, there is no exact appearance of the phrase “keep the faith” in the OT. But the general concept is certainly conveyed by some equivalent expressions. Below are just a few representative examples:

    Leviticus 18:5 – “You shall keep my statutes and my ordinances; by doing so one shall live: I am the LORD.” A promise from God is attached to this admonition.

    Deuteronomy 33:9b – Speaking of the Levites, Moses says, “They observed your word and kept your covenant.” The covenant included the idea of a close relationship between God and the Israelites as a whole as well as each individual.

    Psalm 78:7 – The Psalmist says God taught the Israelites, “so that they should set their hope in God and not forget the works of God, but keep his commandments.” Here we have both positive and negative definitions of keeping the faith.

    Psalm 119 – If you want to see a complete compendium of synonyms for both “keep” and “faith” in an OT context, you cannot do better than read through this whole Psalm. Practically every verse expresses this concept in one way or another.

Of course, the epitome of keeping the faith in the OT is exemplified by observing the Ten Commandments. After a repetition of them in Deuteronomy 5, Moses says in Deuteronomy 6:5 – “Hear, O Israel: The LORD is our God, the LORD alone. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all our soul, and with all your might.” So in these two chapters we have all three aspects of the NT pistis laid out by Vine above. Such faith begins with recognition of God as the only source of truth, includes a personal commitment to Him and all He stands for, and culminates in appropriate actions on our part that are in line with His will.

New Testament Formulations

Here is a quick survey of some of the key NT passages expressing equivalents to “keep the faith,” beginning with statements coming from Jesus Himself:

    Matthew 19:17b – “If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” Apparently, the young man to whom this was addressed had actually kept all of the Ten Commandments. However, when Jesus then advised him to give all his possessions to the poor and follow Him, the man went away sorrowful.

    Luke 8:15 – In this conclusion to Jesus' parable of the soils, those seeds which were successful in growing and multiplying are said to be those who “when they hear the word, hold it fast in an honest and good heart, and bear fruit with patient endurance.” Thus, as James says, we need to be “doers of the word, not just hearers.”

    John 8:51-52 – In this passage, Jesus not only tells the critical Jews that “whoever keeps my word will never see death” but also proceeds to accuse them in vv. 54-55 of not knowing God. Thus, he reveals to them that they have not met the second of Vine's definitions for “faith,” having a personal relationship with Him.

    John 14-15 – Jesus reiterates his above accusation in 14:21 as well as summarizing much of the OT commandments under the category of love for one's fellow man and extends them by adding the command to keep his own words (see 14:15;23; 15:10;20).

    Acts 14:22 – As Paul and his companions return to cities they had already evangelized, Paul encourages the believers to “continue in the faith.” Obviously it is not just a once-only thing.

    I Corinthians 11:2 – This congregation is commended for maintaining “the traditions just as I handed them on to you.” Thus, to the OT faith in God and the keeping of Jesus' words, we are instructed to keep the words of those to whom Jesus entrusted the faith.

    I Corinthians 16:13 – And then toward the end of the letter Paul admonishes them to “Keep alert, stand firm in your faith, be courageous, be strong.”

    Colossians 1:23 – Paul tells the members of this congregation that they will be presented blameless before God “provided that you continue securely established and steadfast in the faith.”

    II Thessalonians 1:4 – And again in this verse, Paul stresses the necessity of remaining steadfast in the faith despite afflictions which they may undergo.

    I Timothy 6:13-14 – In an interesting variation on common OT teachings, Paul charges Timothy to “keep the commandment,” rather than the commandments.

    I John – This letter is known for its constant repetition of just a few key themes. Thus, it is no surprise that seven times John stresses the necessity of the believer to “keep” the word or commandments.

    Jude 3 – Even in this short letter, we find a variation on the same idea when the addressees are urged to “contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.”

    Revelation – And in this final book of the Bible we are instructed to keep the things written in the book (1:3; 22:7,9), the word (2:26; 3:8), and the commandments (12:17; 14:12) as another example of the number seven in John's writings.

II Timothy 4:7

Actually, it is only here in the Bible that we have the exact formulation we have been searching for. Paul says to Timothy, “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. But it turns out that this third metaphor can be understood in at least three different ways:

“I have kept faith”

This is the basic understanding of commentators such as Spicq and Brox. It is also indicated in translations such as NEB (“kept faith”), Phillips (“kept true to him”), and the alternative TEV translation of “been true to my promise.” That understanding, according to Hanson (who does not subscribe to it) indicates “perhaps keeping faith with God, Christ, his baptismal confession, or his commission as an apostle.” And D. Guthrie similarly rejects this idea, which “has been understood by some writers to refer to the athlete's promise to keep the rules, or to the military man's oath of fidelity (Calvin).”

Hendricksen: “Here as in I Tim. 6:12, the meaning is probably not, 'I have kept the pledge' (or 'fidelity') nor 'I have maintained the true doctrine' ('faith' in the objective sense), but, in harmony with the present context, 'I have retained my personal trust in God, my confidence in all his Christ-centered promises.'”

Lea echoes Hendricksen's understanding of Paul's assertion: “'To keep the faith' may have involved either maintaining the sound doctrine of Christianity intact or keeping a loyalty to the trust the Father had given him. In light of the fact that the phrase 'kept the faith' seems to be a fixed formula for maintaining a personal trust, the latter option seems more likely.”

“I have kept the faith”

Knight explains that 'the faith' may have been utilized by Paul “in a subjective or objective sense, i.e. whether he is saying that he has kept on believing or that he had preserved 'the faith' intact. He opts for the objective meaning, in concert with other teachings in the Pastoral Epistles [see some of them quoted above]...Further, since the other two verbs [in v. 7] emphasize perseverance it is likely that this nuance of ['kept] is intended here as well.”

Those who ascribe to this view generally treat “I have kept the faith” as a different type of metaphor than the first two in the verse. For example, Guthrie states that “since the apostle has urged his lieutenants many times to guard the deposit [i.e., body of apostolic teaching], it is possible that the same metaphor of a steward is in mind.” This is certainly the understanding of the next four scholars quoted:

Stibbs defines 'the faith' in this case to be “the gospel, or deposit of doctrine, entrusted to Paul. This he has successfully guarded (cf. 1:14).”

Nute feels that the statement “may well correspond to the earlier references to guarding the deposit (cf. 1 Tim. 6:20; 2 Tim. 1:12,14).”

Litfin says that the phrase “draws again on the image of faithfulness in one's stewardship of Christian faith (2 Tim. 1:14).”

Ward: “It seems to mean that the faith is intact in my hands. It has not been lost through carelessness, abandoned through frivolity, neglected through underestimation. The deposit has been guarded and is still safe.”

Both meanings are intended

Those reading the above comments may be understandably confused and wonder whether there is really that much difference between the objective and subjective interpretations. If so, then Towner's view may appeal to you more than either of the two above options.

“Within these letters to coworkers, the 'faith' word group is a dominant feature of the theological and ethical vocabulary, expressing ideas ranging from 'the faith' (noun) as the objective content of Christian belief, to the act of believing in God/Christ (verb), to 'faithfulness' (adj.; of believers), to trustworthiness (adj. of sayings; cf. 1 Tim 1:2)...This is a case where the ambiguity of the reference to 'keeping the faith' intentionally invites the wider rather than the narrower of possible meanings: if the widest meaning is intended (the loyalty of the apostle), it must incorporate the narrower specifics.”

FOUR NEW TESTAMENT EXORCISMS (MARK 1:21-28; 5:1-20; ACTS 16:16-18; 19:13-17)

“From the stories (e.g., Mk 1:21-28; 5:1-20; 7:24-30; 9:14-29) and the summaries, the most frequent type of Jesus' healings is exorcism, often listed separately (e.g., Mt 8:16-17 // Mk 1:32-34 // Lk 4:40-41; Mk 3:10-11 // Lk 6:17-18; Mt 10:1 // Lk 9:1).” (Bell) In addition, Jesus' disciples were given the same authority to cast out demons in His name. I would like to just zero in on the four incidents mentioned in the title above since they are narrated in more detail than the others.

As with the miracle stories in the Bible, the exorcisms cannot be subsumed under a simple literary formula as form-critics attempt to do. If there is such a thing as a standard format of an exorcism, it is said to consist of the following general elements:

1. The exorcist approaches the afflicted person.

In other words, the exorcist is supposed to be the one to make the first move in the process in order to take the initiative.

2. The source of the exorcist's power is recognized by the evil spirit.

There is some controversy among Bible scholars on this point, with some feeling that this is the opening move on the spirits' part since knowing an opponent's name is one means of gaining control over them. H. Anderson thus states that in the Mark 5 example, “the first play of the demon was to get the name of his opponent right in order thereby to disarm him of his power.”

Mann similarly says, “The question What is your name? is Jesus' acknowledgment of the ancient belief that knowledge of a name gave power over demons as well as enemies.”

Others just feel that it is a recognition on the spirits' part that they are up against a formidable foe.

3. The exorcist determines the spirit's name.

In the same manner, the exorcist must now even the playing field by learning the name of his opponent. Marcus says, “In magical contexts, knowing the name of a god or demon grants power over it.” Anderson echoes this belief: “Part of the strategy of the exorcist was to find out the demon's name in order to gain control over him. For the first narrators of this story [i.e. Mark 5] Legion may have been thought of as a boast of the demoniac whereby he unwittingly divulged his name, or as an evasion...For Mark, however, the question by Jesus and the immediate admission of the demon's name no doubt illustrate Jesus' amazing authority.”

4. The exorcist then pronounces the words, “I adjure you to come out.”

The actual wording here is felt by some to have been necessary to effect the exorcism. Marcus notes, “'To adjure' is standard exorcistic terminology.” Thus, Anderson's explanation of the Mark 5 exorcism goes on to say, “Failing in his attempt to overcome the exorcist, and apparently more than ever conscious of his mighty power, the demon then implores Jesus in strong language. “I adjure you by God, do not torment me...”

5. The spirit leaves and the afflicted party is healed.

In some cases such as in Acts 16, it is not said where the spirit ends up, but in others it appears that it must now inhabit another body. The “Legion” in Mark 5 do not want to end up in the abyss, and therefore they ask to be allowed to enter the swine instead. But in both cases, the possessed person is restored to his or her normal condition. As Neil says regarding Acts 16, “Paul's motive in exorcizing the evil spirit is attributed more to irritation than compassion. The effect is, however, to restore the girl to sanity.”

6. Awe and fear fills the on-lookers.

Ideally this leads to increased recognition of the power invoked by the exorcist. For example, in Mark 1 the result is that Jesus' fame begins to spread to others. In Mark 5, after the legion of spirits have drowned the swine they possessed, the observers are awestruck. “Some have speculated that their fear has to do with the economic loss Jesus' healing has brought about...But in the story it is the townspeople, not the herders, who ask Jesus to leave, and no hint is given that they are the owners of the pigs.” (Marcus)

If the above steps are said to represent the general rule for an exorcism, in the New Testament it appears to be a rule meant to be broken or subverted, as can be seen below:

    1. As to who is the party initiating the exorcism process, only in the last case of Acts 19 do the would-be exorcists do the initiating, and they are spectacularly unsuccessful in their results.

    2. The spirits in the first three stories all recognize the divine power at work in each case to be, respectively, the Holy One of God, Jesus Son of the Most High God, and slaves of the Most High God.

As Bruce puts it, “The superior authority which such spirits had recognized when Jesus Himself commanded them to leave their victims was equally recognized when His name was invoked by one of His apostles and proved as potent in exorcism as in other forms of healing.”

“As a term for God, 'Most High' has roots both in the OT...and in Greek religion...so that in our passages [in Mark 5] it is appropriately employed by a Gentile demoniac...A particularly close parallel to our passage is provided by Acts 16:17...These exorcistic usages of 'Most High' may reflect its employment in Psalm 91, a text that from its inception as used as a charm against evil spirits.” (Marcus) But if that is so, it is most odd that it would be the evil spirits themselves who use the term.

And one might think that these spirits were giving a powerful testimony of Jesus' identity before others and therefore should not have been silenced. “Yet Jesus exorcised them, and would not accept their testimony as legitimate preaching of the gospel (Mk. 1:34; 3:11,12), any more than Paul accepted the testimony of the spirit of divination...” (Wright)

    3. If determining the name of one's opponent is a crucial step in an exorcism, it is interesting that the only time that happens for the exorcist is in Mark 5, and in Acts 19 it is actually the fact that the spirit does not know the would-be exorcists' identity that allows him to conquer them.

    4. The next “necessary” step for a exorcist is to use precise language to drive out the demon. As mentioned above, the verb “adjure” (exhorkizo) is felt to be the correct word to use. However, as Link points out, that word only appears in the NT in Matthew 26:63 and Acts 19:13. In the first case, it is used by the high priest to try to get Jesus to say that He is the Messiah, and in the latter case it is totally ineffective when uttered by the seven sons of Sceva. The root Greek word horkizo also appears on the lips of the demoniac of Mark 4, but is never used by Jesus or his apostles. Actually, Marcus feels in that account “there is an element of deliberate parody in the demon's invocation of God and its use of exorcistic terminology, as well as in its plea that Jesus not torture it.”

    5. Obviously, the successful exorcism demands that the evil spirit depart. And that is what happens when Jesus or Paul carry it out. The failure of the sons of Sceva confirms their lack of relationship with God.

Note that this series of four narratives concerns exorcists farther and farther away in relationship to God Himself. The first two involve Jesus, who does not need to appeal to any power other than what God had already invested him with. Next, is the apostle Paul, who definitely had a warrant from the resurrected Jesus to carry out his ministry with His delegated power. Finally, we run into seven Jewish exorcists who have a third-hand relationship with God and are only able to weakly claim the name of “the Jesus whom Paul proclaims.” This despite the fact that they didn't even know Paul, let alone Jesus or God the Father.

I see this sort of second- or third-hand relationship to God and His word played out in various ways within the church. There are those who take pride in the fact that their parents were in Christian ministry or brag about how popular their preacher or their denomination is, but they themselves have no real relationship with God or Jesus. As has been said many times, “God has no grandchildren.”

Even worse are those examples I have personally witnessed in which a church-goer criticizes someone for quoting Scripture in cases where it disagrees with their “higher authorities” such as a popular Christian writer or a favorite politician or just personally offends them.

    6. Ideally at this point, the power of God and Jesus should have been amply demonstrated to others so that at least they would be awestruck and perhaps convinced to to follow Christ afterward. This is certainly the case in the first story of Jesus in the synagogue. But His second exorcism, which took place in pagan territory, seems to only have enraged the populace and resulted in Jesus' departure. However, He did leave the healed man behind to spread the good news. Paul's exorcism of the slave girl also had the effect of not only getting Paul in trouble with the local authorities but also in his expulsion from the city. But before he left, Paul did have time to instill the fear of Rome into the local authorities so that they would hopefully not harass the fledgling church in Paul's absence.

Paradoxically, it was the failure of the Jewish exorcists in Acts 19 which brought about a mass turning among the populace away from their magical practices, another example of how God uses evil to promote good. As Fitzmyer puts it, “Their attempt itself reveals that no one is able to imitate Paul, the representation of the Christian God and emissary of the Christian church. The Jesus that Paul preaches is not taken over by outsiders. The invocation of Jesus' name is efficacious only when uttered by Christians. Luke is trying to get across the idea that Christianity has nothing to do with magic, and that Jesus' name is no magical-incantation formula.”

There are some additional interesting parallels between some of these four exorcisms:

    A. In the two cases in Acts, it is the exorcists themselves who are beaten as a result of their actions.

    B. There is a sort of reversal between Mark 4 and Acts 19 in that the former story has a naked demoniac becoming fully clothed at the end while the seven exorcists in Acts 19 are clothed at the beginning of the story and naked at the end. Even Paul is stripped of his clothing in Acts 16:22.

    C. There are humorous undertones in two of these episodes. Marcus says of the Mark 5 narrative: “There is...an element of burlesque comedy with the demons...This gruesomely funny conclusion emphasizes the destructiveness of the demons as well as their shortsightedness...they unintentionally destroy their new lodgings...” And I have always felt that the story of the sons of Sceva was one of the funniest in the whole Bible. But that, I suppose, is due to what my wife calls “typical male humor.”

    D. Marcus, in his comment above, brings up another common factor in some of the stories: the tendency of the impure spirits to engage in self-destructive behavior. Thus, they drive the possessed man in the synagogue to announce his presence to Jesus, the demoniac of Mark 5 to injure himself, the swine to drown, and the spirit in the slave girl to pester Paul so much that it is driven out of its home.

    E. In both of Jesus' exorcisms in Mark, the demon says, “What between you and me (or 'us')?” That is an idiomatic expression meaning, “What do you have to do with me (or 'us')?”

Here is some additional information regarding the “non-orthodox” exorcists of the time:

Wright quotes from an Egyptian magical papyrus of the type that was circulating as late as A.D. 200: “I adjure you by the God of the Hebrews, Jesus, Ioa, Iae, Iaoue, etc.” Those last three names represented various attempts to properly pronounce the powerful word Yahweh.

Neil says, “Jewish exorcists are mentioned in the Gospels (Mt. 12:27; Lk. 11:19) and, outside, Jewish magicians were notorious. Those referred to here [i.e. Acts 19] would seem to have been quacks who used the name of Jesus as a magic incantation; this practice was later condemned by the rabbis.” Several commentators add that although their father was said to be a Jewish high priest, no such name as Sceva has been found in Jewish records. He or his sons probably made up that title for use in the pagan land where he lived so as to create a built-in reputation.

In conclusion, we see that these four biblical exorcisms share certain similarities arising from the similar situations that are involved. But at the same time, there are numerous variations in how the stories play out. In other words, these stories have the 'ring of truth' instead of exhibiting the stereotyped literary form one would expect from fictional creations.

HEALING THE DEMONIAC (MARK 5:1-20; LUKE 8:26-39)

 

                                                    Decapolis News (collage, 2009)

All three Synoptic Gospel accounts relate this story, but since Matthew's account is much shorter we will only concentrate on the other two. The wording between Mark and Luke is fairly similar, and the major difference between them is in the order of the events. Since both accounts contain flashbacks, here is the strictly chronological order:

1. Man lived alone in the tombs

2. He is engaged in self-destructive behavior

3. He approaches Jesus as boat docks

4. Jesus commands the spirit to come out of him

5. The man cries out for Jesus not to torment him

6. Jesus asks him for his name

7. The unclean spirit replies, “Legion”

8. The spirit begs to be allowed to enter swine

9. Jesus gives him permission

10. The swine run into the water and are drowned

11. Swineherds tell everyone

12. People see the man clothed and in his right mind

13. They beg Jesus to leave the area

14. Jesus enters boat

15. Man wants to stay with Jesus

16. Jesus tells him to go home and tell his friends what happened

17. Jesus returned to Galilee

Mark narrates the events in this order: #3, 1, 2, 3, 5, 4, 6-16, and omits 17.

Luke's account is given even more out of chronological order: #3, 1, 5, 4, 2, 6-14, 17, 15, 16. But by doing so, he has created the completely symmetrical literary organization shown below:

                                     Figure 1: Literary Structure of Luke 8:26-39

    A. Jesus arrives in boat from Galilee (#3a)

        B. Possessed man meets him (#3b)

            C. Man had no home (#1)

                    D. Man requests Jesus to leave him alone (#5)

                        E. Jesus commanded spirit to come out of him (#4)

                            F. Man's self-destructive behavior (#2)

                                G. Spirit tells Jesus his name (#6-7)

                        E'. Jesus lets them enter the swineherds (#8-9)

                            F'. Swine's self-destructive behavior (#10)

                    D'. People ask Jesus to leave them (#11-13)

    A'. Jesus enters boat and returns home (#14,17)

        B'. Healed man meets him (#15)

            C'. Jesus tells man to go home (#16)

This chiastic organization explains why there is the total non sequitur in B’ of the healed man meeting Jesus after he has already departed in the boat.

The parallel between C and C' is stronger in Luke's account than in Mark since the specific word “house” now appears in both sections.

E' continues the exorcism begun in E in that Jesus grants the spirits' request that they not be left without a body to inhabit, to their resulting doom.

Most commentators feel that Luke's account was based on that of Mark, which came earlier. Thus, Marshall says, “There was no need for Luke to make extensive alterations to his source in order to underline the message...he has merely improved the narrative stylistically...Luke develops the flash-back [of Mark] by incorporating the details [i.e. Section F] about the man's madness which he had earlier omitted...By this alteration Luke perhaps emphasizes the compassionate reason why Jesus acted to exorcise the man from the demon.”

Marshall may perhaps be correct regarding the placement of Section F above, but the literary reason as providing a perfect parallel to F' appears to be a much stronger motif. Both units demonstrate the irrational need for the evil spirits to destroy God's creations, even at the risk of losing their own abodes. As Marcus says, “This gruesomely funny conclusion [i.e. F'] emphasizes the destructiveness of the demons as well as their shortsightedness; incapable of restraining their brutal rage, they unintentionally destroy their new lodgings and so thwart their own desire to stay on Gerasene soil.”

Then there are scholars such as Mann who feel that Luke's was the earlier version of the two. But even he has to admit: “It must be said that proponents of Markan priority would reply that Luke (as a far more elegant prose writer) improved on the text before him.”

And in analyzing the logic of Mark's account, H. Anderson sees nothing but awkward verses pieced together from several sources with interruptions added by Mark himself. Whether or not one agrees with his reasoning, it must be admitted that Luke presents a much more polished version of the narrative.

Interestingly, some commentators (such as Marshall and Fitzmyer) and translators (such as KJV, RSV, NRSV, TEV) treat the notice that Jesus had commanded the evil spirits to vacate the man (Unit E above) as a parenthetical comment that is not really necessary to the story, whether in Mark or Luke's account. By contrast, note that Figure 1 shows that it is vital for providing a perfect parallel to E'.

In Mark's Gospel, this comment appears at 5:8. Lane has this to say about this placement: “In the act of kneeling, the defensive use of the divine name and the violent invocation of God to strengthen the plea that Jesus would not torment him, there is the full recognition of Jesus' superior power on the part of the demon. On this understanding verse 8 is in its original position...Other suggestions have been made concerning the position of verse 8, the most noteworthy conjecture being that the verse originally stood before verse 7, and perhaps in place of verse 6...Such conjectures, however, are unnecessary if verse 8 is seen as an explanatory insertion by Mark similar to Ch. 6:62.”

Translating those “noteworthy conjectures” to Luke's structure in Figure 1 would mean moving Section E to a position before D or in place of B, both destroying entirely the symmetry of the arrangement.

Section G is the center point of Figure 1. Swift notes, “Two explanations have been given of the question, what is you name? First, the ancient belief that knowledge of the name gave power over an adversary. Alternatively, and more probably, it was to recall the man to a sense of his own personality apart from the demon.” Short agrees with the second of these explanations, but either one provides an apt turning point in the narrative.

JOSEPH AS A TYPE OF CHRIST

In Evans and Movakovic's article on “Typology” in The Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, they list ten different categories of Old Testament types of Jesus. These include Moses, Elijah-Elisha, David, Son of Man, Servant, Adam, Jonah, Rejected Stone, High Priest, and OT Sacrifice. But there is no mention of Joseph, which is understandable since the NT never specifically associates Joseph with Christ. Despite that absence, there is abundant evidence that Jesus in his life and teachings provides numerous echoes of events in the Joseph Cycle, especially in Joseph's life. These are listed below in roughly the order of events in Genesis 37-49.

Similarity                                                         Genesis                     New Testament

favorite son                                                     37:3a                          Matthew 3:17

have a special garment                                   37:3b                          John 19:23

brothers turn against them                              37:4                            John 7:3-5

prominence of dreams                                    37:5-10,etc.                Matthew 1-2

future greatness predicted                              37:9-10                       Luke 1:32

parent ponders revelation                               37:11                          Luke 2:19

clothing removed by others                            37:12                          Matthew 27:27-31

enemies conspire to kill                                  37:18                          Mark 3:6

“Come! Let us kill him”                                 37:20                          Matthew 21:38

travelers with myrrh                                       37:25                          Matthew 2:11

rise from the pit                                              37:28                          Luke 24:5

sold for a slave's price                                    37:28                          Matthew 26:15

Jacob and Rachel cry for dead children         37:34-35                     Mathew 2:18

family goes to Egypt                                      37:36                           Matthew 2:14

finds favor in people's eyes                           39:4,21                         Luke 2:52

becomes a servant to others                           39:4                             John 13:4-17

faithful and prudent manager                        39:4-5                           Luke 12:42-46

master leaves him in charge                          39:8-9                           Luke 2:49; John 13:3

turn from physical temptation                       39:8-11                         Matthew 4:3-4

flees leaving garment behind                        39:12                            Mark 14:51-52

                                                                                                            Luke 24:12; John 20:6-7

The Lord is with them                                  39:21                             Luke 1:28; Acts 7:9;10:38

prophesies the future                                     40-41                             Matthew 24, etc.

“remember me when it is well for you”       40:14                             Luke 23:42

promise forgotten                                         40:14-15,23                    Matthew 26:33-35,73

only one of two fellow prisoners saved       40:16-22                         Luke 23:39-43

man identified with bread is hanged            40:22                              Mark 14:21; Matthew 27:5

feed the people miraculously                       41:33-36                         Matthew 14-15

second only to the pharaoh / Father             41:40                              Luke 22:29

given ring and dressed in fine clothes          41:42                              Luke 15:20-24

“Do what he tells you to do”                        41:55                              John 2:5

bow down before him                                  42:6; 43:26                     Mark 15:19

people do not recognize him                        42:8                                Luke 24:16; John 21:4

foot washing as a sign of hospitality            43:24                              John 13:1-30

both wept                                                      43:30;45:2                     Luke 19:41

vessel as indication of guilty party               44:6-13                          John 13:21-30

has supper with eleven                                 44:26-34                        John 13:31-17:26

he reveals his identity                                  45:3-4                             Luke 24:31

“sent ahead” to prepare                                45:5; 46:28                     John 3:28; 14:2-3

save their people                                          45:5                                 John 12:47

“do not be afraid”                                        46:3-4                              Luke 1:12-13

laying hands on children; blessing them     48:14-15                          Matthew 19:13-15

God/Jesus as shepherd                                48:15                                John 10:1-42

the field Jacob gave Joseph                        48:21-22                           John 4:1

donkey and its colt                                      49:11                                Matthew 21:5

forgive those who tried to kill them           50:15-21                           Luke 23:34

evil intentions accomplish God's will        50:20                                 Mark 14:21

You may notice from the above table, that there are no such parallels for Genesis 38. That is because that chapter is devoted wholly to incidents in the life of Judah instead of Joseph. But since it is part of the whole Joseph Cycle, we should note how it also fits in with the life of Jesus. Its importance in that context is seen in the fact that Tamar is the first of five women listed in the genealogy of Jesus found in Matthew 1:1-16. She shares several things in common with those other ancestresses:

Tamar was a probable Canaanite; Rahab was a Canaanite; and Ruth was a Moabite. Thus, Bathsheba and Mary were the only Jews in the list, and even Bathsheba was married to a Hittite.

Tamar acted the part of a prostitute (Genesis 38:15) , and Rahab was in fact a prostitute.

Both Tamar and Ruth lost their first husbands.

The nearest relative was denied to Tamar and Ruth even though the levirate law demanded it.

Both Tamar and Ruth go to extraordinary lengths to continue their lines even though their actions transgressed sexual standards of the time.

Both Tamar and Mary become pregnant while engaged to another man.

Both Tamar (Genesis 38:28) and Rahab (Joshua 2:18) are associated with a crimson cord.

In the case of Tamar and Bathsheba, it is a younger son who becomes the ancestor of Jesus.

All of the women except Bathsheba are praised in the Bible for their character and actions.

144,000 VIRGINS (REVELATION 14:1-5)

This is one of the most puzzling images in a book filled with nothing but puzzles. And as usual in interpreting Revelation, there are a number of interrelated factors that go together to shape one's view of any particular detail in the book. While realizing this reality, it is still tempting to isolate one specific image, such as those who are pictured as “virgins who have never been polluted with women” and see if any sense can be made of it.

G.K. Beale has provided us with a fairly thorough review of opinions regarding the meaning of this phrase. So, I will begin by using it as a general template to present the major points of view on the subject. These fall into two categories, the literal and the figurative.

Literal Understanding

a. a particular group of celibate men and women is in mind

Some commentators take this view, but to do so requires them to paradoxically take the word “virgin” literally while ignoring the fact that the literal Greek also indicates that only men are being being referred to. Similarly, they feel bound to take the number 144,000 literally when throughout the OT and NT, 12 refers to the people of God, whether it is the 12 tribes of Israel or the 12 apostles. And the number 1,000 is used in both Testaments more times as a representative of an unspecified large number than as a literal number. The product of those three figurative numbers (7x7x1,000) would hardly be expected to refer to a literal number, so neither would the term “virgin.”

Beale points to some earlier commentators, such as Moffatt, who felt that 'virgins' was “a literal reference to a group of celibate men or to celibate men and women (cf. Matt. 19:12). One problem with these literal views is that nowhere else does Scripture view sexual relations within the bond of marriage as sinful. Furthermore, if the 144,000 is a symbol for the entire people of God, that would mean that John required celibacy for the whole church, which is improbable.”

b. those living in times that were not conducive to regular married lives

Walvoord says, “Reference to the purity of the 144,000 could be recognition that during the difficult times of the Tribulation they could not have led normal married lives.” But even this vaunted literalist waffles on this view, as can be seen below.

c. those married or single people who abstained from sexual immorality

F.F. Bruce states that celibacy “implies that married men have 'defiled themselves with women' – something so contrary to the uniform biblical teaching on marriage (cf. Heb. 13:4) that it is unlikely to be introduced incidentally in so thoroughly 'Hebraic' a book as this. More probably the reference is to people who have been, in the language of the Pastoral Letters, 'the husband on one wife.'”

d. those men who abstained from sexual practices at pagan temples

That concept is certainly included in the term “virgin” but should not be specifically limited to it.

Carrington is one of the few commentators who have adopted this stance, but as Beale point out, “even he remains open to a more figurative understanding.”

Figurative Understanding

Morris summarizes the objections to the literal view with the following words: “they were not defiled by women; for they are virgins. This is surprising, in the first instance because the 144,000 stands for the whole church and it is not easy to apply the first part of the saying to women members, nor the second part to men, and in the second instance because the New Testament does not regard sexual relations as defiling. This idea was found in the ancient world, and in time became prominent in the church. But it is not found in the New Testament.”

a. military imagery

This idea begins with the understanding voiced by Kim: “The risen Christ, the victorious Lamb, is present with his church (Rev. 1:13; 21) and leads it as his army (Rev 14:1,4; 17:14) into the battle against the satanic trinity.”

“Caird argues that the symbolism of v. 4 is based on the background of Israelite soldiers being required to preserve ceremonial purity before battle (e.g. Deut. 23:9-10; 1 Sam. 21:5; 2 Sam. 11:8-11...While possible, this does not account for the dominating metaphor of virginity, which is an essential part of the symbolism.” (Beale)

The Dictionary of Biblical Imagery mixes this metaphor with that in category c below: “In Revelation the church is pictured as an army...which follows a Lamb singing and playing harps (Rev 14:1-4) and which goes into battle like a bride wearing wedding garments rather than armor (Rev 19:7-8,14).”

b. OT imagery for Israel

“The word 'virgin' is repeatedly applied to the nation of Israel in the OT...As is typical in Revelation, this description of Israel is now applied to the church...In the OT Israel's idolatries, as well as their political and economic practices, were pictured as 'harlotry'...Their worship of idols was referred to as 'defilement'. The picture of preventing 'pollution' occurred earlier in Revelation to refer to Christians who had not identified with idolatrous institutions such as emperor worship or trade guild idolatry...The same notion is conveyed here.” (Beale and McDonough)

Somewhat surprisingly, Walvoord appears to lean toward this figurative understanding. He admits that the virginity of the 144,000 “may refer to spiritual purity, often symbolized by virginity (cf. 2 Kings 19:21; Isa. 37:22; Jer. 18:13; 31:4,21; Lam. 2:13; Amos 5:2). In 2 Corinthians 11:2 the concept of virginity is extended to the entire church, including both sexes.”

c. NT bride of Christ imagery

“The identity of the 144,000 seems determined by 7:1-8 and 5:9,10. John would hardly represent two different groups by such an extraordinary and obviously symbolic number...We therefore take this vision to portray the Church possessing the advent glory of Christ in the millennial age...it is impossible, therefore to regard it as numbering unmarried men only. It seems best to interpret the language as symbolic, denoting the spiritual purity of men and women who form the bride of Christ (cf. 2 Cor. 11:2).” (Beasley-Murray)

“A leading ingredient in the Bible's eschatological images of the future age is the restored wholeness that glorified saints will finally enjoy in perpetuity...At one is the union of people with God and Christ, pictured as a marriage (Rev 19:7; 21:2,9) and as an existence in which the redeemed follow the Lamb wherever he goes.” (Rev 14:4 RSV).” (DBI)

Immediate Context

Above, I have already mentioned the effect the words “144,000” and the concept of a male “virgin” have on our understanding. The other imagery in Revelation 14:1-4 which needs to be taken into account in any interpretation is the reference to these people as being “first fruits.” That would seem to indicate that this is just one particular group of the saved such as perhaps the martyrs, not the whole church. But that is not necessarily the case, as the following two commentators note:

“The risen Jesus...is the 'beginning of God's [new] creation' (Rev 3:14; cf. 1:5; Col 1:15,18), and those who obediently follow this Lamb are its 'first fruits' (aparche, Rev 14:4; cf. 11:11).” (C.C. Newman)

Wilkins addresses this question with the same answer as above: “Those who have been chosen by God for salvation in Christ are the firstfruits of a redeemed creation (cf. 2 Thess 2:13; Rev 14:4; Rom 8:19-23).” Therefore there is no need to posit a particular group of believers such as the martyrs for this “first group of people,” since what follows will apparently be whatever remainder of God's created universe He chooses to save.