Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T11:24:43.458Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Luke and Isaiah

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

David Seccombe
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the course of an inquiry into the origins of Luke's understanding of the poor I was forced to ask the question how far Luke might have been influenced not only by certain texts in Isaiah but also by wider themes. In answer to this question one is often referred to C. H. Dodd's According to the Scriptures, where he concluded that when NT authors quoted small OT texts they often did so with knowledge of larger passages or collections of passages from which the text was drawn. This principle has become a commonplace and is frequently used illegitimately to find ideas in the NT which are not otherwise discernible.1 The recent study of B. Lindars (‘The Place of the Old Testament in the Formation of New Testament Theology: Prolegomena’, N. T. S. xxiii (1977), 59–66) argues that NT writers had no interest in the meaning of the OT for its own sake, but simply quarried texts to support and illustrate a pre-existing NT theology. Both these views need to be kept in mind. It may be that each is correct in different places. What is needed is a closer study of the practice of individual authors and their use of different parts of the OT. Only then will it be possible to give any confident judgement of how much an NT author may have carried in the way of related ideas, theology and contextual understanding when he quotes or alludes to the OT.2

Type
Short Studies
Information
New Testament Studies , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , January 1981 , pp. 252 - 259
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 An example in connection with the present study: Crockett, L. C. (The Old Testament in the Gospel of Luke (Brown Univ. Ph.D., 1966), 2, 277 ff.)Google Scholar thinks the dominant idea in Luke's quotation of Isa. 61. 1 f. (Luke 4. 18 f.) is the messianic banquet (from Isa. 61. 6 and elsewhere) which is not even mentioned.

2 See Young, F. W., ‘A Study of the Relation of Isaiah to the Fourth Gospel’, Z.N.W. 46 (1955), 215–33Google Scholar; Farmer, W. R., ‘Matthew and the Bible’, Lexington Theol. Quart. 11 (1976), 57–71.Google Scholar

3 See Lampe, G. W. H., ‘The Holy Spirit in the Writings of St Luke’ in Studies in the Gospels, ed. Nineham, D. E. (Oxford, 1955)Google Scholar; von Baer, H., Der Heilige Ceist in den Lukasschrjflen (Stuttgart, 1926).Google Scholar

4 In Mark 1. 12 the Spirit drives Jesus into the wilderness (τ⋯ φνεũμα αὐτ⋯ν ⋯кβ⋯λλει εἰζ (cf. Matt. 4. 1). In Luke 4. 1 he returns from the baptism φλ⋯ρηζ ∏νεὐματоζ Ἁγιоν and was being led in the wilderness in the Spirit (ἦγετо ⋯ν φνεὐματι τῇ ⋯ρ⋯μῳ).

5 Though note I Sam. 16. 13; II Sam. 23. 1–2. The Targum to Isaiah gives a messianic interpretation to Isa. ii. 1 and 42. 1.

6 Philo and Josephus always supply an object. One evangelizes' something (the message with accusative or irepl) to someone. Sometimes the object is supplied from the context.

7 In Isaiah this is expressed in terms of the coming of God (or his arm) to rule (save and judge). The Targum interprets this as the Kingdom of God (e.g. Tg. Isa. 40. 9).

8 It is instructive to compare Luke 4. 43 With its source in Mark 1. 38: εὑαγγελισασθαιreplaces кηρὐξω and ⋯φεστ⋯λην replaces ⋯ξ⋯λθоν). The formative influence of Isa. 61. 1/Luke 4. 18 is apparent

9 Many would see the Servant idea in Jesus' baptism (Luke 3. 22).

10 So Moule, C. F. D., ‘The Christology of Acts’ in Studies in Luke-Acts, ed. Keck, L. E. and Martyn, J. L. (Nashville, New York, 1966), pp. 169 f.Google Scholar

11 So Creed, J. M., The Gospel according to St Luke (London, 1957), p. 161.Google Scholar

12 Jesus' confession is simple and receives less emphasis than in the other gospels. No alternative to death is seriously contemplated, no emphasis is given to the intensity of his sufferings and there is no discourse from the cross.

13 Cf. Harvey, A. E. (Jesus on Trial (London, 1976), pp. 1 ff.)Google Scholar who makes similar observations in relation to the purpose of the Fourth Gospel.

14 For a different interpretation of the same facts see Larkin, W.J. Jr, ‘Luke's Use of the Old Testament as a Key to His Soteriology’, J.E.T.S. 20 (1977), 329–35.Google Scholar He thinks Luke has prepared his readers to puzzle over the anomaly of the innocent man suffering as a criminal in a God-ordained way by quoting Isa. 53. 12 in Luke 22. 37. This is meant to lead them to a soteriological understanding of Jesus' passion.

15 Acts i. 1. In Acts 3. 1 ff. Peter does messianic works in the name of the Servant. A similar thing is recorded of Paul in Acts 14. 8–10. Cf. G. W. H. Lampe, op. cit. p. 194.

16 Lampe, C. W. H., ‘The Lucan Portrait of Christ’, N.T.S. 2 (1955-1956), 175.Google Scholar

17 Further studies: Grundmann, W. ‘Der Bergpredigt nach der Lukasfassung’, Stud. Evang. 1 (1957), 180–9Google Scholar; Derrett, J. D. M., ‘Midrash in the New Testament: The Origin of Luke xxii. 6–68’, Stud. Theol. 29 (1975), 147–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar