December 22: Revelation 20:7-10

Revelation 20:7-10

This the third of the four visionary scenes in chapter 20; it is parallel to the first scene (vv. 1-3, cf. the earlier note), with its emphasis on Satan and the “thousand years”, as representing the period during which he is bound in prison. Within the structure of the vision-sequence, the heavenly throne scene occurs between these two episodes (vv. 4-6, cf. the previous note).

Revelation 20:7-8

“And when the thousand years are completed, the Satan will be loosed out of his (prison) guard, and he will go out to lead astray the nations th(at) are in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—to bring them together into the war, of whom their number (is) as the sand of the sea.”

This is perhaps the most unusual and difficult portion of the chapter to explain. If we are to view chap. 20 as a continuation of the Judgment visions in chap. 19, then this episode is totally unexpected. After all, the nations have been defeated and judged, Satan bound, and the People of God (believers) ruling alongside the exalted Jesus (in heaven). This would seem to have settled the matter; yet now, apparently, there is another rebellion by the nations and a second Judgment? Here is where viewing chapter 20 as a separate vision sequence, parallel to that of chap. 19, may make better sense of the eschatological framework. With this approach, the assembling of the nations to battle in 20:7-8ff would be seen as a separate depiction of the same event—the Judgment of the Nations—in 19:17-21.

Let us briefly consider each detail in vv. 7-8, depending on whether chap. 20 is viewed as continuous or parallel with chap. 19 (and the earlier visions):

“when the thousand years were completed” —While the actual number of a thousand is certainly symbolic (indicating completeness, etc, 10 x 100), the idea of a period of time that it represents can be understood several ways; limiting this to the immediate interpretive approach (cf. above), there are two possibilities:

    • (Parallel): The “thousand years”, encompassing the defeat/binding of Satan and the rule of believers alongside Christ, reflects the current Age, specifically the time between the exaltation of Jesus and the end-time Judgment.
    • (Continuous): The thousand years, taken in a more literal sense (as a lengthy period of time), represents the Age to Come on earth; that is to say, the current Age has come to an end, and the “thousand years” marks the New Age.

“the Satan will be loosed out of his (prison) guard” —This of course refers to the binding and imprisonment of Satan in vv. 1-3. Ideally, the release of a prisoner should lead to gratitude and obedience in response (cf. Tacitus Annals 12.37; Josephus Antiquities 10.40; Koester, p. 776), but here the Satan continues to rebel against God instead. Keeping with the same dual line of interpretation, there are again two possibilities:

    • (Parallel): The defeat and binding of Satan (vv. 1-3) corresponds with the scene in 12:7-12, and is related to the work of Jesus that culminates in his death and resurrection (vv. 5, 10-11; cf. also Lk 11:17; 1 Jn 3:8, etc). The “loosing” of Satan then would refer to the end-time period of distress, otherwise referenced in the book of Revelation by the symbolic designation of 3½ years; cp. 12:12 with 20:3.
    • (Continuous): Just as there is a brief but intense period of activity by Satan at the end of the current Age, so there will also be at the end of the Age to Come (the “thousand years”). Satan is bound following the Judgment at the end of the current Age, and will be punished again at the end of the Age to Come.

“and he will go out to lead astray the nations th(at are) in the four corners of the earth” —This draws upon the eschatological tradition of the Judgment of the Nations (collectively), which requires that they assemble together so they can all be judged in one place (Joel 3). A development of this motif has the nations gathering together to make war against God and His People (Israel)—cf. especially Zechariah 12:1-9 and Ezekiel 38-39 (discussed below). The nations were similarly gathered together for battle, by Satan (or his representatives), in 16:12-14; 19:17-21 (cf. also 14:17-20). Interpreting this in v. 7 as parallel with 19:19 is obvious; while a continuous interpretation would mean that the same sort of gathering of the nations (along with their subsequent judgment/defeat) is going to take place at the end of the Age to Come (the “thousand years”).

“Gog and Magog” —These two names, presumably derived from the eschatological oracle in Ezekiel 38-39, here represent “the nations in the four corners of the earth”. In the original oracle “Magog” (gogm*) is a territory north of Israel, possibly to be identified with parts of Anatolia (Cappadocia, Scythia) or Armenia and beyond the Caucasus mountains. The name likewise appears as the name of the eponymous ancestor of this (same?) region in Gen 10:2, but its derivation is otherwise quite unknown. “Gog” (goG) is the ruler or commander of the land of Magog, and could conceivably correspond to the Akkadian gûgu (there was an Anatolian [Lydian] ruler with this name in the 7th century B.C.). Probably “Gog” is simply taken from “Magog”, by assonance/wordplay, etc, to create a specially colorful and ominous combination.

“to bring them together into the war” —Here in the book of Revelation, “Gog and Magog” serve as a kind of shorthand for the entire scenario in Ezek 38-39—i.e., of the collection of distant nations who assemble together to attack Israel (cf. also Zech 12:1-9). The same oracle was in view in 19:17-21 (cf. Ezek 39:17-20), which tends to confirm the interpretive view (cf. above) that chaps. 19 and 20 are parallel accounts of the same basic Judgment scene. The Qumran War Scroll also associates Gog and Magog with the wicked nations who are to be defeated in the great end-time battle (1QM 11:6, 16-18; cf. also 4Q161 fr. 8-10 col. iii. 10-21). Now, “the war” takes on more cosmic significance, being waged against God and the People of God (exalted in heaven); it is quite literally the climax of the conflict between God and the forces of evil (cf. below).

“of whom their number (is) as the sand of the sea” —On the one hand, this is simply a picturesque idiom to describe a great multitude, especially when used of an army assembled for battle (Josh 11:4; Judg 7:12; 1 Sam 13:5). However, the association with the sea in the book of Revelation suggests perhaps a deeper allusion—recall that in 12:18, just prior to the rise of the evil Sea-creature, the Dragon (Satan) was standing there “upon the sand of the sea”.

Revelation 20:9

“And they stepped up upon the wide space of the earth and encircled the (gathering) of the holy (one)s (that had) thrown (down) alongside (each other), and (also) the city having been loved, and fire stepped down out of heaven and ate them down.”

The noun parembolh/, difficult to translate literally in English, refers to the idea of military troops thrown together alongside each other, i.e. as in rows or arranged in a camp. It is very much a military battle that is envisioned, with the forces of “Gog and Magog” encircling the group of “holy ones”, as well as the city designated by the perfect participle “having been loved” (vb a)gapa/w). Here “the city” is Jerusalem, or, more properly, the portion of the city where the Temple was located—the old Canaanite fortified hill-site known in tradition as the “City of David” or “Zion” (cf. Psalm 78:68; 87:1-2, etc). This is scarcely the earthly Jerusalem, in its ordinary sense, in spite of the traditions drawn on from Zech 12:1-9, etc. In the book of Revelation, the earthly Jerusalem is not depicted in a positive light, having been overrun by the wicked nations (11:2, 7-10). Only the Temple sanctuary, figuratively speaking, where the faithful ones (believers) gather, truly represents the holy city. Similarly, believers gather around the Lamb on “Zion” in the vision of 14:1-5. The realization of Jerusalem as the true holy city (“the new Jerusalem”) must wait until the visions of chaps. 21-22 (to be discussed).

The punishment and defeat of “Gog and Magog” is accomplished via supernatural means, much as the nations are defeated by the “sword” that comes out of the exalted Jesus’ mouth in the earlier Judgment vision (19:15ff). The image of “fire coming down out of heaven” is a traditional motif of Divine Judgment, on cities and peoples, cf. Gen 19:24; 1 Kings 18:39; 2 Kings 1:10-12; Luke 9:54), which here is used in the eschatological context of the Last Judgment (cp. Luke 10:12 par; 17:29; 2 Pet 2:6; Jude 7; Rev 11:9). Elsewhere in the book of Revelation fire comes down on the nations as a sign of the great Judgment—8:5, 7-11; 11:5; 15:8; 16:8; 17:16; 18:9; cp. 14:10-11; 19:3. The same imagery was used in the oracle of Ezek 38-39 which inspired this scene (38:22; 39:6).

The imagery of Gog and Magog “stepping up” onto the broad surface of the earth, presumably from somewhere ‘below’, suggests that these are not normal human armies—on this, cf. the notice below.

Revelation 20:10

“And the (One) casting (evil) throughout [dia/bolo$], the (one) leading them (all) astray, he was cast into the lake of fire and sulphur, where also the wild animal and the false foreteller [i.e. False Prophet] (were cast), and they shall be tested (painfully with fire) day and night, into the Ages of Ages.”

This represents the final defeat of the forces of evil, parallel with what was described in 19:20. The idea of the Devil (o( dia/bolo$), or Belial, being punished and devoured by fire is found elsewhere in Jewish tradition (e.g., 1Q13 iii. 7; Testament of Judah 25:3). As for the expression “lake of fire”, it draws upon the more general imagery of fire as a sign (and form) of Divine punishment (cf. above, and note in Isa 30:33; 66:24). The fiery end of the Sea- and Earth-creatures (“wild animal” and “false prophet”) resembles that of the fourth ‘beast’ in Daniel 7:11. The wicked/rebellious Angels could likewise be depicted as being thrown into a fiery abyss (1 Enoch 10:6ff; 21:7-10). The specific combination of fire and a lake probably is derived from common underworld imagery; on such rivers, etc, of fire, see, for example, Plato Phaedo 113ab; Virgil Aeneid 6.550-51). For these and other references, cf. Koester, pp. 761, 779.

The difficulties in explaining the scenario of vv. 7-10 have been noted above, including the wider interpretative question of whether the visions of chap. 20 are best understood as a continuation of chap. 19, or as a separate sequence parallel to it. Complicating the situation is the use of “Gog and Magog” as a symbol. There is some indication that it does not refer simply to the ordinary nations known to readers (such as those of the Roman Empire, etc), but should be regarded as a mythic figure-type for peoples from beyond the recognized boundaries of the earth (“the four corners”). This would make “Gog and Magog” akin to the Sea- and Earth-creatures of chaps. 13ff, who serve as figures of the forces of evil at work in the world. In support of this, I would note:

    • The location of “Gog and Magog” as “in the four corners of the earth”. In the original oracle of Ezekiel 38-39, Gog and Magog are said to come from the remotest parts of the north (38:6, 15); now this conceptual delimitation is given wider cosmic significance. It is a basic point of human religious and cultural psychology, that the boundaries of the known world tend to be regarded as the domain of frightening alien beings.
    • Here Gog and Magog “step up” onto the broad space of the earth’s surface, suggesting that they come up from a location below the earth, much like the hybrid-demon beings in the fifth and sixth trumpet-visions of chapter 9.
    • These strange ‘nations’ are described as a vast multitude, numbering “as the sand of the sea”; the demonic ‘armies’ in 9:16-19 are similarly vast. Moreover, the descriptive expression here likely alludes to the earlier scene of the Dragon standing “upon the sand of the sea” (12:18).
    • The fate of theses ‘nations’ is to be consumed by heavenly fire, just like the Sea- and Earth-creatures, and Satan himself.

Even so, there is clearly an intentional parallel between the Judgment scenes in 19:17-21 and 20:7-10, reflecting, if you will, two stages in the end-time Judgment and final defeat of evil:

    • The immediate nations, influenced by the Sea-creature are defeated and slain in battle
      • The Sea-creature (and his ally) are thrown into the lake of fire
    • The distant nations, influenced by the Satan/Devil himself, are defeated and slain in battle
      • The Satan/Devil is thrown into the lake of fire

These two episodes bracket the scene of the “thousand years”, signifying the resurrection/exaltation of believers, who now rule alongside Jesus—parallel to his own resurrection/exaltation. This may be outlined as:

    • The Judgment in its earthly aspect—the human nations on earth (16:12-16ff; 19:17-21)
    • The Thousand Years—the resurrection/exaltation of believers (20:1-6)
    • The Judgment in its heavenly aspect—the distant nations of the earth, signifying more clearly the forces of evil (20:7-10ff)
This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 2019EschatologyNT_header1a.png

October 7: Revelation 11:1-2

Revelation 11:1-2

Many commentators regard the first two verses of chapter 11 as belonging more properly with chapter 10; in my view, it is best to treat them as a separate (transitional) scene set between 10:1-11 and 11:3-13.

Rev 11:1

“And there was given to me a reed (which was more) like a staff, saying ‘You must rise and measure the shrine of God and the place of (ritual) slaughter [i.e. altar] and the (one)s kissing toward [i.e. worshiping] (God) in it’.”

The reed (ka/lamo$) refers to any stick which might be used as a measuring tool; the further description of it as being “like a r(a/bdo$” means that it is larger/longer and firmer, like the staff held by a shepherd or ruler. The possible royal/Messianic allusion adds to the idea that this is no ordinary measuring-stick.

The command to measure is a visionary detail which echoes a number of Prophetic passages, such as Amos 7:7-9. The Old Testament idiom involves a measuring-line (plum-line), and usually refers to the application of judgment—cf. also 2 Sam 8:2; 2 Kings 21:13; Lam 2:8. The most immediate reference comes from Zech 2:1-2, which involves the vision of a man (i.e. heavenly being/messenger) holding a measuring-line, who has been tasked to measure the dimensions of Jerusalem. This passage is part of a visionary promise of Israel’s restoration and return to Jerusalem, presented in eschatological language. Also relevant is the vision of the new Temple in Ezek 40-43ff, where the building’s dimensions are described in detail; the prophet also sees a heavenly/divine being holding a measuring-stick in his hand (vv. 3, 5). Taking all these prophetic passages together, we see that there is a two-fold aspect to the symbolism of measuring:

    • Negative—determining the portion/people which are to receive the judgment
    • Positive—demarcating the space marked for deliverance/restoration

Both of these apply to the visionary scene here in the book of Revelation.

Rev 11:2

(The heavenly voice continues:)
“And the open court(yard) th(at is) outside the shrine you must throw out and you should not measure it, (in) that [i.e. because] it was given to the nations, and they will tread (over) the holy city (for) forty-two months.”

Here the Temple is envisioned as having a simpler structure than the Herodian (Second) Temple in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus. It is closer in design to the ancient temple-pattern of the Israelite Tent-shrine (Tabernacle)—an inner sanctuary surrounded by an outer court (cf. Exodus 26-27). This indicates that it is typological—while it draws upon the historical Temple in outline, it should be understood here as a figure or symbol. The Herodian Temple did have a “court of the Gentiles”, marking a division in the Temple-complex past which non-Jews were not supposed to enter (Josephus Wars 5.190ff). This historical detail probably factors into the imagery here as well. Some commentators would infer from this passage that the Jerusalem Temple was still standing when the book of Revelation was written, indicating a date in the 60’s A.D. This is possible, but, I think, rather unlikely; other factors point to a time somewhat later in the 1st century. The reference here involves the (historical) Temple as a basic type-pattern, and really cannot be used for a dating of the book.

The contrast in vv. 1-2 is clear: the inner sanctuary (shrine, na/o$) is to be measured, but the outer courtyard (au)lh/) is not. The people (of God) are worshiping (vb. proskune/w, lit. “kiss toward”) within the shrine, but the outer court is given over to the nations (i.e. foreigners, unbelievers). This results in a religious division within the Temple itself, marking off the sanctuary from all that is outside.

This, too, draws upon historical memory and tradition, as interpreted and given shape in Scripture, set within a distinctive eschatological setting. Two main (historical) events are involved:

    • The violation and profanation of the Temple by the Syrian/Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) in 167 B.C., generally recognized as the primary point of reference in Dan 9:27 (cf. the earlier study on Dan 9:24-27).
    • The destruction of the (Herodian) Temple by the Roman army in 70 A.D., after which the Romans exercised more direct control over Jerusalem. Even prior to the Temple’s destruction, the emperor Gaius (Caligula, c. 40 A.D.) introduced policies which seemed to echo those of Antiochus IV.

Both of these events are reflected in the “Eschatological Discourse” of Jesus (Mark 13:1-2, 14ff par)—indeed, the Lukan version combines them together, presenting the prophecy in Dan 9:27, and the time of distress associated with it, specifically in terms of the siege/destruction of Jerusalem (Lk 21:20-24). The wording, and the idea expressed, in verse 24 is quite close that here in Rev 11:2:

“…and Yerushalaim will be (be)ing tread (down) under the nations, until the (moment at) which the times of the nations should be fulfilled.”

Here Jesus (along with the Gospel writer) is clearly referring to the conquest of Jerusalem and, with it, the destruction of the physical/historical Temple, which occurred in 70 A.D. After this, there will be a period of time when the “nations” (i.e. Gentile Romans) exercise control over the city and the Temple. This seems to parallel precisely what is declared to the seer (John) in Rev 11:2, and yet, if the book was written after 70 A.D. (as most commentators believe), it cannot refer to the same event(s) prophesied by Jesus. Moreover, in this vision, the sanctuary itself (the inner shrine or “holy place”) is not destroyed or desecrated. Modern-day commentators who wish to retain verse 2 as a concrete historical prophecy, require a situation whereby the Jerusalem Temple is rebuilt at a future time. Yet there is nothing of the kind suggested here in the text, nor anywhere else in the New Testament, for that matter. The idea derives almost entirely from a specific interpretation of Ezek 40-43ff, harmonized to fit the eschatological references to the Temple in 2 Thess 2, etc. As an interpretive method or approach it is highly questionable, though popular as a way of navigating certain historical/chronological difficulties related to New Testament eschatology. I discuss this approach at various points throughout this series.

The idea that the Temple in Rev 11:1-2 refers to an actual historical/physical building would seem to be rather flatly contradicted by the fact that all other references to the Temple in the book are either (a) symbolic of believers, or (b) are part of a setting/locale in heaven; mainly it is the latter7:15; 11:19; 14:15ff; 16:1, 17; 21:22, while 3:12 also indicates the former. Moreover, the final reference in 21:22 identifies the Temple with the person/presence of God and Christ (the Lamb) together. Numerous other passages in the New Testament use the Temple as a symbol for believers (collectively) as the body of Christ—1 Cor 3:9ff, 16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pet 2:5.

As would be expected in a vision such as those in the book of Revelation, the Temple as an image is a concrete symbol or pattern for something else. A proper interpretation should begin with the idea of the Temple as symbolizing believers as a group or body (community). If this is correct, then what is the meaning of the distinction between the sanctuary (nao/$) and the outer court? The key is found in verse 1, where John is commanded to measure the shrine, including specifically the altar and the ones worshiping God there. Above I translate qusiasth/rion literally as the “place of (ritual) slaughter”; however, the context clearly shows that this is not the altar for animal sacrifice (which was in the outer court), but the altar for offering incense (which was inside the sanctuary). This is the altar-type assumed throughout the book (except possibly in 6:9), and the incense is associated specifically with the prayers of believers (8:3). I would say that the persons inside the sanctuary, worshiping at the altar, are meant to represent true believers, those following Jesus faithfully even unto death (6:9ff). By extension, this would imply that any persons in the outer court, outside the sanctuary, are not true believers, but false disciples or believers in name only who do not remain faithful in the time of distress. This is very much the theme of the warning/exhortations in the letters to the Seven Congregations (chaps. 2-3), and follows the clear symbolism in Jesus’ own eschatological teaching (esp. the parables in Matt 13 [vv. 24-30, 37-43, 47-50]).

What, then, of the motif of the nations treading/trampling the “holy city” (v. 2)? The “nations” (e&qnh), in the basic traditional/religious sense of the term, refer to all those who are not part of the people of God (i.e. not believers in Christ). The “nations” are fundamentally synonymous with the “wicked”. As part of the end-time Judgment, in its initial phase(s) at least, the nations/wicked will war against one another, bringing about suffering and destruction on humankind. This is expressed in the first four seal-visions (6:1-8), with the same idea also found in Jesus’ Eschatological Discourse (Mk 13:7-8 par). The time of warfare precedes, or is part of, the great distress (1:9; 2:22; 7:14; Mk 13:19 par; cf. Dan 12:1ff), which will even engulf the faithful.

The measuring of the sanctuary is a sign that those in it (believers) will be protected from judgment (cf. above). Traditionally, a temple, and, in particular, the area around the altar, due to its sacred character, was a place where persons could seek (and find) protection or asylum (Exod 21:13-14; 1 Kings 1:50). Similarly, here, we have the idea that the believers worshiping in the sanctuary (at the altar) will be protected from the Judgment. This does not mean that believers will not suffer any harm, or even be put to death, as is clear from 6:9-11 and Mk 13:9-13, 20-22 par; however, the promise is that, ultimately, the true believer will be saved from the (final) Judgment (2:7, 10-11 etc; Mk 13:13 par), while those outside, among the nations, will be destroyed. God’s Judgment does not only mean punishment for the wicked; it is also a time of testing for the righteous, and is to be endured by believers as part of our coming salvation (1 Pet 4:12-19, etc). The time period involved—forty-two months (= 3½ years)—comes from the book of Daniel (9:27; also 7:25; 12:7, 11f); here, like the rest of the vision in vv. 1-2, it is best viewed as symbolic, reflecting a short but intense period of suffering and distress at the end-time. For those seeking to preserve a concrete literal/historical fulfillment, it would mean a period of precisely 3½ years (42 months), as written. Rev 12:14 uses the same idiom as in Dan 7:25; 12:7 for this duration—”time, times and half and a time”.

It should be pointed out that not all commentators would interpret Rev 11:1-2 exactly as I have above; I note here a different approach, which still treats the Temple image as symbolic in more or less the same sense (Koester, p. 485):

“{The} outer court as the vulnerable aspect of the church. The enclosed temple (naos) that is measured signifies the worshiping community, which God preserves on earth. The open court (aule) signifies the church, as it is vulnerable to affliction in an unbelieving world. The same community is both preserved and vulnerable…”

I have already mentioned above the line of interpretation which would view vv. 1-2 as a vision of the historical/physical city and Temple, to be fulfilled (literally) at a future time, parallel with a similar modern/futurist interpretation of Mk 13:14ff. For more on the Temple in New Testament eschatology as a whole, see the separate study on this subject.

References marked as “Koester” above, and throughout this series, are to Craig R. Koester, Revelation, Anchor Bible [AB] Vol. 38A (Yale: 2014).

Jerusalem and the Unity of Believers (part 1)

As indicated in the previous days’ notes on the Pentecost narrative (Acts 2:1-13), the setting of Jerusalem holds a central place in the narrative, both as a location and a theological motif. Indeed, the first chapters of Acts—up to and including the death of Stephen (chapters 1-7)—are devoted entirely to the early Christians living and ministering in Jerusalem. Only with the onset of severe persecution (Acts 8:1-4ff), do the disciples spread outward into the surrounding territories and nations—this notice is emphasized again in Acts 11:19, in order to introduce the Christians of Antioch and to set the stage for Paul’s missionary journeys. Once the Pauline narratives begin, the Jerusalem Church largely fades from view, only to reappear associated with two important episodes: (1) the ‘council’ held in Jerusalem (Acts 15) to discuss the role and place of the Gentile mission, and (2) the arrest of Paul upon his visit to Jerusalem (Acts 21, extending to the middle of chap. 23).

A proper understanding of the significance of Jerusalem in the early chapters of Acts, I believe, requires that one study the role it plays in the Gospel as well. Since, by general consensus, the third Gospel and Acts (as a 2-volume work) were written by the same author (trad. Luke), one would expect a fair degree of continuity in thought—both theological and artistic expression—in the two books. What follows is a summary of Jerusalem as a narrative setting and theological/spiritual theme in the Gospel of Luke. It is necessary to compare that which Luke has inherited as part of the wider Synoptic tradition with those elements unique to his Gospel.

Jerusalem in the wider Synoptic tradition

Within the Gospels of Matthew and Mark there are relatively few references to Jerusalem. Let us begin with:

1. What Matthew and Mark share in common. This is fairly simple:

    • General summary references to people coming from all around (including Jerusalem) to see Jesus—Mark 1:5; 3:8 (par Matt 3:5; 4:25, and, adapted somewhat in Luke 5:17; 6:17).
    • Reference to religious leaders (Scribes [and Pharisees]) coming from Jerusalem to see/question Jesus—Mark 3:22; 7:1 (par [latter reference only] Matt 15:1; no parallel in Luke)
    • The journey to Jerusalem, including a prediction by Jesus of his Passion which will take place there—Mark 10:32-33 (par. Matt 20:17-18, with a similar notice earlier in 16:21; partial parallel Luke 18:31 [cf. below])
    • Beginning with the Triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Mark 11:1ff; par Matt 21:1ff; Luke 19:28ff), Jesus remains in Jerusalem (or nearby Bethany) until his death and resurrection. All of the events of the Passion take place in Jerusalem; however, according to Matthew and (apparently) originally in Mark (cf. 16:1-8), Jesus’ (first) resurrection appearance to the disciples does not take place in Jerusalem, but rather in Galilee (Matt 28:7, 10, 16ff; Mark 16:7), contrary to what is narrated in Luke and John.

2. Details unique to Matthew. Apart from several minor additions to the Synoptic narrative (Matt 16:21; 21:10, etc), and a unique proverbial reference in Matt 5:35, there are only three significant episode or sayings involving Jerusalem:

    • The Infancy narrative (setting of Matt 2:1-8, 16), related to both the visit of the Magi and the slaughter of the children of Bethlehem in chapter 2.
    • The Jerusalem Temple setting in the Temptation scene—Matt 4:5ff (shared by Luke 4:9ff).
    • Jesus’ lament for Jerusalem—Matt 23:37ff, included at the end of the “Woes” against the religious leaders (Scribes and Pharisees) in chapter 23. The saying is part of the so-called Q tradition, for it also found in Luke 13:34f.

Jerusalem in the Gospel of Luke (beyond the Synoptic tradition)

This can be outlined as follows:

    • Jerusalem as a setting in the Infancy narratives
    • The expanded Journey to Jerusalem
    • Eschatological predictions by Jesus, set during Passion week
    • Post-resurrection appearances of Jesus

Jerusalem as a setting in the Infancy narratives

There are three episodes, each of which draws significantly upon Old Testament narrative and imagery:

  1. The angelic annunciation to Zechariah (Luke 1:5-23). This takes place while Zechariah is serving in the Temple (v. 8ff); indeed, the author has taken care (in v. 6) to emphasize that Zechariah and Elizabeth were both “just” (di/kaioi) and “without fault” (a&memptoi) in observing God’s commandments, and this faithful religious service in the Temple is a vital motif. The appearance of the heavenly Messenger, announcing the birth of John (vv. 11-17), like the announcement to Mary in 1:26-38, follows a pattern of similar angelic annunciations in the Old Testament, which I discussed in treating this passage in an earlier Advent season note.
  2. Jesus’ parents with the child in the Temple precincts (Luke 2:22-38). In establishing the setting for this narrative, the Gospel writer has combined (or conflated) two separate details: the purification offering for Mary following childbirth (v. 22a, cf. Leviticus 12), and the consecration of the firstborn (v. 23, cf. Exod 13:2-16) which Luke narrates (whether at the historical or literary level) as a presentation/dedication of the child before God (v. 22b, such as in 1 Sam 1:22ff). There are three important themes in this passage:
    a) The faithfulness of Joseph and Mary (similar to Zechariah and Elizabeth) in fulfilling their religious duties (cf. v. 39). That is, they represent devout, just/righteous Israelites.
    b) The encounters with Simeon (vv. 25-35) and Anna (vv. 36-38), two aged figures (in many ways parallel to Zechariah and Elizabeth) who reflect and represent devout, faithful Israelites—those who are looking toward receiving “the help/comfort of Israel” (v. 25) and “the ransom/redemption of Jerusalem” (v. 38), two expressions with strong Messianic and eschatological resonance.
    c) The central prophecy (oracle) of Simeon (vv. 29-32), which predicts the child Jesus’ future role as savior and light to both Jews and Gentiles (the second prediction in vv. 34-35 is darker and more difficult to interpret). Simeon’s oracle draws upon language especially from several key passages in so-called deutero-/trito-Isaiah (chs. 40-66). I have also discussed Lk 2:22-38 in some detail in an earlier Advent note.
  3. The child Jesus in the Temple precincts (Luke 2:41-51). This dramatic and challenging narrative centers upon the climactic words of Jesus to his parents (v. 49): “did you not know that it is necessary for me to be in/among the (thing)s of my Father?” The centrality of the Temple is the key to this episode, which I have discussed in prior notes.

The Journey to Jerusalem

Unlike the Gospel of John, which depicts Jesus making a number of different trips to Jerusalem (for the holy/feast days), the Synoptic Gospels record just one journey—that made prior to the events of Jesus’ Passion. In Mark and Matthew, this journey is mentioned only briefly, encompassing less than a single chapter (Mk 10:32-52; Matt 20:17-34). However, in the Gospel of Luke, this journey has been framed quite differently, extending from Lk 9:51 (which follows the corresponding point of Mk 9:41) all the way to Lk 18:15 (which corresponds again to Mk 10:13)—in other words, in place of the Mk 9:42-10:12, we have Lk 9:51-18:14 which comprises: (a) material located elsewhere in Matthew/Mark, and (b) sayings and parables only found in Luke. This enhances the journey scene greatly, for it depicts Jesus preaching and teaching extensively. But there are other important ways that the journey to Jerusalem is heightened. Note the following details and specific references to Jerusalem:

    1. In the transfiguration scene (Lk 9:28-36), the significance of the journey is foreshadowed in verses 30-31, where it is mentioned that Jesus conversed with Moses and Elijah (a detail unique to Luke’s account), speaking “of his way out [e&codo$, “exodus”, i.e. departure] which he was about to complete in Jerusalem”.
    2. In Lk 9:51, the journey is effectively inaugurated with the statement that Jesus “set his face/sight strong(ly) toward traveling [or, to travel] into Jerusalem”. This is mentioned again in verse 53, and it is the reason (i.e. his intention to go to Jerusalem) that he found no welcome in the Samaritan village. Though Samaritans are involved, this can probably be taken as a literary foreshadowing of the hostility Jesus would face in Jerusalem.
    3. This Lukan material covering the journey (Lk 9:51-19:27), is punctuated by three summary references to his journeying to Jerusalem: Lk 13:22; 17:11; and 19:11 (cf. also v. 28). The first two of these can be coordinated with a specific saying or prediction by Jesus regarding Jerusalem, and each can be related to significant eschatological teaching. Note how these correlate to divide the material:
    • Lk 13:22: “And he traveled (lit. passed [through]) accordingly down through the cities and villages, teaching and making passage into/unto Jerusalem”
      • Lk 13:34-35—a lament for Jerusalem (corresponding to Matt 23:37ff), which emphasizes the persecution/killing of prophets (cf. also the separate saying in Lk 13:33), with an eschatological prediction of judgment (v. 35)
    • Lk 17:11: “And it came to be in (his) passing (through) into/unto Jerusalem…”
      • Lk 18:31-33—the third (Synoptic) passion prediction by Jesus (par. Mk 10:32-34; Mt 20:17-19), which, unlike the two previous predictions, specifically mentions Jerusalem. In context here, it may also be worth noting the eschatological material (partially found in a different location in Matthew) earlier in Lk 17:20-37.
    • Lk 19:11, 28: these two narrative statements bracket the parable of the ten minas (19:12-27), effectively concluding the travel narrative, and leading into the Triumphal entry (19:28ff). Note the eschatological context of v. 11, similar to that of 17:20-37 above.

Eschatological predictions by Jesus

These are recorded as being uttered by Jesus in or near Jerusalem during Passion week (punctuating the narrative at three points):

    1. Lk 19:41-44 (just following the Triumphal entry)—a lament over Jerusalem with a (graphic) prediction of its destruction
    2. Lk 21:20-24 (partway during Passion week)—Jesus specifically (and again graphically) predicts the siege and destruction of Jerusalem, details not found elsewhere in the so-called Eschatological (Olivet) discourse shared by all three Synoptics (Mk 13; Matt 24), which only refer more generally to the suffering and travail of the time (but with destruction of the Temple indicated, Mk 13:2 par).
    3. Lk 23:28-31 (on the way to crucifixion)—a lament for the women/mothers of Jerusalem, for the great suffering they are about to endure during the siege/destruction of the city (implied).

Clearly, by combining and inserting this material as he has done, the Gospel writer has interwoven the fates of Jesus and Jerusalem in a most dramatic and moving way.

Post-resurrection appearances of Jesus

Unlike the Gospel of Matthew (and as one can infer from Mark 16:1-8), the Gospel of Luke records the first resurrection appearances of Jesus to the disciples as taking place in Jerusalem. The traditions in Luke are partially confirmed by the Gospel of John (Jn 20:1-10, 19-20), and, it would seem, from the long ending of Mark (Mk 16:9-13), though text-critical questions make it difficult to establish both parallels decisively. There are two main episodes:

  • The appearance to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-35)—this extended, highly dramatic narrative is set in proximity to Jerusalem (v. 13, 18), and contains several key themes and motifs found throughout the Gospel and which are developed in the next episode.
  • The appearance to the Twelve (eleven) and larger group of disciples, along with their commission (Lk 24:36-53). This can, in turn, be divided into three parts:
    1) The appearance scene itself, vv. 36-43—this has a parallel in Jn 20:19-20.
    2) The exposition/commission by Jesus, vv. 44-49
    3) Jesus’ blessing and departure, vv. 50-53
    The last two sections are the most original to the Gospel of Luke, and each contain a key reference to Jerusalem:
    • VV, 47-49: the emphasis on Jerusalem as the beginning point of the Gospel proclamation, with the clear directive for the disciples to remain in the city until the coming of the Spirit (“power from out of the height”). This commission is tied in closely to an exposition of the Scriptures (vv. 44ff), in which Jesus “opened their mind/understanding” to recognize that the events of his suffering, death and resurrection were the fulfillment of Scripture (note the similar description and language in 24:25-27, 32).
    • V. 52-53: following the departure/ascension of Jesus, these two short verses narrate:
      • The disciples’ return to Jerusalem (see Acts 1:12 for the same motif)
      • That they were in the sacred place (the Temple) “through (it) all” (dia\ panto/$, i.e. continually), blessing/worshiping God. For similar references in Acts, see 1:14; 2:1, 42, and esp. 46-47 (which refer to their presence in the Temple precincts). Luke clearly intends to depict the early Christians as faithful and devout in matters of religion (like Zechariah/Elizabeth, Joseph/Mary, and Simeon/Anna in the Infancy narratives), by their presence in Jerusalem and association with the Temple—the new believers in Christ represent a continuation (and fulfillment) of the Old Testament patterns of religion.

(The article is part of the periodic series Jews & Gentiles and the People of God.)