[B-Greek] Luke 17: 20-21
Elizabeth Kline
kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Thu Sep 17 16:57:03 EDT 2009
On Sep 17, 2009, at 11:34 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:
> There is some linguistic support for reading ENTOS as "in your
> midst" or "among you" . This evidence has been known for a long time
> so obviously it didn't convince everyone.
> .
I found a useful synopsis of the interpertaions online in class notes
from Professor Barry D. Smith [1]
Here is the section that talks about Luke 17: 20-21
{start quote}
5. Kingdom of God as Inseparable from Jesus
Jesus sees the Kingdom of God as inseparable from himself. In his
presence, the Kingdom of God is present to his contemporaries, and
rejection of him is the rejection of the Kingdom.
5.1. The Kingdom of God in Your Midst (Luke 17:20-21)
Luke contains a saying in which Jesus describes the nature of the
appearance of the Kingdom of God; in it he connects the Kingdom with
himself.
Some unconvincingly reject the authenticity of Luke 17:20b-21, viewing
the passage as Lukan redaction (Strobel, In dieser Nacht (Luk 17,34):
Zu einer älteren Form der Erwartung in Luk 17,20-37,” ZTK 58 (1961)
16-39 (26-27); id., “Zu Lk 17,20f.,” BZ 7 (1963) 111-13; D.
Luehrmann,Redaktion, 72; Merkelin, Gottesherrschaft, 122). Luke is not
in the habit of creating sayings of Jesus (see Schlosser, Le Règne de
Dieu dans les Dits de Jésus, 1.181; Perrin, Rediscovering the Teaching
of Jesus, 68-74).
The Pharisees ask Jesus when the Kingdom of God will come in 17:20a.
(Although not particularly Lukan, Luke 17:20a may have been composed
by Luke, as is often suggested. If he did his goal was to provide a
context in which to understand the apophthegma saying that follows has
been suggested. But this does not mean that it is a historical
fabrication.) Jesus’ response in 17:20b-21 is constructed in
antithetical parallelism. The negative member of Jesus’ response
consists of two coordinating clauses joined by “nor” (oude), which
describe how the Kingdom of God does not come: “The Kingdom of God is
not coming with signs to be observed (meta paratêrêseôs), nor will
they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’”
Schlosser argues that the phrase meta paratêrêseôs is Lukan redaction
(Le Règne de Dieu dans les Dits de Jésus, 1.196-201). He begins by
noting first the difficulty of finding a Semitic equivalent of the
phrase and second the fact that the word belongs to “la langue relevée
et savante” (196). These data consistent with a Lukan origin. He then
observes that the construction meta + genitive is as much Lukan as it
is traditional, and, since it is a hapax in the New Testament, the
wordparatêrêsis can no more be attributable to the tradition as to
Lukan redaction (197). Yet he observes that the word is not part of
common speech but a literary word and so would more likely originate
with Luke than in the tradition. In fact, the verb paratereô occurs
six times in the New Testament and four of these are in Luke’s
writings; this supports the hypothesis that the noun paratêrêsis is
also Lukan (197). Against the argument that logion 113 in Gospel of
Thomas, which contains the clause “"It will not come by watching for
it,” is an independent translation of the original Aramaic, Schlosser
claims that the logion is literarily dependent on Luke 17:20-21. This
means that it cannot be used as evidence for the originality of the
phrase “with signs to be observed” in the saying. Schlosser also
argues that there is no evidence to conclude that 17:20b (without the
phrase “with signs to be observed”) has been added to the tradition
either by Luke or the early church (199-200). In conclusion, he
reconstructs the original saying, which he considers to be basically
identical to what Jesus actually said, as: ouk erchetai hê basileia
tou theou idou (gar) hê basileia tou theou entos estin (17:20b+21b).
Schlosser’s argument is an example of trying to prove too much with
too little: his reconstruction of the alleged original form of the
tradition is too speculative.
The first way in which the Kingdom does not come is “with signs
to be observed.” In the context, the meaning of “signs to be observed”
probably describes empirically observable phenomena associated with
the inception of eschatological fulfillment. Jesus’ questioners hold
the view that the coming of the Kingdom of God will be universally
recognizable by its accompanying manifestations, and they want to know
when Jesus believes these premonitory manifestations will begin to
occur, thereby heralding the Kingdom. (On this interpretation “come”
has a future meaning since it is referring to the future Kingdom of
God.) The second way in which the Kingdom of God does not come is in
such a way that someone could say “Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it
is!” The meaning seems to be the same as “with signs to be observed.”
In other words, Jesus is saying that, contrary to their expectation,
the Kingdom of God will not come in such a way as to be universally
recognized as such. He rejects the presupposition behind the question,
namely that the Kingdom of God will all at once come as a publicly
observable event. In other words, the Kingdom will not come all at
once, as full-blown, so that no one could deny that it has come.
Rather, Jesus' conception of the Kingdom of God is that it begins
inconspicuously, so that it is possible to deny that it has come at
the earliest stages of its historical development.
In 1 Enoch, God’s eschatological appearance is described three times.
In such cases, that this is time of the eschaton will be universally
known. First, in the introduction to the Book of Watchers, Enoch says
that what he expounds is revelation pertaining to the distant future
(1 En 1:2–3b). (There are parallels in vocabulary and form between 1
En 1:2–3b and the oracles of Balaam, especially Num 24:15–17.) Then
comes the description of the eschatological theophany: God will come
from his dwelling, identified later as “the heaven of heavens,” to Mt.
Sinai in order to judge the whole world (1 En 1:3c–9). (For the
biblical sources of this theophany, see, in particular, Deut 33:1–3;
Jer 25:31; Micah 1:3–4.) God appears eschatologically as a warrior
accompanied by his angelic armies to bring judgment not only to all
human beings, but also to fallen angels known as the Watchers (1 En
1:5). As the author says in 1 En 1:9, “He comes with the myriads of
his holy ones to execute judgment on all.” That the appearance is to
be upon Mt. Sinai is probably due to the fact that it was on this
mountain that God gave the Law to Moses; the implication is that God’s
judgment will be on based on the Law. (In Deut 33:2, God appears from
Sinai, and it is not the place to which he descends.) The theophany is
accompanied by cosmic disturbances and upheaval, caused by God’s
appearance (1 En 1:5–7) (see Exod 19:16–20; 20:18; Judg 5:4; Ps 68:7–
8; Mic 1:2–4; Nah 1:5; Hab 3:6). Second, later in the Book of
Watchers, on his journeys Enoch comes to a tall mountain, one of seven
mountains, situated in the center of the other six (1 En 24–25). The
archangel Michael explains to Enoch that on the summit of this
mountain is the throne upon which God will sit when he descends to
visit the earth in goodness (1 En 25:3). What is being described is
the eschatological theophany for the purpose of judgment, or, to use
the idiom, the time when God will “visit” the earth. Third, in the
Epistle of Enoch, Enoch explains that on the day of final judgment,
God will appear as a warrior and with the help of his angelic army
execute eschatological judgment (1 En 100:4; see 91:7). Finally, in
the discourse on eschatological judgment preserved in 4Q416 frg. 1 (=
4Q418 frg. 2), using biblical imagery, the author appears to depict
the time of eschatological judgment as a theophany, with the result
that all creation will respond in fear and trembling to the appearance
of God as righteous judge (4Q416 frg. 1.11–15) (see Isa 24:18; Ps
77:16–18).
The positive member of Jesus’ response is the remarkable
statement that the Kingdom of God has already come: “For behold, the
kingdom of God is in your midst” (see Xenophon, Anab. 1.10.3;Hellen.
2.3.19; Herodotus, Hist. 7.100.3; Arrian, An. V, 22, 4. In its use in
this phrase, it is a synonym for en mesô). In Aquila Exod 17:7 the Heb
wnbrqb is translated as entos humôn). Jesus’ point is that the Kingdom
of God is in the midst of his questioners insofar as he is in their
midst, so inseparable is he from the Kingdom. Of course, the Kingdom
is in its initial phases and so is still only partially and even
ambiguously present. For this reason, the possibility exists to deny
that it is present at all, in which case Jesus would be seen as having
no salvation-historical significance at all. When it comes to
completion, the Kingdom of God will be undeniable, but until then a
person will be able to accept or reject Jesus’ claim that the Kingdom
of God is already present insofar as he is present.
The prepositional phrase entos humôn could also be translated as
"within you" (Dalman, Words of Jesus, 143-47; Dodd, Parables, 63 n 2
R. Sneed, “The Kingdom of God is within You” (Lk 17,21),”CBQ 24 (1962)
363-82. Percy argues that the reason that Kingdom does not come with
signs to be observed is because the Kingdom is a purely inward
phenomenon (Die Botschaft Jesu, 216-23) Moreover, the linguistic
evidence may slightly favor such an interpretation (Moule, An Idiom
Book of the New Testament, 83-84; But the interpretation "in the midst
of you" better coheres with Jesus' understanding of the Kingdom of God
as already present in its incipient stages by virtue of his own
presence by virtue. In no other saying does Jesus internalize the
Kingdom as a spiritual reality within. Another interpretive
possibility is that Jesus is saying that the Kingdom of God is within
the reach, grasp or possession of his hearers in the sense of being
their disposal: “within your reach, grasp or possession” or “to take
it lies among your choices and within your power” (H.J. Cadbury, “The
Kingdom of God and Ourselves,” Christian Century 67 [1950] 172-73;
C.H. Roberts, “The Kingdom of Heaven (Lk xvii. 21),” HTR 41 [1948]
1-8; A. Rüstow, “Entos hymon estin: Zur Deutung von Lukas 17.20-21,”
ZNW 51 [1960] 197-224). The context does not support this
interpretation because it must be in antithetical parallelism with
come with signs to be observed: already present but hidden.
{end quote}
Elizabeth Kline
[1] Religious Studies 2203
Life of Jesus
Lecture Questions
Part Two
Professor Barry D. Smith
Atlantic Baptist University
Fall Semester 2008-2009
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list