Exegesis of Luke

Exegesis of Luke 6. 20-26

Introduction

It seems wise to begin by laying out certain assumptions I bring to the text which might affect my exegesis.  Given that there are a number of scholars who base their exegesis on different understandings of the ‘Q’ document, I shall begin by briefly laying out my thoughts on the matter.  I am inclined to agree with Boch (1994, 9) that Q is best understood, not as a single document (cf. Fitzmeyer, 1981, 66), but as “a pool of widely circulating traditions” given the lack of evidence for ‘Q’ as a single source.  Concerning the form of Lk. 6.20-26 it can be split into two sections, beatitudes (20-23) and woes (24-26).  Within these, the verses can, for the most part, be split into two clauses, a   μακάριοι (20-21) clause, also known as a macarism, or a οὐαὶ (24-25) clause followed by a ὅτι clause (cf. Nolland, 1989, 279).  The passage is placed following Jesus descent of the mountain, he then ministers to a great multitude of his disciples and people from the surrounding area (6.17).  This ‘great multitude’ come to be healed and to hear Jesus’ teaching (6.18) and following the healings and the curing of those with unclean spirits (18-19) he begins to teach (20-26).  The beatitudes and woes, then, form part of Jesus’ sermon on the plain (cf. Mt. 5.2-12 [Sermon on the Mount]) which incorporates both “dominical sayings...and parables” (Fitzmeyer, 1981, 629).

vs 20

Jesus begins his teaching by addressing his disciples with the great multitude of 6.17 still present and starts with the macarisms.  Of particular importance here are the differences between Luke’s beatitudes and Matthew’s (5.2-12) and their renderings of this first macarism.  Luke uses the term πτωχοί (poor) and though this is describing a literal condition the word also carries eschatological connotations.  This is evidenced with reference to the prophecy of 4.18 and through the fact that it is associated with the kingdom of God in 6.20 and the Son of man in 6.22 (cf. Boch, 1994, 573; Johnson, 1991, 106).  Matthew’s rendering of this beatitude draws out these spiritual connotations by adding “in spirit” (cf. Ellis, 1981, 113).

vs 21

In this verse Luke begins to emphasize eschatological reversal.  This is demonstrated through the use of the word νῦν (now) which he uses to contrast the hardships of the present with the reversal of conditions brought about by God in the future (Johnson, 1991, 106-107).  Fitzmeyer (1981, 634) points out that the use of ‘hunger’ is reminiscent of the OT eschatological banquet (cf. Isa 25:6-8; 49:10-13; Ps 107:3-9).  In addition, he (Fitzmeyer, 1981, 634) capitalises on this by postulating that the original version in Q also contains ‘thirst’ in accordance with certain OT groupings, however given the understanding of Q as a pool of traditions, outlined in the introduction, this could just as easily be attributed to variations in the Q traditions as opposed to a deliberate divergence from a single source on the part of Matthew or Luke for stylistic reasons.

vs 22

This verse anticipates the persecution of those who follow Jesus and it echoes both Lk.21.17 and Isa. 66:5 (cf. Nolland, 1989, 284), indeed, Jesus himself had already been subject to persecution (Lk. 4.29).  What this verse also shows is that the blessedness is warranted not necessarily on the basis of harshness of one’s conditions but on one’s relation to the Son of Man (Nolland, 1989, 284), though those literally living in the conditions described in these beatitudes have an advantage in that they are “undistracted by the spurious consolations of the world.” (Caird, 1990, 102)

vs 23

This verse begins with the imperative χάρητε (rejoice) followed by σκιρτήσατε (leap).  The use of σκιρτήσατε is interesting in that Luke used this same term in 1.41,44, again exemplifying the eschatological nature of this pericope (cf. Johnson, 1991, 107).  Jesus compares his followers to that of the OT prophets and how traditionally they were shunned by the Jewish people, as Stephen points out in Acts 7:52 (cf. Lk. 4:24; 13:33-34; 11:47-51; 1kgs 19:10, 14; Jer 2:30; Neh 9:26; 2 Chr 36:15-16; Nolland, 1989, 286). 

vs 24

The woes now begin, signalled by Πλὴν (but).  This time the opposites of the conditions of the first beatitudes are discussed, this first woe dealing with the rich.  This theme is drawn out again in Lk.12.13-21 in the parable of the rich fool.  But it is clear, as is pointed out by Boch (1994, 583) that the rich are not condemned purely on the basis of a socio-economic state, because, as with the term poor in 6.20, there is a spiritual theme underlying the reference to the rich.  Indeed those rich people who are encountered in Luke are excluded on the basis of their attitude not there socio-economic position (Boch, 1994, 583).  The focus is on those who have found their joy in ephemeral things, they “have received...consolation”, but for those who pursue God, they will find eternal joy.

vs 25

Here, as in 6.21 we see Luke drawing upon the nature of eschatological reversal.  Those who are full now, will one day be hungry.  There is a point to be made here concerning the use of γελῶντες (laugh) in 6.25b.  Laughter, in this context, “is that of those who feel quite happy with their present lot in life.” (Nolland, 1989, 288; cf. Fitzmeyer, 1981, 636).  Furthermore, the use of γελάω in the LXX points towards a negative nuance in that “it is often tied to laughter that is boastful, self satisfied, condescending, or rejoicing in the harm that others experience.” (Boch, 1994, 584).   This laughter is to be reversed.  That this is the meaning of γελάω in the beatitudes (Lk.6.21) is to be doubted, however, as the context of its use within a sermon that implores people to love their enemies (Lk.6.27) counts against this interpretation.

vs 26

The final woe mirrors the final beatitude in its form, the prophets of 6.23 being paralleled in this verse by ψευδοπροφήταις (false prophets).  In OT tradition “false prophets gained general approval (Isa 30:9-11; Mic 2:11; Jer 5:31; 23:16-17)” (Nolland, 1989, 288).  Thus, ‘being spoken of well by all’ follows this Jewish tradition and its understanding of false prophets. 

Conclusion

This pericope, then, articulates the nature of God’s blessing through its pronouncement of beatitudes and woes.  It makes clear that, “that blessing knows no socio-economic limitation.” (Boch, 1994, 586).  It identifies the problem with putting one’s trust in ephemeral as opposed to eternal things.  This speaks into our current consumerist age with great profundity as all too often the people of this era fall into the trap of the “fool’s paradise.” (Nolland, 1989, 288).  But this passage also sends a message out to the church.  The church should be responding to the teaching of Jesus, rejoicing in suffering, storing up treasure in heaven, and not pursuing the approval of all at the expense of the gospel.

Word Count:  1046

Bibliography

Boch, D.L. (1994). BECNT: Luke 1:1-9:50. Michigan: Baker Books.

Caird, G.B. (1990). Saint Luke. Penguin.

Ellis, E.E. (1981) NCBC : The Gospel of Luke. (Revised ed.). Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Fitzmeyer, J.A. (1981).  The Gospel According to Luke. New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc.

Johnson, L.T. (1991). The Gospel of Luke. Minnesota: The Liturgical Press.

Nolland, J. (1989). 35a Word Biblical Commentary Luke 1-9:20. Texas: Word, Incorporated.