The Apologetic revisited

240 Pages·2011·2.6 MB·English

JULIUS-MAXIMILIANS-UNIVERSITÄT WÜRZBURG
KATHOLISCH-THEOLOGISCHE FAKULTÄT

The Apologetic revisited:

Exonerating Luke from an Ancestral Exegetical and
Theological Burden

Inaugural Dissertation
zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines
Doktors der Theologie

Betreuer: Professor Dr. Bernhard Heininger
Zweitkorrektor: Professor Dr. Hans Rechenmacher

eingereicht von

Innocent Emezie Ezeani

Januar 2010
I
Table of Content

Chapter 1...............................................................................................................................1
1. Introduction to the theme of the Dissertation...................................................................1
2. Justification of the Study..................................................................................................2
3. Some research works in the course of years.....................................................................3
3.1 Conzelmann: Redaction criticism in Luke and the Apologetic........................................4
3.2 Yoder and Cassidy: Protagonists of a defiant Luke.........................................................6
3.3 Other works of recent years............................................................................................10
3.4 A shift in the Appeasement paradigm............................................................................15
4. Relevant Biblical texts for the Dissertation-theme.........................................................18
5. Methodological Approach..............................................................................................21

Chapter 2.............................................................................................................................26
1. The Magnificat and the theme of power (Lk 1:46-55)...................................................26
1.1 Greek Text......................................................................................................................26
1.2 English translation..........................................................................................................26
2. The Context of the Magnificat........................................................................................26
2.1 Structure and Composition.............................................................................................27
2.1.1 Linguistic Proof for the structure................................................................................28
2.2 Literary Genre.................................................................................................................30
2.3 Literary Criticism...........................................................................................................32
3. Tradition and History......................................................................................................34
4. Some Literal constructions of immense importance......................................................39
4.1 ἡ ταπείνωσις...................................................................................................................39
4.2 Φοβούµενοι του Θεοῦ.....................................................................................................42
4.3 Ὑπερήφανοι....................................................................................................................46
4.4 καθεῖλεν δυνάστας ἀπὸ θρόνων ......................................................................................48
5. Redaction Criticism ........................................................................................................50
6. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................53

Chapter 3 ............................................................................................................................56
1. The Birth Narrative: Imperial edict and divine fulfilment.............................................56
1.1 Greek Text ......................................................................................................................56
1.2 English Translation ........................................................................................................57
2. The Context of the birth narrative .................................................................................58
2.1 The Structure of the Text of the Birth narrative: Lk 2:1-20...........................................59
2.2 The literary Genre of the micro text ..............................................................................61
2.3 The literary development of the Text ............................................................................62
3. Religio-Historical Perspective .......................................................................................63
3.1 Imperial cult: A guide to the understanding of the Text.................................................63
3.1.1 The social and political Aspects of the Pax Romana..................................................65
3.1.2 Εὐαγγελίζοµαι .............................................................................................................66
3.1.3 The imperial Hegemony of the Roman Era ...............................................................68
3.2 Σωτήρ .............................................................................................................................69
3.2.1 Σωτήρ in Old Testament and Judaism ........................................................................71
3.3 Χριστός ..........................................................................................................................72
3.4 Κύριος.............................................................................................................................74
I
II
4. Lukan Profile and Theology...........................................................................................76
4.1 The Lukan use of the title “saviour”...............................................................................76
4.2 The Lukan use of Χριστός..............................................................................................78
4.3 Lukan Theology and criticism of the Pax romana.........................................................80
5. Conclusion......................................................................................................................84

Chapter 4.............................................................................................................................88
1. The second item of the Temptation of Jesus (Lk 4:5-8).................................................88
1.2 Greek Text......................................................................................................................88
1.3 English Translation.........................................................................................................88
2. The Context of the Temptation pericope .......................................................................88
2.1 The compositional structure of the temptation pericope................................................89
2.2 Synoptic comparison of the Lukan and Matthean Accounts .........................................90
2.2.1 Historical and relational Questions.............................................................................92
2.2.2 A hypothetical reconstruction of the Q version..........................................................96
3. History and Tradition......................................................................................................97
3.1 A traditional and historical consideration of the Lukan redaction.................................97
3.1.1 οἰκουµένη....................................................................................................................97
3.1.2 Ἐξουσία.......................................................................................................................98
3.1.3 προσκυνεῖν................................................................................................................101
4. The political Theology of Luke in the temptation Account.........................................104
4.1 Introduction..................................................................................................................104
4.2 The social and cultural context of the Temptation Account in Luke...........................104
4.3 The political and theological message in the Temptation pericope of Luke................111
5. Conclusion......................................................................................................................113

Chapter 5...........................................................................................................................116
1. The Parable of the throne claimant (Lk 19:11-28).......................................................116
1.1 Greek Text....................................................................................................................116
1.2 English Translation.......................................................................................................117
2. The Context of the parable...........................................................................................118
2.1 Structure and Language................................................................................................119
2.2 Literary Genre...............................................................................................................122
2.3 Synoptic Comparison...................................................................................................124
2.4 Literary Criticism.........................................................................................................128
3. Tradition.......................................................................................................................130
3.1 Redaction Criticism......................................................................................................131
4. Conclusion....................................................................................................................137

Chapter 6...........................................................................................................................139
1. Leadership as service: The advice of Jesus within the last supper in Lk 22:24-30......139
1.1 Greek Text....................................................................................................................139
1.2 English Translation.......................................................................................................139
2. Context, Language and Genre of the Text....................................................................139
2.1 The structure of the Pericope........................................................................................142
3. Synoptic Comparison between Luke and Mark...........................................................144
3.1 Differences in points of Departure...............................................................................144
3.2 Text immanent comparison..........................................................................................145
3.2.1 The preoccupation of the Disciples...........................................................................146
3.3 The theological Yield of the synoptic Comparison......................................................148
4. Tradition and History....................................................................................................148
II
III
4.1 Φιλονεικία.....................................................................................................................148
4.2 Εὐεργέτης......................................................................................................................149
4.3 Socio-historical Considerations....................................................................................153
4.3.1 Νεώτερος...................................................................................................................153
4.3.2 ∆ιακονέω...................................................................................................................155
4.3.2.1 ∆ιάκονος as a go-between......................................................................................156
4.3.2.2 The New Testament use of ∆ιακονέω....................................................................157
4.3.2.3 ∆ιακονέω and the innovations of Luke..................................................................157
5. The Twelve and their future judging role in Lk 22:28-30..............................................159
5.1 Synoptic Comparison...................................................................................................159
5.2 Conditions and Content of the Promise........................................................................160
5.3 Conclusion....................................................................................................................162
6. The political theology of Luke.....................................................................................163
6.1 The Lukan Jesus as ὁ διακονῶν....................................................................................163
6.2 The political Intentions of Luke...................................................................................165
7. Conclusion......................................................................................................................168

Chapter 7...........................................................................................................................169
1. The Hubris of Herod: God’s wrath on an arrogant king...............................................169
1.1 Introduction..................................................................................................................169
1.2 Text and Translation of Acts 12:20-24........................................................................169
1.2.1 Greek Text.................................................................................................................169
1.2.2 English Translation...................................................................................................169
2. The Context of the death of Herod...............................................................................170
2.1 The semantic connections and structure of Acts 12:20-24...........................................172
2.2 The literary Genre of Acts 12:20-24.............................................................................173
3. Tradition-Criticism.......................................................................................................175
3.1 The Account of Josephus..............................................................................................176
3.2 Synoptic Comparison with Josephus............................................................................177
3.3 Historical Findings.......................................................................................................180
3.3.1 The Emergence of the King.......................................................................................180
3.3.2 The Speech of Agrippa and its consequence.............................................................182
3.4 Nero from the Perspective of History...........................................................................183
3.5 Conclusion....................................................................................................................186
4. Redaction Criticism .....................................................................................................187
4.1 The theological intention of Luke................................................................................189
4.1.1 The offence of Agrippa within the context of Luke-Acts.........................................190
4.1.2 Conclusion.................................................................................................................193

Chapter 8...........................................................................................................................199
1. Conclusion....................................................................................................................199
2. Yields from the Research work....................................................................................207
3. Proceeds for the day-to-day life....................................................................................209

Bibliography.....................................................................................................................217

III
1. Introduction to the theme of the Dissertation
From the sixties of the last century, the double work of Luke has been holding a
key position in the New Testament field. This interest has partially to do with its
subject matter and length. Glancing through the bibliographies of works in the
field of New Testament exegesis, one sees immediately that much attention has
been bestowed upon it. It would not be an overstatement to say that the writings of
Luke have taken over the interest and domination, which the letters of Paul
enjoyed until the fifties of the last century, and is second only to the scholarship
involved with the historical Jesus.
To this field of proficiency and excellence should be added the political
importance and contribution of Luke: the double work of Luke is, with the
exception of the book of Revelations, the most political work of the New
Testament.1 It is therefore not surprising that for several generations of
scholarship of Luke-Acts, it has been ancestral paying a critical attention to the
relationship between the imperial Rome and the Christian community, especially
the Lukan community. This overarching attention is not only politically
motivated, it also portrays the trajectories of a judicial reality in the Roman world.
The political and the judicial interests of this attention are grounded on the very
interest of Luke in his works. His political sensitivity to realities of his time is
unmistakable as he took time to map out an effusive height of synchronisms,
which he worked out between the dates in the imperial history and in his history
of salvation.2 This observation, which characterises the whole work of Luke from
the gospel to Acts, is too obvious that it does not require any extraordinary
diligence. A partial consequence of this interest is the question regarding the
opinion and attitude of Luke or his dramatic figures to the mighty Rome, to the
powerful and to the socially well to do of his time. Does he present a wonderful
picture of these powerful or are they suspiciously presented? Besides, an
antecedent to this discussion is the widely held ancestry of an appeasement
theology or the Apologetic as presenting an interpretative matrix, which helps in
presenting a summary of the attitude of Luke to the Roman authorities. The Lukan
position is often presented as Apologetic, which comes from the Greek concept of
defence. This concept, with the attendant verbs, appears often in the Acts of the

1 Confer for instance H.J. Klauck, Stimme, 251-267. J.B. Green sees in the nativity presentation
a subtle reference to the political situation of Jesus’ time. Cf. J.B. Green, Luke, 132-135. On the
other hand, M. Wolter sees no political insinuations in the titles given to Jesus in the
proclamation of his birth. Cf. M. Wolter, Lukasevangelium, 128. In relation to the figure of
Hannah in the presentation of Jesus, Heininger has observed that the refusal of Hannah to
remarry after the death of her husband could be seen as a criticism to the laws of Augustus; lex
julia de maritandis ordinibus, lex julia de adulteriis, lex papia poppaea. These laws wanted to
promote the birth rate among the higher class of the citizenry and ordered the remarriage of
widows of the higher caste of the Roman citizenry, failure of which attracted a financial
punishment in the form of higher taxes. From the religious perspective of Luke, it suffices to
maintain that a life dedicated to God is worthier than following the birth-rate politics of an
Emperor. Cf. B. Heininger, Witwe, 159.
2 Luke presents his historical narration with synchronisms: The birth of Jesus is presented as
having taken place during the census ordered by Augustus in Lk 2:1-7. Further, Luke presents
John the Baptist as beginning his ministry in the fifteenth year of the principate of Tiberius as
Pontius Pilate was the governor of Judea (Lk 3: 1-3).
2
Apostles (ἀπολογειν: Acts 19:33; 24:10; 25:8; 26:1, 2, 24; Lk 12:11; 21:14;
ἀπολογια: Acts 22:1; 25:16). There is however, a difference between the Apology
as was used in the early Christian church and the Apology of the biblical science.
In the early church, following the example of the defence of Socrates, the
Apologetic developed into a literary genre, while in the New Testament studies it
expresses the wishes of the early Christians to express and live out their
conviction especially in relation to other religions.3 The tenet of this Apologetic
position in the New Testament is a political stating that Luke undertakes a
friendly portrayal of the Roman power apparatus, in order to show them that the
new faith is far from being a danger to the Roman politics.4 As such, Luke’s
intention is an apologia pro ecclesia. This Apologetic, which partially seems to
capture the essence of the writings of Luke, has blinded scholars from
approaching the Lukan writings from a different perspective, namely from the
perspective of finding out the aversions of Luke to the powerful.5 Unfortunately,
not much has been done in this direction, which explains partly the motif of this
study.

2. The justification of the study
As I have already stated, a typical stand in the research of Luke-Acts is the
conviction that Luke wrote his double work as an Apology for the new Christian
faith, which invariably justifies the theory of an appeasement theology.6 In order
to show that the Christian faith is not a threat to the political entity and imperial
system of Rome, he presents the local and imperial officials in a positive way. He
not only presents the innocence and harmlessness of the Christians but also
portrays the actions of the Roman officials as exemplary since they procure safety
and benefaction for the Christians. This position of Luke to the Roman system
runs from the gospel to the Acts. In both works, there is a series of court
narratives with Roman officials being the important decision takers while the
Jewish officials help out, especially in matters of Religion. Both the arraignment
and cross-examination of Jesus before Pilate (Lk 23:1-23) and the long judicial
process against Paul ending with his arrival in Rome (Acts 21:15-28:31) have one
thing in common: In both court trial processes, the Jews raised their accusations,

3 For more on this cf. H. Omerzu, Imperium, 27.
4 For more than 270 years ago, Heumann proposed the thesis that the two volumes of Luke were
written as an apology for the Christian faith, which was gasping for survival in the Roman
imperial period. This apology was meant to be presented to a magistrate or state official with
the name Theophilus. Cf. C.A. Heumann, Dissertatio, 483-505. Some opine that Luke wrote an
apology for the Christian faith to be presented to the Roman empire, while others maintain that
his works are an apology with a different recipient: An apologia pro imperio to be presented to
the church.
5 As regards the topic of the dissertation, it is important to call to mind the idea of Plümacher
concerning the seeming unanimity of the agreement regarding the “... Vorhandensein einer
politisch-apologetischen Tendenz bei Lk.” E. Plümacher, Acta-Forschung, 51.
6 Cf. H. Conzelmann, Theology, 137-144; W. Radl, Paulus, 325-345; M. Tolbert, Ideas, 446; T.
Reese, Theology, 62-65; M.C. Cano, Prozeß, 210-221; J. Ernst, Portrait, 61-73; F.F. Bruce,
Acts, 2598.
3
while the Roman officials clearly state the innocence of the accused.7 Besides, the
Christian community never proved to be a danger to the Roman state because it
never had any political ambition.8 Even when there seemed to be a sign of
rebellion, it normally came from the Jewish citizens. Last but not the least, the
Roman Empire, represented by the local officials, protects a Christianity seeking
survival in the midst of Jewish foes represented by the religious aristocrats.9 Even
in Acts, Paul hopes to get a favourable judgement from the emperor, which
explains his appeal to him (Acts 25:11). Also at his arrival in Rome, the Roman
state was never a hindrance to the preaching activity of Paul (Acts 28: 30-31).10
With these arguments and observations, the institution of the Apologetic as a
central and not a peripheral theme of the Lukan double work seems to have its
foundation on solid, thorough and well thought out biblical arguments.11 On the
background of these findings, therefore, it sounds absurd and redundant trying to
find out the criticisms, which Luke meted on the political elites since they would
not seem to exist. Many literatures on this topic, which support the above
Apologetic thesis, make it almost impossible to undertake a work of this nature,
which tries to systematise the subtle Lukan criticisms on the powerful. What I am
attempting is a proverbial swimming against the current, an Aspektverschiebung
or as M. Ebner would say, a project “…gegen den Strich der exegetischen
Auslegungstradition…”12

3. Some research works in the course of years
There exist two tendencies in the domain of the Apologetic argumentation, which
portray an apparent disunity of this apologetic syndrome. Is this Lukan apologetic
an apologetic for the empire to the church (apologia pro imperio) or the
apologetic for the church to the Empire? According to Vernon Robbins, Luke
worked from the perspective of establishing a lively and positive symbiosis
between Christianity and the Roman Empire. The intentions of both institutions
do not contradict each other: “This means that Christianity functions in the

7 Erika Heusler has argued in this direction. She opined that Luke presented Jesus as a nationale
of a conquered territory, who was accorded the privileges of a Roman citizen. According to her,
Luke is working with a political apologetic, which exonerated the Romans from all guilt, not
only in the Gospel, but also in Acts: Pilate, Felix and Festus did everything possible to assure
the accused the maximum protection of the Roman legal processes, while the chief priests and
the scribes assume responsibility for the death of Jesus. Cf. E. Heusler, Kapitalprozesse, 259-
266.
8 C. Burchard, Zeuge, 184: “Derjenige Aussagenkomplex, der sich am ehesten an (heidnische)
Außenstehende richtet, ist die politische Apologetik, die einerseits auf Differenzierung des
Christentums vom faktischen Judentum aus ist, andererseits auf die Feststellung, dass der
christliche Glaube Staat und Gesetze Roms nicht verletzt und daß die Behörden das jedenfalls
zu Paulus’ Zeit auch anerkannten.“
9 Cf. J.B. Tyson, Death, 138: “The Pharisaic block of Jesus’ opponents is not present at the
crucial moment. The foes of Jesus who are to blame are those who formed the priestly block.”
10 For a summary and an exegetical foundation of these arguments for an appeasement theology,
cf. F.W. Horn, Haltung, 203-212.
11 J. Weiss has already noticed this phenomenon in 1897 in his book, “Absicht und literarischer
Charakter der Apostelgeschichte”.
12 M. Ebner, Widerstand, 129.
4
domain of the Roman Empire, and this empire is good because it works
symbiotically with Christianity. Roman laws, correctly applied, grant Christians
the right to pursue the project started by Jesus, and the goals of Christianity,
rightly understood, work congruently with the goals of the Roman Empire.”13
Walaskay supports this claim with his opinion: “Far from supporting the view that
Luke was defending the Church to a Roman magistrate, the evidence points us in
the other direction. Throughout his writings Luke has carefully, consistently, and
consciously presented an apologia pro imperio to his church.”14 He even
maintained that Luke has neutralised some aspects of the anti-Roman sentiments
with the intention of portraying the positive aspects of the Roman rule.15
In the last century, the thesis of apologia pro ecclesia has, before the Second
World War, enjoyed a careful analysis by Cadbury, leading to the reality that the
Rome-directed apologetic has continued to thrive, which eventually gave rise to
the theory of religio licita.16 Luke, according to Cadbury, had different aims for
the compilation of Luke-Acts. One of these aims was the concern of proclaiming
the loyalty of the church to the political institutions.17 He, however, offers an
appendage regarding the certainty of his thesis: “Our knowledge of Roman law on
these points and of Rome’s treatment of the Christians in the first century is too
uncertain for any assurance.”18

3.1 Conzelmann: Redaction criticism in Luke and the Apologetic
After the Second World War, a renaissance in the redaction critical school of the
Lukan scholarship began with the person of Conzelmann and with his classical
piece in redaction criticism, Die Mitte der Zeit. He took over the apologetic line of
those before him, however, with the observation that the Lukan apologetic was
prompted by the very realisation that the church was still at its very beginning and
had the wonderful prospect of still enjoying many years of existence. As such, the
clarification of its status and position becomes highly imperative, not only in
relation to the Roman state, but also to Judaism.19 From this perspective, this
overarching enterprise of clarifying its status is historical, as well as genetic and
theological. As a result, the Lukan apologetic is not only an internal endeavour,
but also an external enterprise.20 The aim of the internal apologetic was to work
towards the reconciliation of the different schools in Christianity and to define its
relation to Judaism, while the external apologetic was deeply political defending
the church before the state. The apologetic in relation to Judaism is independent of
the political apologetic to the state. In addition, Conzelmann, while accepting the
political apologetic, maintained however, that Luke was not interested in making
an appeal for the toleration of Christianity, but in appealing to the state to allow

13 V.K. Robbins, Luke-Acts, 202.
14 P. Walaskay, Rome, 64.
15 Cf. P. Walaskay, Rome, 64.
16 Other notable adherents of this theory include Foakes-Jackson, Kirsopp Lake and B.S. Easton.
17 Cf. J. Cadbury, Luke-Acts, 308.
18 J. Cadbury, Luke-Acts, 308.
19 Cf. H. Conzelmann, Luke, 137.
20 Cf. H. Conzelmann, Luke, 148.
5
Christianity to enjoy her rights under the Roman law.21 For Conzelmann, Luke’s
apologetic tracks a trajectory through Luke-Acts and consists of his emphasis on
the disinterest of the church in political matters, starting from John the Baptist and
continuing into the ministry of Jesus and the early church.22 Instances of this non-
political stance include the non-political reason for the arrest and imprisonment of
John (Lk 3:19), the non-political programme of the sermon of Jesus (Lk 4:16-19),
the encouragement given to the apostles to bear witness to kings and governors in
Lk 21:12-15 because “…to confess oneself to be a Christian implies no crime
against Roman law.”23 In Acts, according to Conzelmann, this tendency is
evidenced in 10:1 where the first pagan to be admitted to the faith is Cornelius, an
official of the Roman state. Further, in 16: 35-39 Luke writes of the Roman
citizenship of Paul.
However, a consequence of this apologetic syndrome is to fathom the length at
which the early Church was actually persecuted. Conzelmann has seen the Lukan
church as an ecclesia pressa, which made this apologetic necessary. Karris
deposits his doubt on affirming the first century church as a victim of imperial
persecution, on the ground of the futile effort involved in finding evidences for
such persecutions.24 One can at most say that the Jews were very instrumental to
the Roman persecutions of Christians.
It is worth noting, however, that this apologetic euphoria does not carry all
commentators of Luke-Acts, in as much as certain works on Luke-Acts have
attempted a shift from this ancestry. Lukas Bormann, for instance, has propagated
the concept of the “Verrechtlichung” in the study of Luke-Acts.25 Such a concept,
while not completely neglecting the apologetic thesis, would open another horizon
for the study of Luke-Acts. He summarises this concept as “die Tendenz eines
Autors, Überlieferungen mit rechtlichen Details anzureichern, Vorgänge innerhalb
juristischer Kategorien zu interpretieren und juristische Problemstellungen in den
Erzählablauf zu integrieren”.26 With this method, Luke was able to adapt his work
to the interest of the reader, inasmuch as court and trial episodes are veritable
means of generating tension in ancient Rome.27 Bormann supports his claim with
these instances: A. The numerous occurrences of situations, in which legal matters
are of immense importance. B. The right of the Roman nationality of Paul
evidences a crucial change in the way he was treated by the officials. In addition,
this right of his nationality determines the structure of the trial from Acts 22:25.
C. The legal relation of Paul to Tarsus and Rome is insinuated at the beginning,
only to be treated fully in the course of the portrayal. D. There was no other

21 Cf. H. Conzelmann, Luke, 142-144.
22 Cf. H. Conzelmann, Luke, 138-144.
23 Cf. H. Conzelmann, Theology, 140.
24 Cf. R.J. Karris, Communities, 84-86.
25 L. Bormann, Verrechtlichung, 283-311.
26 L. Bormann, Verrechtlichung, 287.
27 Cf. L. Bormann, Verrechtlichung, 304. The interest of Luke in forensic trials is an evidenced
fact in the Lukan scholarship with textual evidences. For more on these forensic trials confer
J.H. Neyrey, Passion, 84f. For the Book of Acts confer A.A. Trites, Importance, 278-284.
6
martyrdom after that of Stephen and there was no punishment after the episode in
Philippi.28
Bormann portrays Luke as being aware of the use of the Jewish apologetic in
political matters in her surroundings through diplomacy. The possibility of this
high level of diplomacy is however lacking in Luke, which he however,
substitutes with the “Verrechtlichung” of his sources. This thesis of the
“Verrechtlichung” not only helps Luke to exemplify the innocence of Jesus and
Paul from the Roman legal perspective, it also serves as a reaction to the
expanding popularity of the Roman power and legal system. However, a careful
evaluation of this concept would locate it at the periphery of the apologetic,
inasmuch as it “…greift auf Erfahrungen und Traditionen der jüdischen
Apologetik in der hellenistisch-römischen Welt zurück.”29

3.2 Yoder and Cassidy: Protagonists of a defiant Luke
Contrary to the mild assessment of Bormann are some exegetes, who see in Luke
a theologian that writes against the power structure of the Roman Empire. Their
wish is to sharpen the horizon for the forms, functions and consequences of the
Roman power structure as experienced in the social, military, economic and of
course political control mechanisms and the reactions of the people.30 One of
them, John Howard Yoder, has presented several theses in his book, The Politics
of Jesus just to show that the Lukan composition is far from being influenced by
an appeasement theology. Yoder is fully convinced that the ministry of the Lukan
Jesus was not only a social but also an economic and political revolution.
Working from the perspective of the jubilee proclamation in Lk 4:18-19, a text
which forms the fountain of his arguments, and from the conviction that Luke’s
year of favour refers to the jubilee year of the Old Testament, Yoder argues that
the presentation of Jesus’ mission equals “a visible socio-political, economic
restructuring of relations among the people of God.”31 With this singular
conviction of Jesus, he constitutes a danger for the Roman political elites.32 The
Lukan texts dealing with the annunciation and the Lukan presentation of the
preaching of John the Baptist arouse socio-political hopes, especially with the
martial tone of the Magnificat in Lk 1:52-53. In addition, the political tone of the
birth narrative accentuates the political expectations and features of Jesus with
known ancestries within the Jewish religious expectations: Bethlehem, the city of
David; the angelic “peace on earth”; the unannounced but anxious appearance of
Simeon and Anna garnished with a considerable height of liberation hopes. The
sermon of Jesus on the plain (Lk 6:20-49) takes into account the social reality of
his hearers. This sermon is revolutionary in as much as it propagates an ethic not
founded on the principles of natural law. Jesus forms a new community of

28 Notwithstanding the ingenuity and artistry of Bormann, it must still be mentioned that the
martyrdom of James in Acts 12 and the intended murder of Peter, all with the collaboration of
the Jews in the same chapter, are too conspicuous to be ignored.
29 L. Bormann, Verrechtlichung, 311.
30 Cf. H. Omerzu, Imperium, 28.
31 J.H. Yoder, Politics, 39.
32 Cf. J.H. Yoder, Politics, 50-52.