The Year of Public Favor, Part 2: “Rabbi Jesus,” or the Teaching Ministry of Christ

By David J. MacLeod [1]

Dave MacLeod is Chairman of the Division of Biblical Studies at Emmaus Bible College and Associate Editor of The Emmaus Journal.

The Bible is a written record of God’s revelation to man. The existence of such a written record gave rise to the need for competent and expert knowledge. The office of teacher, therefore, had a long and honorable history in Israel. [2] The Hebrew word for the Law is תּוֹרָה (tôrāh), which in its wider sense means teaching, instruction, or direction. [3] When Moses was given the Law to impart to the people of Israel, the Lord told him that he was to teach it to them (Deut. 4:14; cf. Ex. 24:12). At the same time Aaron was told that the priests were also to be involved in the teaching of the Law to the people (Lev. 10:11; Deut. 33:10). As the people came to understand and appreciate the Law, “lay” Israelites took up the study of the Law, and, by the second century b.c., a highly respected, independent order of “Torah scholars,” or soferim were in existence side by side with the priests (cf. Ecclesiasticus 38:22–39:11).

In Jesus’ day the process was complete, and these scribes (i.e., “Scripture experts,” γραμματεῖς, grammateis) were the “undisputed spiritual leaders of the people.” Among their number were “lawyers” (νομικοί, nomikoi, Matt. 22:35; Luke 7:30; 10:25) or “teachers of the law” (νομοδιδάσκαλοι, nomodidaskaloi, Luke 5:17; Acts 5:34), who not only were experts in the Law but taught it. [4] The extraordinary respect which these sages enjoyed among the people is seen in the reverential form of address given to them, i.e., “Rabbi” (רַבִּי).

That Jesus was a teacher is certainly the testimony of the New Testament. [5] This was the common perception of his contemporaries, friends and foes alike. This is demonstrated by the following facts: He was commonly addressed as “rabbi” or “teacher,” and the relationship he had with his closest followers was the customary teacher-disciple relationship [6] of first-century Judaism. [7] The term teacher is used more than forty times to describe him, and the Aramaic title Rabbi is used fourteen times. [8] The title Rabbi (ῥαββί) is from a Hebrew word (רַב, ra) meaning “great,” which was used with the sense “my great one” or “my lord” (רַבִּי, rabbî). As a title of reverential respect for a religious teacher (“my lord”), it seems to have originated about the time of Jesus. [9] In any case it is widely accepted that our Lord Jesus Christ was the greatest spiritual and moral teacher of all times. [10] To the professional educator and student of the history of teaching this is because of his manner and method, but to the Christian this is true because of who he was, and what he taught.

It is my purpose in this article to survey the teaching ministry of Christ. His public ministry lasted approximately three and a half years. Traditionally these years have been called “the year of obscurity,” which took place in the south in the province of Judea, “the year of public favor,” which lasted about a year and a half and took place to the north in Galilee, and “the year of opposition,” which took place in Judea and Perea. Having considered the “year of obscurity,” [11] we turn now to the “great Galilean ministry” during the “year of public favor.” And we begin our study with his teaching ministry, for that is the way his public ministry began. [12]

The Setting of Jesus’ Teaching Ministry

The Inception of His Ministry, Matt. 4:12

Now when Jesus heard that John had been taken into custody, He withdrew into Galilee;

The arrest of John the Baptist [13] was the “divine cue” for Jesus to step out from John’s shadow and begin his own public ministry. [14] “With John’s ministry completed, Jesus saw that it was time to begin his own.” [15] Herod’s imprisonment was “the signal for the herald to be replaced by the King. Men may stifle the prophets and the apostles, but they cannot derail the Word of God.” [16]

The Scene of His Ministry, Matt. 4:13-16

And leaving Nazareth, He came and settled in Capernaum, which is by the sea, in the region of Zebulun and Naphtali. This was to fulfill what was spoken through Isaiah the prophet: “The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles — The people who were sitting in darkness saw a great light, and those who were sitting in the land and shadow of death, upon them a light dawned.”

After his poorly received sermon in Nazareth (Luke 4:14–30), Jesus settled in Capernaum, a town on the north-west shore of the Sea of Galilee, in the territory of Naphtali, about two miles west of the Jordan River. The scene of our Lord’s ministry for the next eighteen months would be Galilee, the most northerly of the four provinces of Palestine. This means that the geographical area in which he ministered was a very small one. Palestine as a whole is only 150 miles long from north to south and an average of fifty miles wide from west to east. [17] Galilee itself is only sixty miles long from north to south, and thirty miles wide from west to east — about the size of many counties in the United States. [18] It is helpful to remember this, because it explains why the message of Jesus could spread so rapidly over the land, and how all parts of the province could flock to his ministry. [19]

Isaiah prophesied that Jesus would live there, Matthew says in verses 15–16. The word Galilee originally meant something like “district” or “region.” [20] By Jesus’ time it was a formal name, “the Galilee,” or “the Region.” In a pejorative or negative sense it had been called, “the region of the Gentiles/nations,” because it was occupied by a large number of foreigners. In the first century this was something of a nickname, like “America the melting pot.” [21] Jesus worked where Judaism touched the pagan world, where light met darkness. [22] These words from Isaiah 9:1 in verse 15 become a wonderful prophecy prefiguring “the missionary Jesus.” [23] His message will not be confined to Israel only; from the outset it is hinted that the evangelistic message of Jesus will be worldwide. [24]

Galilee contains “the coolest, most picturesque and lush mountainous district.” For the most part it is an elevated plateau whose “terrain is diversified, containing volcanic and limestone hills with alluvial fertile plains. It has been compared with portions of the Carolina and Virginia Piedmont.” [25] Near its eastern boundary it suddenly drops down into a large gulf, through which the Jordan River flowed. In the middle of this rift, 685 feet below sea level and surrounded by mountains, is the beautiful harp-shaped, deep blue Sea of Galilee, a sheet of water thirteen miles long by seven and a half miles wide. The ancient rabbis used to say, “Jehovah has created seven seas, but the Sea of Galilee is his delight.” [26]

The area was suitable for raising wheat and barley as well as olives, oranges, and figs. In Jesus’ day the whole shore of the lake was studded with towns and villages, the chief of which were Capernaum, Bethsaida, and Chorazin. It was a beehive of swarming human life. According to Josephus there were about three million people in Galilee, with many villages containing populations of fifteen thousand. [27] This helps explain the large crowds that frequently followed Jesus. The waters of the lake teemed with fish, providing employment for thousands of fishermen. The whole area was marked by energy and prosperity. [28]

As Johnson observed, if one were to take away from the Gospels the incidents in Jesus’ life that are associated with the Sea of Galilee, a significant portion of his life would be lost. It was in Galilee that he preached and taught, called his disciples, spoke nineteen of his thirty-two parables, performed twenty-five of his thirty-three recorded miracles — including the stilling of the storm and his walking upon water — where he was transfigured, and where he appeared to his disciples after his resurrection. [29]

The Activities of Jesus’ Teaching Ministry [30]

Verbal Discourse, Matt. 4:17, 23

Having settled in Capernaum, Matthew wrote, “Jesus began to preach and say, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand’” (v. 17). His ministry was an itinerant one, with Jesus “going throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues [31] and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness among the people” (v. 23). [32] To visit all of the synagogues in Galilee would require at least three months — at the rate of two villages per day with no time off for the Sabbath. [33]

In verse 23 the three participles stand out: “teaching” (διδάσκων, didaskōn), “proclaiming” or “preaching” (κηρύσσων, kēryssōn), and “healing” (θεραπεύων, therapeuōn). They are the three chief activities of our Lord during his earthly ministry prior to his death. [34] Two of the terms, teaching and preaching, are the focus of this message. [35] The difference between teaching and preaching should not be over pressed, but Matthew does seem to make some kind of distinction because he uses both terms in the same verse, when one would have been sufficient if he thought they were synonymous. [36] The word teaching (διδάσκων) speaks of instruction, i.e., exposition of the Scriptures. The method and style Jesus used was very much that of a Jewish teacher. The incident in the synagogue of Nazareth is a case in point (Luke 4:16–21). [37] Like other Jewish teachers, he stood to read the Scriptures, and then sat down to expound them. [38] Like other expositors of the times, he based his address on the passage he had just read. Teaching, then, was the explanation and application of the Scriptures to his hearers. [39]

It is the unanimous testimony of the Gospel writers that teaching was “one of the most prominent functions of Jesus in His public ministry.” [40] That is why, in evangelical churches, such prominence has historically been given to the teaching of God’s Word. James Orr (1844–1913), the well-known Scottish theologian, remarked, “If there is a religion in the world which exalts the office of teaching, it is safe to say that it is the religion of Jesus Christ.” [41]

The word proclaiming/preaching (κηρύσσων) was originally used of a herald. It had the basic meaning, “to cry out loud,” “to proclaim,” “to declare,” “to announce.” It was used, for example, of proclaiming the victors and honors at games in the amphitheater. [42] While his teaching focused on his interpretation of Scripture and its implications for our behavior and actions, Jesus’ preaching/proclamation focused on God’s activity and the announcement of it. It had “as its content or subject the divine work.” In this passage it is the announcement that the kingdom is coming. [43] Proclamation “does not mean the delivery of a learned and edifying or hortatory discourse in well-chosen words and a pleasant voice. It is the declaration of an event…. [It] is not a lecture on the nature of God’s kingdom. It is proclamation.” [44]

What Jesus proclaimed was “the gospel of the kingdom” (τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς βασιλείας, to euangelion tēs basileias). The word gospel (εὐαγγέλιον) means “good news.” Among the Greeks the term was a technical term for “news of victory,” i.e., it was used of the proclamation of the good news of victory in battle. Here it is the wonderful news, the glad tidings, and the thrilling fact that the time of messianic fulfillment promised in the days of Isaiah is now at hand (see the quotation of Isaiah 9:1–2 in verses 15–16). [45]

The teaching and preaching of Jesus proved to be a sensation. Matthew says that “news about Him spread throughout all Syria” (v. 24). [46] “Large crowds followed Him” — not only from Galilee but from Judea and the areas east of the Jordan River (v. 25). [47] Perhaps the best summary of this aspect of Christ’s ministry came from the lips of soldiers who were later sent to arrest him: “Never did a man speak the way this man speaks” (John 7:46).

Symbolic Gestures

Another word that the Gospels use to describe Jesus is prophet (προφήτης, prophētēs). [48] Our Lord used the word of himself (Matt. 13:57; Luke 4:24), and he was so described by the ordinary people (Matt. 21:11; John 7:40). The OT prophets were occasionally called to present the truth not merely in verbal expression, [49] but in certain dramatic portrayals in which they were to be the center of an “object lesson” given by divine mandate. Examples of such symbolic gestures include the following: Isaiah gave to his sons symbolic names (Isa. 7:3; 8:3), Jeremiah hid his waistband in the crevice of a rock (Jer. 13:1–7), Ezekiel lay down on each side for long periods of time and was tied with ropes (Ezek. 4:4–8), and Hosea married a woman who turned out to be a harlot (Hos. 1).

In the ministry of Jesus there were symbolic gestures also. They included: his baptism by John (Matt. 3:13–17), his writing on the ground (John 8:6), the washing of his disciples’ feet (John 13), his visible transfiguration before his disciples (Matt. 17:1–8), his triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Matt. 21:1–11), his cleansing of the Temple (Matt. 21:12–13), his cursing of the fig tree (Matt. 21:18–22), his anointing with precious oil (Matt. 26:6–13), and his last supper with the elements of bread and wine (Matt. 26:6–13).

Yet there was something else: the OT prophets were men consecrated to God, i.e., holy men (cf. Isa. 6:6–7). Yet the greatest of the prophets were under the curse of sin, and failed to portray with completeness the truth of God. That, however, is precisely what Jesus accomplished. He said that his food was to do the will of him who sent him (John 4:34). In his prayer in John 17:6 he said, “I manifested Your name to the men whom You gave Me out of the world.” John 1:18 says that “He has explained” God. We might paraphrase the Greek text, “He exegeted (ἐξηγήσατο [exēgēsato]) him.” No one knows God, says Jesus in Matthew 11:27, unless the Son reveals him. In short, Jesus’ revelation was faithful and complete.

The Manner of Jesus’ Teaching Ministry [50]

The Qualities of His Style

It Was Oral Teaching [51]

One student of the Gospels wrote long ago that Jesus “was the greatest of the greatest oral teachers.” [52] It was spoken teaching, not written. In fact, only once in the Gospels do we see Jesus writing (John 8:6). All his teaching was entrusted to the memories of a group of peasants and fishermen. He planted a seed, and God and the soil did the rest. The Holy Spirit enabled them later to put his teaching into writing (John 14:26; 16:15).

He Used Didactic Discourses

In the Gospels there are several blocks of teaching made up of didactic discourse. The major discourses are the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7), the Parables of Matthew 13, the Upper Room Discourse (John 14–16), and the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24–25). [53]

He Made Simple Statements of Fact

Examples of simple statements of fact are sprinkled throughout the Gospels. They include, “God is spirit” (John 4:24), “I have come down from heaven” (John 6:38), and “I go to prepare a place for you” (John 14:2).

He Used Literary Forms and Rhetorical Devices [54]

He used proverbial statements (e.g., the Beatitudes). Examples include: “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy” (Matt. 5:1–11). On another occasion, late in his ministry, he said, “All those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword” (Matt. 26:52).

He told parabolic stories. The word parable (παραβολή, parabolē) is from a verb (παραβάλλω, paraballō) meaning “to set beside,” or “to compare.” In the Gospels the term is used of a saying or story of Jesus that is designed to illustrate a spiritual truth through comparison. [55] For this purpose he used everyday common things, customs, and experiences of life. The parables had a twofold purpose. They were designed pedagogically to make the truth simple and luminous (Mark 4:11). And they were used judgmentally to veil the truth from those who were hostile, unbelieving, and disobedient toward Christ’s message (Matt. 13:13–15; Mark 4:12). [56] The prodigal son (Luke 15:11–32), the sower (Matt. 13:1–9), the good Samaritan (Luke 10:30–37), the wedding banquet (Matt. 22:1–14), and the ten virgins (Matt. 25:1–13) are stories that forever remain in the minds of those who read them. [57]

He used metaphors. He described his followers as “the salt of the earth” (Matt. 5:13), because of the purifying effect and moral influence they have on the world. He beautifully captured John the Baptist’s rugged independence in the question, “What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind?” (Matt. 11:7). By telling his disciples, “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (Matt. 16:11), he gave a lively picture of the corrupting influences found in those circles.

He used hyperbole. To those with a critical spirit he said, “Take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye” (Matt. 7:5; cf. 5:29–30, 38–42).

He used puns. To Simon he said, “You are Peter (“Rocky”), [58] and upon this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18).

He used epigrams, i.e., witty, tersely expressed, pointed sayings. For example, he summed up the believer’s obligation to church and state with the masterful remark, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s” (Matt. 22:21).

He used paradox, as when, on more than one occasion, he said, “He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it” (Matt. 10:39; 16:25; John 12:25).

He sometimes made a statement that posed a riddle. For example, early in his ministry he said, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19). At his trial it is evident that this puzzling statement was not understood by his enemies (Mark 14:58).

In debate he made good use of the dilemma. For example, when questioned as to the source of his authority, he parried the question with another that put his enemies on the spot, “The baptism of John was from what source, from heaven or from men?” (Matt. 21:25–27; cf. also: Matt. 22:15–46).

He used a fortiori arguments. [59] He said, “If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give what is good to those who ask Him!” (Matt. 7:11).

He appreciated the value of repetition. The effectiveness of the Beatitudes owes much to the piling up of one “blessed!” upon another (Matt. 5:3–11; cf. 5:22).

Jesus’ adept use of contrast is illustrated by his story of the two houses — one built on rock, and the other built on sand (Matt. 7:24–27).

He also used irony, as is illustrated in his encounter with the Pharisees and Sadducees. He noted that they could read the signals in the sky to forecast the weather, but they could not discern the “signs of the times” (Matt. 16:2–3).

Scholars have come to see a poetic structure in many of our Lord’s sayings. [60] It is estimated that there are as many as two hundred examples of poetic parallelism, rhythm, and rhyme. The cadence in the following lines is obvious:

Ask, and it will be given to you; Seek, and you will find; Knock, and it will be opened to you (Matt. 7:7). [61]

His Teaching Was Profusely Illustrated

Jesus was always illustrating his lessons. He often varied the illustration for different hearers, e.g., for men and women (cf. Matt. 24:40, 41; Luke 15:4, 8). [62]

He Used Questions

This was especially true in situations of controversy, e.g., with the Pharisees (Matt. 22:20–21, 42–45) and the Sadducees (Matt. 22:31–32). [63] He also did this in situations with his disciples (Matt. 16:13–15).

His Teaching Was Occasional [64]

By this I do not mean that he taught infrequently. Rather, it was as the occasion arose. It was unpremeditated, aimed at the circumstances of the moment. He used synagogue services (Mark 1:21; Luke 4:16–27), or a chance encounter in the synagogue (Matt. 12:10). He spoke on the wayside with a young aristocrat (Matt. 19:16), and elsewhere in the open doors (Mark 4:1). He also taught when his disciples had a sudden quarrel (Luke 9:46). [65]

His Teaching Was Unsystematic [66]

Our Lord’s teaching was aimed at the mideastern mindset of his own day and time. We Westerners like our lectures and textbooks to have outlines and closely reasoned sub points. He, too, lectured, but he developed his arguments using figures of speech, stories, and proverbs. We use systematic structure, while the Mideasterner of Bible times did not. [67] Thus, we don’t find theological phraseology such as: “Trinity,” “election,” “efficacious calling,” etc. — yet Jesus did have strong views on these subjects, as a careful reading of just one Gospel will make clear, (cf. John 6:37–65; 8:47; 10:27–30; 17:1–2, 6, 9, 12, 24). There are, however, certain “ruling ideas” underlying Jesus’ teaching, and it is our business as students of the Gospels to systematize it. [68]

The Qualities of his Demeanor

His Teaching Was Authoritative [69]

Matthew told his readers that “the multitudes were amazed at His teaching; for He was teaching them as one having authority, and not as their scribes” (Matt. 7:28–29). Jesus’ preaching was quite different from what the Jews heard in their synagogues. James Stalker writes, “These were the exponents of the deadest and driest system of theology that has ever passed in any age for religion.” [70]

The scribes never directly expounded Scripture. They were always citing the opinions of the commentators. It was all secondhand religion. [71] Instead of dwelling on the great themes of Scripture, “they tortured the sacred texts into a ceremonial manual, and preached on the proper breadth of phylacteries, the proper posture for prayer, the proper length of fasts, the distance one might walk on the Sabbath,” etc. [72]

One can read of similar preaching in the Roman Catholic Church of the pre-Reformation period. John Knox (1513–72), the Scottish reformer, describes the sermons of the monks as “legendary tales concerning the founder of some religious order, the miracles he performed, his combats with the devil, his watchings, fastings, flagellations; the virtues of holy water, chrism [consecrated oil], crossing, and exorcism; the horrors of purgatory, and the numbers released from it by the intercessions of some powerful saint.” [73] The Lord Jesus was quite the opposite. [74] He appealed to the Scriptures to make his points (cf. Luke 4:16–21 and Isaiah 61:1–2; see also: Matt. 22:41–44; John 5:39–47; Luke 24:27).

In addition — apart from his citation of the OT — the one other authority he appealed to was himself: “I say unto you” (cf. Matt. 5:22, 28, 32, 34, etc.). With Jesus there was no “perhaps,” “it may be so,” or “I rather think so.”

The many ways in which our Lord expressed his divine authority may be summarized as follows: [75] First, he expressed it in what he claimed for himself. He claimed he was sent into the world (Matt. 10:40; 15:24; Mark 9:37; Luke 4:18; John 3:17; 5:23–24, etc.). More than a dozen times he makes this claim in the Gospels. Because he is the Son sent from God he is greater than John the Baptist (Luke 3:16), than Jonah (Matt. 12:41), than Solomon (Matt. 12:42), than the Temple (Matt. 12:6); and he is Lord of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8). He claimed to be the truth (John 14:6), i.e., the absolutely veracious person. He claimed to be the Determiner of Destiny (Luke 12:8–10). To reject his word was folly (Matt. 7:24). He said he would judge the world (Matt. 25:31–46).

The place assigned in the last judgment to Himself in the words of Jesus is recognized by all interpreters to imply that the ultimate fate of men is to be determined by their relation to Him. He is the standard by which all shall be measured; and it is to Him as the Savior that all who enter into eternal life will owe their felicity. But the description of Himself as Judge implies much more than this: it implies the consciousness of ability to estimate the deeds of men so exactly as to determine with unerring justice their everlasting state. How far beyond the reach of mere human nature such a claim is, it is easy to see. [76]

He claimed to know of events in heaven (Luke 15:10).

Second, he expressed his authority, as I’ve already said, in the unusual manner in which he taught (Matt. 7:29): “Truly, I say to you…” (Matt. 5:18, etc.), or “Truly, truly, I say to you…” (John 3:3, 5). He presumes to authoritatively set aside the biblical legislation on divorce in Matthew 5:32: “but I say unto you” (ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, egō de legō hymin). That our Lord should treat the Word of Yahweh as his to change is remarkable. The prophets began their messages with “thus saith the Lord.” Jesus never used this prophetic formula. Instead he regularly asserted, “But I say to you.” Jesus was, of course, a prophet, yet there rings in his words “something clearer than the prophetic: we feel somehow that we are in the presence of the very Word of God” himself.

Bruner adds on the same page, “Who of us, for example, would dare regularly to say, ‘The Bible says this, but I say to you’?” [77] “Here is a tone of authority,” wrote D. J. Burrell, “which finds no parallel except in the thunder of Sinai.” If any preacher, priest, rabbi or other religious authority presumed to speak today with such authoritative certainty he would be ridiculed. Says Burrell, “He who presumes to say, ‘I am Sir Oracle, and when I open my lips let no dog bark,’ is laughed at for his arrogance.” Yet we preach Christ today with a “Truly, truly,” because we rest on the authority of his word. Sanders has said, “His authority was not the magic of a great reputation, but the irresistible force of a divine message, delivered under a sense of divine mission.” [78]

Third, he expressed his authority in his works. By his word he cast out demons (Matt. 8:16). By his word he stilled the elements (Matt. 8:26). By his word he raised the dead (Matt. 9:18, 25; Luke 7:14–15). By his word he cured diseases (Matt. 8:16; 9:35). By his word he balanced the insane (Mark 5:15; Luke 9:42). And, perhaps most notably, he claimed to be able, by his word, to forgive sin (Matt. 9:1–8). It is clear that he claimed this authority came from God (cf. Matt. 21:23–37; Mark 11:30).

Fourth, he underwrote his authority, as I’ve noted earlier, by his appeal to the OT (cf. Luke 4:16–21; Isa. 61:1–2).

Fifth, he appealed to his own moral perfection as the seal of his authority. He asked the Jews, “Which of you convicts me of sin” (John 8:46)? “The moral seal on His truthfulness,” says Bernard Ramm, “ is His moral perfection.” [79]

Finally, Jesus could commend his own course of action as worthy of imitation. “For I gave you an example that you also should do as I did to you” (John 13:15; cf. Luke 14:27; John 13:34; 15:12; 21:19, 22).

In turn, his disciples presented Christ as the supreme example to follow (1 Cor. 11:1; Phil. 2:5; 1 Pet. 2:21; 1 John 2:6). “He is the perennial ideal of the believer,” says Roger Nicole, “toward whom his every aspiration tends (Rom. 8:29; 2 Cor. 3:17; 1 John 3:2).” [80] As Griffith Thomas observed, “While whole continents of knowledge were outside His plan, there was no indication of error in what He actually said.” His knowledge was limited by the conditions and requirements of his earthly manifestation. Yet, it was infallible within those limitations. [81]

His Teaching Had Boldness [82]

The KJV of John 7:26 says, “He speaketh boldly.” The NASB has, “He is speaking publicly” (παρρησίᾳ [parrēsia]). This term (παρρησίᾳ) has the sense “freedom of speech.” It may mean freedom of utterance, i.e., expressing oneself openly and plainly, or it can have the sense of speaking without fear, i.e., boldly. Westcott argues that it has this sense (“boldly”) here and in John 7:13. [83] The Jews knew (cf. v. 15) that he was an unlettered man, having never attended one of their rabbinical schools. Yet he was not timid or self-conscious. He showed no fear of the learned and great in his audience. James Stalker was right when he said that we are mistaken to think of him as all mildness and meekness (cf. John 2:13–22; Matt. 21:12–13). [84] To those most highly reverenced in that culture — the scribe, the Pharisee, the priest, and the Levite — he delivered his most scathing polemic (cf. Matt. 23).

His Teaching Was Ethical And Practical [85]

Our Lord impressed on his hearers the fact that doctrine was valueless unless transmuted into holy living. It was not enough to “talk the walk;” one must “walk the talk.” As our teacher, says Clement of Alexandria, Jesus Christ explains and reveals through instruction, but as “our Educator” he is practical. [86] The Sermon on the Mount, for example, is the foundation of Christian ethics. Further, all his teaching had practical application. Nor did he follow the practice of many and leave all his application to the end. When the sermon began, the application began. As the subtle Scottish thinker, “Rabbi” Duncan, once quipped, when lauding Jonathan Edwards, “His doctrine was all application, and his application was all doctrine.” [87] J. Oswald Sanders once remarked, “No member of [Jesus’] audience was left in doubt as to the person to whom it was applicable. They were either enraptured or enraged, but they could not remain neutral.” G. K. Chesterton (1874–1936) maintained that it could never be said that the teaching of Christ had been tried and found wanting. It had only been found difficult and not tried. [88]

His Teaching Was Radical

“Jesus made no attempt,” says Harrison, “to adjust His ethical demands to the limitations of human nature.” [89] His demands of his disciples were absolute. “So then, none of you can be My disciple who does not give up all his own possessions” (Luke 14:33). “Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt. 5:48).

His Teaching Was Wise [90]

Jesus’ teaching was characterized by wisdom. In Nazareth the townspeople asked, “What is this wisdom given to Him?” (Mark 6:2). In the Gospels the term wisdom refers to great intellectual and rhetorical ability (Mark 6:2), as well as his moral insights (Luke 2:40, 52). [91] Even the scribes and Pharisees addressed him as “Teacher,” although he had not gone to their schools (John 3:2).

His Teaching Was Gracious [92]

Luke (4:22) says they were “wondering at the gracious words which were falling from His lips.” Students of Luke differ on their interpretation of the expression λόγοις τῆς χάριτος (logois tēs charitos, “words of grace”). Some take it to mean “words filled with divine grace,” i.e., words with a message of salvation and forgiveness of sins. [93] Others take the Greek word χάρις (charis) in its fundamental meaning of “beauty” or “comeliness:” they were “winning words,” “gracious words;” there was a charm about the way he spoke. [94] Still others suggest that the phrase is ambivalent, i.e., both senses are included. [95] This third option is most likely. Certainly our Lord spoke of God’s grace in the forgiveness of sins. And the manner of his speaking was characterized by graciousness. In spite of his tone of authority, and in spite of his fearless and scathing attacks on the hypocrisy of the Jewish leaders, there was also a charm and a warmth to his words.

The scribes were harsh, proud, and loveless. They flattered the rich and honored the learned. But for the common man they had contempt: “This people who knoweth not the law are cursed” (John 7:49, KJV). But to Jesus every soul was precious. He spoke to all his hearers with the same respect. Said Stalker, “It mattered not under what humble dress or social deformity the pearl was hidden; it mattered not even beneath what rubbish and filth or sin it was buried; He never missed it for a moment.” [96]

His Teaching Was Marked by Simplicity [97]

Jesus’ teaching was always adapted to his audience. In his teaching there was an absence of pedantry or striving for effect. People in his audience were not knitting their brows, wondering what he was getting at (except in instances where he was trying to cause them to not understand, cf. Matt. 13:10–23). He always sought to understand his audience’s point of view and lead them from there. Was the Law of Moses their religion? He would start there and show them the true spiritual and ethical meaning underlying the Law (e.g., Matt. 5:17–48). He was simple, not trivial. Some have said of the Gospel of John, for example, that it is simple enough for a child to wade in, and deep enough for an elephant to swim in (cf. John 6:35; 8:12; 10:9; 14:6, etc.). [98] He was direct, simple, and forceful — so unlike the speech of the Jewish scribes of his day. And, he never went too fast. He never rushed his students. “I have many more things to say to you,” he once told them, “but you cannot bear them now” (John 16:12). He would later teach them when they were able (through his Holy Spirit).

The Gospel writers tell us that children were often in the crowds that listened to Jesus (Matt. 14:21; 15:38; 19:13–14; 21:15). In his teaching he would speak of them and use them for his illustrations (Matt. 7:11; 11:16; 18:3; Mark 10:24). After his “Triumphal Entry” into the city, the children in the Temple were shouting, “Hosanna to the Son of David” (Matt. 21:15). No doubt they were present on these occasions with their parents, but their words of praise indicate that they saw in this man one who could speak on their level — one who was their champion as well as the champion of their elders. [99]

His Teaching Was Characterized by Freshness, Not Originality [100]

Charles Hodge (1797–1878), the great professor of theology at Princeton Theological Seminary, made this startling assertion in 1872: “I am not afraid to say that a new idea never originated in this Seminary,” [101] an assertion his enemies might deride, but one in which he boasted. His point was that the Seminary sought to simply teach the old theology of the Reformers without modification. We could say this in another sense of Jesus. His teaching was essentially that of the Scriptures. Much that he said is found in other Jewish literature (e.g., the Golden Rule of Matt. 7:12 [“Therefore, however you want people to treat you, so treat them, for this is the Law and the Prophets”] is found in negative form in the Book of Tobit 4:15 [“And what you hate, do not do to anyone”]). So our Lord’s teaching was not characterized by absolute newness, yet it was fresh in its manner of formulation, in its spirit and atmosphere. It was free from clichés; old truths were stated in new ways that challenged fresh thought and action.

There have been those who have sought for a note of originality: R. H. Lotze (1817–81), philosophy professor at Gottingen, said it was in the unique value Christ assigned to each individual man. [102] Adolf von Harnack (1851–1930), the University of Berlin’s famed church historian, said that it was in the way Christ rooted morality in the intention and disposition; the way he concentrated on the basic motive of love. [103] Claude Montefiore says there was a spirit and atmosphere pervading the teaching of Jesus that is not found elsewhere. [104] It is W. H. Griffith Thomas (d. 1924), the Anglican theologian and biblical commentator — following in the train of other evangelical and orthodox writers — who gave the true answer. He said, “The real newness of Christ as a Teacher is found in His Person rather than in what He said or in the way He said it. The unique contribution Christ makes to ethics is Himself.” [105] He connects the Kingdom of God with himself as king (Matt. 19:28). He links the Fatherhood of God with himself as the unique Revealer (Matt. 11:27). He associates forgiveness with his own prerogative and authority (Mark 2:10).

Many years ago two men were conversing on a Pacific steamship. One was Sir Edwin Arnold (1832–1904), the distinguished poet and author of The Light of Asia. The other was Dr. William Ashmore, the heroic American missionary to China. Arnold had been criticized for favorably comparing Buddhism to Christianity. He denied it and affirmed the absolute preeminence of Christ. He said, “I would not give away one verse of the Sermon on the Mount for twenty epic poems like the Mahabharate [by Confucius], nor exchange the Golden Rule for twenty new Upanishads [Hindu].” [106]

His Teaching Was Characterized by Personal Honesty and Authenticity [107]

As James Stewart, professor of New Testament at Edinburgh University, observed, “What He taught, He lived.” [108] The disciples saw each of his teachings incarnate in himself. He did not preach unlived truths. Did he teach faith in God? He gloriously lived that lesson out himself (Heb. 12:2). Did he urge them to forgive those who injured them? How gloriously he forgave! (Luke 23:34). Did he tell them prayer was important? He prayed all night long (Luke 6:12). Did he speak to them of the need for self sacrifice and service? He girded himself with a towel and washed their feet (John 13:1–11).He did not make empty orations about love and brotherhood. He went into the homes of the despised and sat at their tables, and all knew he was their friend (Luke 7:34). What a contrast to the scribes and Pharisees whose religion was secondhand and unreal. What Emerson said of Seneca (Roman writer and philosopher, 4 b.c.-a.d. 65) could well be said of the scribes: “His thoughts are excellent if only he had the right to utter them.” [109]

His Teaching Was Characterized by Intimacy and Love for Those He Taught. [110]

It was Augustine who said, “One loving spirit sets another on fire.” And this, humanly speaking, was the ultimate secret of Christ’s success as a teacher. The disciples — and how like them we are — were bumbling pupils in Christ’s school, who disappointed him many times. And yet his loving spirit triumphed over all their failures. How surprised they must have been to hear his words toward the end: “They have kept Your word” (John 17:6). But eventually, after Calvary and Pentecost, through the ministry of Christ’s Spirit, they got the central message of redemption perfect and complete and without any flaw at all, and went forth to proclaim it in all the earth.

His Teaching Was Universally Applicable [111]

It was for children as well as adults (cf. Matt. 18:1–14). It was for all times and locales. The reason for its universality is its threefold ethical attitude: He called for repentance in relation to sin. He called for trust in relation to God. He called for love in relation to man.

His Teaching Was Complete (When Coupled with the Rest of the NT) [112]

We can say this in that it touches the very heart of all moral issues, viz., the thoughts and motives of man and the control of the will and conduct. Its moral is love for God and man. It emphasizes humility and the exclusion of fame and reputation, and the refusal to pander to personal interest.

His Teaching Is Permanent [113]

Jesus said, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away” (Matt. 24:35). Passages from Plato’s Dialogues are erroneous, absurd, and immoral. Chapters from Aristotle are out of date. Sections in Paradise Lost are now considered unworthy of Milton and meaningless to the modern reader. But no one could change the Sermon on the Mount or add to the Olivet Discourse.

The Central Message of Jesus’ Teaching: Himself

His Kingdom

I noted earlier in this article that our Lord’s teaching was unsystematic. Some jump from this observation to the conclusion that Jesus had no use for doctrine, i.e., theology. However, he had strong views on doctrine, as the Gospels make clear. “To be ignorant and unconcerned with doctrine is to be ignorant and unconcerned over Christianity,” S. Lewis Johnson has written. [114] As Luther told Erasmus in their debate over free will, “To say that we have no pleasure in ‘assertions’ is all one with saying we are not Christians. Take away assertions from biblical truth, and one takes away Christianity.” [115]

Jesus made great assertions — he laid stress on three things. First, he emphasized the doctrine of the Kingdom of God and the Messianic Ruler who would sit on the Davidic throne. [116] This is the theme with which his ministry began: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt. 4:17). And this is the theme that is predominant to the end. In his final great confession he asserted that he is the Messiah who shall come in glory to reign (Matt. 26:63–64). The expression “kingdom of God” or “kingdom of heaven” [117] occurs about eighty times in the Gospels and represents thirty different occasions in his ministry.

By the “kingdom of God” Jesus meant the advent on earth of an actual Davidic monarchy ruled over by Messiah. Such a kingdom had been prophesied at his birth. The angel told Mary that the Lord God would give her son Jesus “the throne of His father David; and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end” (Luke 1:31–33). Such a kingdom was expected by his followers both during his earthly ministry (Matt. 20:20–21) and after his resurrection (Acts 1:6). Such a kingdom was described by our Lord to his disciples. When he sat on his glorious throne, he promised, they would “sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Matt. 19:28; 25:31–46; cf. Luke 22:29–30). [118] Access into the kingdom is limited to those from every nation (Matt. 8:11) who have been born again (John 3:3–5). It is a spiritual/literal kingdom. The kingdom was future during Jesus’ earthly ministry (Luke 19:11), during his post-resurrection ministry (Acts 1:6), and when the epistles were written (cf. James 2:5, “heirs of the kingdom”). When teaching the disciples to pray, the Lord said they were to pray for the kingdom to come (Matt. 6:10). It awaits its full manifestation at the Second Coming of Christ when he will establish his thousand-year kingdom and reign upon the earth (Rev. 20:4–6). There is a very real sense in which we may say that the kingdom today is “in abeyance, in the sense of its actual establishment on earth.” [119]

The kingdom, then, is still unrealized, and its arrival is yet future. [120] Is there any sense in which it may be said that the kingdom is already present? [121] In asking this question it must be remembered that the OT prophets envisioned a number of spiritual benefits that would accompany the earthly kingdom — the establishment of a new covenant for the forgiveness of sins (Jer. 31:31–33), the implanting of a regenerate spirit in the heart of the believer, and the impartation of the Holy Spirit to believers to enable them to obey God (Ezek. 36:25–27). [122] At his death the Lord Jesus Christ inaugurated the new covenant (Luke 22:20). The new birth, which Jesus told Nicodemus was a requirement for entrance into the kingdom, is a present reality in the lives of believers (John 3:3–5; Titus 3:5; 1 Pet. 1:23). The outpouring of the Spirit, which the prophets envisioned for the last days, took place on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:14–21, 32–33; cf. Joel 2:28–32). God’s people in the church today “already” enjoy many of the spiritual blessings of the kingdom even though the kingdom has “not yet” been established. [123]

We may therefore say that the kingdom does have a present de jure existence, even prior to its actual establishment. This is true in two senses: [124] First, God is today saving and preparing in the church the members of the royal family who are destined to rule with Christ in his future kingdom (Rev. 20:4; 1 Cor. 6:2–3). Second, as those born into this royal family, we enter the kingdom judicially before its actual establishment. Paul describes this remarkable divine action as a translation (Col. 1:13). [125]

There is an interesting parallel to the church’s relationship to the kingdom to be found in the career of King David. Because of his disobedience, King Saul was told that his regal rights had been abrogated (1 Sam. 15:28). Samuel then anointed David as king of Israel (1 Sam. 16:1, 13), but he did not immediately occupy the throne. Instead, Saul held the throne as a usurper and, treating David as a fugitive, pursued him in the wilderness. During that time several hundred men in distress and debt “gathered to him” and became his loyal followers (1 Sam. 22:2). Saul’s rule was later shattered by defeat and death, and David’s rule was established (2 Sam. 2:4; 5:3).

Similarly, at his first coming Jesus was anointed to be the Messianic King (Matt. 3:13–17). It will not be until his second coming, however, that he will establish his kingdom on earth and sit on David’s throne. In the interim, he is gathering to himself a body of people, distressed and debtors because of sin, who are destined to be associated with him in his coming kingdom. [126] Even though he has been exalted to heaven today there is a real sense in which he is despised and hated in this world. Yet from that exalted place in heaven (Acts 2:36) he is bestowing some of his regal blessings upon his people today — even before the arrival of the kingdom. [127]

His Person

Joachim Jeremias concluded, “Jesus not only utters the message of the Kingdom of God, He Himself is the message.” [128] James Stalker agreed, “But the center and soul of His preaching was Himself.” [129] Jesus’ declarations about himself are too numerous to detail. To cite just one example, I shall mention the “I Am” (ἐγώ εἰμί, egō eimi) statements of John’s Gospel: John 4:26 — “I who speak to you am He.” John 6:35 — “I am the bread of life.” John 8:12 — “I am the light of the world.” John 8:58 — “Before Abraham was born, I am.” John 10:7 — “I am the door of the sheep.” John 10:11 — “I am the good shepherd.” John 11:25 — “I am the resurrection and the life.” John 14:6 — “I am the way, and the truth, and the life.” John 15:1 — “I am the true vine.”

In these “I Am” statements Jesus uses the Greek expression ἐγώ εἰμί which is used of God in the Septuagint (cf. Ex. 3:14). Just in these statements alone our Lord claims to be the Messiah of Israel (4:25–26), anticipates his death for the life of the world (6:35, 51), bears witness of himself as the light of the world (8:12), asserts his preexistence and deity (8:58; cf. 5:18), points to himself as the door to salvation (10:7–9), prophesies his death for the sheep (10:11), tells Martha that he will raise his followers from the dead (11:25–26), and claims to be mankind’s sole means of access to God (14:6).

“The egoism of all this has to be reckoned with much more seriously than is sometimes done by men who profess to accept Jesus as Teacher while denying him as Lord. The self-assertion of Christ is either a serious blot on His character or an integral part of a gracious and deliberate saving purpose of God.” [130]

Cambridge University Professor, C. S. Lewis, wrote:

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. [131]

Lewis would, of course, have agreed that Jesus was a great moral teacher. His point was that central to Jesus’ teaching was his claim to be the great “I Am,” i.e., God.

As Griffith Thomas wrote:

This simple but all-significant fact of the connection between the Person and the teaching, which is patent to every reader of the Gospels, has been felt ever since the days of Christ. Just as the Jews opposed Him because He made Himself equal with God, because His teaching implied and involved immense claims for Himself, so men have never been able to rest long in His teaching alone; it has inevitably led them to His personality and compelled them to face His claims. Besides, ideas alone never save and inspire lives; they must have a personality behind to give them reality, vitality, and dynamic. A disciple is more than a scholar, and inspiration is more than instruction. Christ’s words are of permanent value because of His Person; they endure because He endures…. 

It is simply impossible to accept the teachings without acknowledging the claim of the Teacher. So inextricably are they bound up that men in sacrificing the one are not long before they let the other go also. It is an utterly illogical and impossible position for any one to accept the Sermon on the Mount without recognizing the full claims of Christ as Master and Judge which He made in that discourse. [132]

D. S. Cairns also said:

It will in the long run, I believe, be found impossible to maintain supreme reverence for the character of Jesus and to reject the truth of His [teaching]. The character is simply the [teaching] translated into [conviction] and conduct. If the [teachings] are illusory, then the character is not in accordance with the nature of things, and in such a case it is not what we ought to imitate or admire. All such admiration is simply sentimentality; it is not ethical, and it stands in the way of [spiritual growth]. But if we cannot face this, if we feel, in spite of ourselves, awe and veneration for the character of Jesus, we must, sooner or later, go on to faith in the [teaching]. [133]

His Work

Griffith Thomas wrote:

Christianity in its final and ultimate analysis is the acceptance of the Person not the teaching of Christ. He came not so much to teach as to redeem, and redemption involves His Person, His community of believing followers, His relation to and rule over their lives. As Dr. R. W. Dale used to say, Jesus Christ came not to preach the Gospel, but that there might be a Gospel to preach. And it is the Gospel which He Himself is rather than anything He ever taught that constitutes Christianity. What think ye of the teaching? is an interesting, valuable inquiry. But, What think ye of the Teacher? is far more important, and more vital and central to the issues involved in the problem before us. [134]

For full expositions of the redemptive work of Christ we most often turn to the epistles of Paul. In Paul’s epistles the great doctrines of the gospel, as to how a sinner is reconciled to God, are laid out. It is sometimes argued by critical scholars that the distinctive doctrines of Paul are not genuine elements of Christianity. I would like to respond to these arguments by making three observations: First, there is not one prominent doctrine of the apostle the germs of which are not to be found in the teaching of Christ himself. Second, the chief part of Christ’s work, viz., to atone for the sins of the world by his death on the Cross, was taught by Jesus. Yet it was not taught in detail for two reasons: (1) His disciples refused to believe that he had to die (Matt. 16:21–22). (2) Until his death took place it was impossible to explain its far reaching significance. [135]

Third, Paul’s most distinctive doctrines are merely expositions of the meaning of two great facts: (1) The death-burial-resurrection-ascension of Christ, and (2) the mission of the Holy Spirit who was sent by the glorified Redeemer (cf. John 14:26; 16:13, etc.). [136]

Whatever, the purpose of this message is to consider Jesus’ teaching on his work. The following elements stand out:

1. First, he assumes that man is a sinner (Luke 11:13), promises that the Holy Spirit will expose and convict men of sin (John 16:8–9), and warns that those who do not believe in him will die in their sins (John 8:24). In light of these texts it is astonishing to read Robert H. Schuller’s assertion that “Jesus never called a person a sinner.” [137]
2. Second, he spoke of the death he would die on the Cross. In Matthew 20:28 he says, “the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.” Here he expresses the doctrine of the atonement by penal substitutionary sacrifice (cf. John 6:51–54). [138]
3. Third, he taught that men must believe in him, and this means believing in him as the One who was affixed to the Cross and thereby paid the ransom for the sins of mankind (John 3:14–15; Matt. 20:28). Everyone who so believes will have everlasting life and be raised from the dead (John 6:33, 35, 40, 47). [139]
4. Fourth, he taught that God was his Father (John 8:19, 38, 42), that it was his work to reveal the Father (John 14:9–11), that men have access to the Father through him (John 14:6), that men know the Father through Christ (John 17:2–3), and that his followers should view God and pray to him as Father (Matt. 5:16, 45, 48; 6:9). In OT times Israel was called God’s son. It is striking, however, that in the literature of early Palestinian Judaism (before and during the time of Jesus) there is no evidence of “my Father” being used as a personal address to God. [140] It was something utterly new when Jesus told his disciples to address God as Father.
5. Fifth, he taught that after his departure he would send his Holy Spirit to teach and indwell his people (cf. John 14:17, 26).

The Major Discourses of Jesus’ Teaching Ministry [141]

Though much of Jesus’ teaching ministry is scattered throughout the Gospels, there are four major discourses preserved for us: The Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7), the Parables of Matthew 13, the Olivet Discourse, i.e., the message on the Mount of Olives on Tuesday of Passion Week (Matt. 24–25), and the Upper Room Discourse, i.e., Jesus’ message to the disciples on Thursday evening of Passion Week (John 13–16).

As Charles Ryrie has observed, the teachings of Christ are difficult and require a great deal of care in order to interpret them accurately. [142] The reason for this is that he lived and taught in relation to three different aspects of God’s program for this world. First, our Lord lived under the Mosaic Law and perfectly kept it (cf. Gal. 4:4). Second, he also presented himself to Israel as their king (Matt. 4:17; cf. Luke 1:31–33). The nation subsequently rejected him as King (Matt. 27:23; cf. Luke 9:14). Third, after his rejection as King, Christ introduced a new phase of God’s program, viz., the church, and he gave some teaching about it (Matt. 16:18; 18:17). To keep these strands of teaching distinct is not always easy.

The Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 5-7

The Sermon on the Mount was delivered in the context of Christ’s offer of the Kingdom to Israel. The Kingdom, according to the prophets (cf. Jer. 31:31–34), would have as its basis a new covenant between God and his people. That new covenant was established with a believing remnant of Israel (viz., the disciples) at the time of Christ’s crucifixion (Luke 22:20). Although the kingdom has not yet been established, the new covenant has. The Sermon on the Mount forms the basis of Kingdom (i.e., new covenant) ethics. The Sermon describes the character and walk of the heirs of the kingdom. Believers today are the heirs of the Kingdom (cf. James 2:5) and will look to the Sermon for ethical guidance.

The Parables of Matthew 13

Matthew 13 contains four publicly-given parables followed by four parables given in private. In the parables Jesus gave new revelation (“mysteries”) concerning the kingdom. He instructed his disciples “regarding a hitherto unrevealed period of time prior to the establishment of the kingdom,” [143] i.e., an era from the time of his rejection until the time of his reception. There are two great points in NT theology: Christ’s Cross and his Coming, i.e., his first and second advents. The King was crucified and is now in heaven. Matthew 13 covers the period while Jesus is absent. In his parables Christ says that this era will be a time of seed sowing, a time when wheat and tares (i.e., believers and unbelievers) grow together, and a time that will end with a great separation.

The Olivet Discourse, Matthew 24-25

That Israel has rejected her King does not mean that God’s Kingdom program has been forever abrogated. In the Olivet Discourse Jesus prophesied of the future events that will lead up to the establishment of the messianic, Davidic Kingdom. Matthew 24:4–14 describes events that will happen during a period of tribulation that will transpire before the return of Christ. Verses 15–31 describe his return. Chapter 25 contains a description of the judgment to follow his return.

The Upper Room Discourse, John 13-16

On the night before his crucifixion our Lord gathered his disciples together to prepare them for his departure. This discourse included the following important instructions: First, Jesus gave them a new command — to love one another in the same way that he loved them (13:34). Second, he filled their hearts with hope by describing the heavenly home he would prepare for them and to which he would bring them (14:1–3). Third, he promised them a helper, the Holy Spirit, who would indwell them (14:17), instruct them (14:26), and empower them as they sought to live their lives as heirs of the Kingdom. Incidentally, the indwelling Spirit is the dynamic that undergirds the ethical instruction of the Sermon on the Mount. Fourth, he established a new basis for prayer, viz., the authority of his name (16:24, 26).

The Purpose of Jesus’ Teaching Ministry

The View of Contemporary Theology [144]

The older Liberal theology (e.g., Renan, Strauss, Wrede, Harnack, Bousset, etc.) has historically placed its chief emphasis on Jesus as a Teacher. Jesus taught in order to save, they argued, and he saved by his teaching (cf. John 6:63). [145] However, “we look in vain for such a saying as this: ‘The Son of man has come to teach.’” [146] Jesus himself testified that his life without the Cross would have no saving value. “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit” (John 12:24). Although John 12:24 is figurative, its sense is plain, viz., Jesus must die. The second of the famous three “musts” of John 3 (cf. 3:7, 14, 30), so beloved by expository preachers, emphasizes the necessity of his death also: “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life” (John 3:14–15).

The View of Holy Scripture

To Bring People to Life

The purpose of Christ’s teaching ministry was to fit the saints for life. He did this, first of all, by bringing them to life through the knowledge of his Person and his saving death. A saving knowledge of Christ (the new birth) grants the believer access to the kingdom of God (cf. John 3:3). [147] It also assures him/her of life everlasting and a home in heaven (John 11:25–26; 14:1–3). To ignore the words of the Lord Jesus in his teaching ministry is to bring on personal ruin (cf. Matt. 7:26–27).

To Instruct Them in Life

The second purpose of the teaching ministry of Christ was to instruct the saints in life by the Word of God. We have already alluded to his great discourses in which is found life-changing and life-enriching instruction from the “great prophet of our God.”

Conclusion

English pastor and author, Michael Green, has written, “Jesus of Nazareth remains the most important individual who has ever lived. Nobody else has had comparable influence over so many nations for so long. Nobody else has so affected art and literature, music and drama. Nobody else can remotely match His record in the liberation, the healing, and the education of mankind. Nobody else has attracted such a multitude not only of followers but of worshippers.” [148] And nobody else has had such an impact with his teaching as he has. The teaching of this first century rabbi is therefore of great importance — today as much as ever. Its importance, wrote New Testament scholar, Everett Harrison, is seen in the following three considerations: [149]

The Teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ Has Abiding Significance

In the last week of his earthly ministry Jesus flatly predicted, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away” (Matt. 24:35). A couple of days later, in his last major discourse, Jesus promised the coming of the Holy Spirit. Among the functions of the Spirit would be the recalling to the memory of the disciples the things Jesus had spoken to them (John 14:26). The Lord went on to say that there were “many more things” that he had to teach them, but they were not yet ready (John 16:12–13). However, the Holy Spirit would later reveal those things to the apostles. This promise of Jesus does two things: (1) It serves as “something of a pre-authentication of the remainder of the New Testament.” [150] The post-Easter writings of the Apostles carry the authority of Jesus Christ. (2) It underscores the fact that the teaching of Jesus was to continue on in the church through the ministry, spoken and written, of the Apostles.

The Lord Jesus Christ Occupies a Supreme and Unique Position as Teacher of His People

Clement of Alexandria (a.d. 155–216), one of the early church Fathers, spoke of the Lord Jesus Christ as our “Tutor, or Instructor.” [151] An earlier Father, Ignatius (a.d. 35–107), spoke of Jesus as our only Teacher. [152] In this they were expressing the sentiments of the Lord himself. He said, “But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers” (Matt. 23:8). Jesus’ followers bowed to his unique position. In the Gospels they “enshrined the golden sayings of one great teacher and one only.” [153] These future leaders of the church accepted their place as learners — “learner” is the meaning of the word disciple (μαθητής, mathētēs). When Jesus had gone to heaven and they became teachers, they consciously stood in his light.

The Teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ Calls People to a Decision

The words of Jesus, the preeminent Teacher of mankind, “are not simply wise sayings calculated to strengthen and better one’s life. They are words filled with destiny. To ignore them means ruin.” [154] Jesus said there were two possible responses to his teaching. Each response was like a foundation a person builds on for this life.

Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded on the rock. Everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not act on them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. The rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and it fell — and great was its fall (Matt. 7:24–27).

Jesus warned his hearers that if they rejected his words those very words would be the basis of their judgment in the last day: “He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word I spoke is what will judge him at the last day” (John 12:48). Those who are repulsed by Jesus and his words will find themselves repulsed by him on the day of judgment. “For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels” (Mark 8:38). Jesus the Teacher is also the Savior of mankind. He stands before each of us and asks that we believe his words, and in believing we shall build our lives — and eternal destinies — on a solid foundation.

Notes

1. This is the eighth in a series of occasional articles on the life of Christ.
2. Emil Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, 4 vols., ed. Matthew Black et al (rev. ed., Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1979), 2:322–23; cf. Everett F. Harrison, A Short Life of Christ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968), 94.
3. W. Gutbrod, “νόμος,” TDNT 4 (1967): 1046.
4. Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, 2:323–25.
5. That Jesus was a Jewish teacher or rabbi has been denied in some recent scholarship. Hengel flatly asserted, “Jesus was not a ‘rabbi.’” For Hengel, Jesus was primarily an “eschatological charismatic,” the focus of whose message was no longer the OT. Similarly Rengstorf wrote, “He is for them, not the rabbi/διδάσκαλος, but their Lord.” Martin Hengel, The Charismatic Teacher and His Followers (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1981), 42, 44, 46; K. H. Rengstorf, “μαθητῆς,” TDNT 4 (1967): 455. A corrective to this view has been offered by Riesner, Köstenberger, and others who have argued that Jesus operated within the Palestinian framework of a Jewish religious teacher. R. Riesner, Jesus als Lehrer, WUNT 2/7 (3d ed., Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1988), 246–76; Andreas J. Köstenberger, “Jesus as Rabbi in the Fourth Gospel,” BBR 8 (1998): 97-128 (esp. 98–100).
6. The word disciples (μαθηταί) was “a technical term for those who attended upon a rabbi and formed his ‘school.’” C. H. Dodd, The Founder of Christianity (New York: Macmillan, 1970), 53; Rengstorf, “μαθητής,” 434–36.
7. That Jesus was perceived by his contemporaries primarily as a rabbi provides, says Köstenberger, a needed corrective to some contemporary views of Johannine Christology. “Far from reflecting a docetic or otherwise idealized Christ, John’s Gospel is found to reflect, in accordance with the Synoptics, Jesus’ thoroughly human and cultural pattern of living and relating…. This does not mean that Jesus was reduced to a merely human figure. It does, however, imply that Jesus’ messianic claims and His disciples’ understanding of Him as the Christ grew from His assumption of the accepted cultural role of a Jewish religious teacher.” Jesus is a “religious teacher with a difference—issuing startling claims and performing powerful ‘signs’—but a religious teacher nonetheless.” In John’s Gospel, to be sure, Jesus is not “a conventional rabbi…. Rather [He]…is cast as the true reformer…. [He] cleanses the Temple (2:13–22), instructs the ‘Teacher of Israel’ regarding his need for spiritual regeneration (3:3–8), teaches that true worship is spiritual (4:21–24), points to the true significance of Jewish religious fests (7:37–38; 8:12; 9:5)…and supersedes Moses, through whom God had given the Law (1:17; 5:45–46), and Abraham, the Jewish patriarch (8:58).” Köstenberger, “Jesus as Rabbi in the Fourth Gospel,” 126–28.
8. John uses the term rabbi of Jesus eight times (1:38, 49; 3:2; 4:31; 6:25; 9:2; 11:8; 20:16), Matthew two times (26:25, 49), and Mark four times (9:5; 10:51; 11:21; 14:45). Luke does not use it of Jesus at all. Matthew’s use of the term is mainly negative. Two uses (23:7, 8) are warnings to the disciples against allowing themselves to be addressed as “Rabbi,” and two are by the traitor Judas. Matthew seems to avoid the term to safeguard Jesus’ uniqueness as Israel’s Messiah. In deference to his Gentile audience, Luke uses διδάσκαλος (“teacher,” 7:40; 8:49; 22:11, etc.) and ἐπιστάτης (“master,” 5:5; 8:24; 9:33, etc.). Köstenberger, “Jesus as Rabbi in the Fourth Gospel,” 106.
9. The rabbis of Jesus day were instructed to obtain their livelihood from other secular occupations. Cf. Emil Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, 2:326–28. Only later did the title connote one officially ordained to teach (W. D. Davies, The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1964], 422). Riesner concluded, “In the first century rabbô was not yet a fixed title for academically schooled, ordained scribes as was later the case (R. Riesner, “Teacher,” DJG, 807). George Foot Moore adds, “In the second century it was a title conferred on an officially recognized or ordained teacher” (Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era, The Age of the Tannaim [Cambridge: Harvard, 1930], 3:15).
10. For several testimonies to Jesus as a teacher as well as for a number of significant statistical studies, cf. Roy B. Zuck, Teaching as Jesus Taught (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 17–44.
11. The Synoptic Gospels skip over the “year of obscurity.”
12. Cf. S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., “The Messiah’s Year of Public Favor (1),” BBB (1987): 2.
13. John had been arrested for having the effrontery to confront Herod Antipas about his adulterous affair with Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip (Matt. 14:3–4). Cf. Harold W. Hoehner, Herod Antipas, SNTS Monograph 17 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972), 110–71.
14. W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 3 vols., ICC (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1988), 1:375.
15. Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 80.
16. Johnson, “The Messiah’s Year of Public Favor (1),” 2.
17. Because of the imprecision of what is included in “Palestine,” the size is often described in various ways. Cf. William S. LaSor, “Palestine,” ISBE 3 (1986): 634.
18. Cf. R. H. Alexander, “Galilee,” ZPEB, 2:638–43.
19. James Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ (1880; reprint ed., Westwood: Revell, 1949), 55.
20. Cf. William S. LaSor, “Galilee,” in ISBE 2 (1982): 386.
21. Frederick Dale Bruner, Matthew, A Commentary, 2 vols., vol. 1: The Christbook (Waco: Word, 1987), 119.
22. “If the messianic light dawns on the darkest places, then Messiah’s salvation can only be a bestowal of grace—namely, that Jesus came to call, not the righteous, but sinners (9:13),” Cf. D. A. Carson, “Matthew,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, 12 vols., ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984), 8:117.
23. Bruner, The Christbook, 119.
24. Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church Under Persecution (2d ed., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 59.
25. R. H. Alexander, “Galilee,” ZPEB, 2:639.
26. The OT refers to it as the “sea of Chinnereth.” (Num. 34:11; Josh. 13:27). The Hebrew term (כִּנֶּרֶת) means “harp,” and probably refers to the sea, but may also/instead refer to the fact that shepherds played harps or lyres in the area. The name Gennesaret in Matthew 14:34 is a corruption of the original word. Cf. R. L. Alden, “Chinnereth, Chinneroth,” ZPEB, 1:799.
27. These figures come from two sources. In his autobiography Josephus says there were two hundred and four cities and villages in Galilee, and in The Jewish War he says that the smallest of Galilee’s villages contained over fifteen thousand inhabitants. Cf. Josephus, Life of Josephus 235, in Josephus, 10 vols., trans. H. St. J. Thackeray (New York: Putnam’s, 1926), 1:88–89; idem., The Jewish War 3.41-43, in Josephus (1927), 2:586–89. Clark and Riesner reject Josephus’ figures. Riesner places the population at between two and three hundred thousand, and Clark places it around 450,000 (350,000 Gentiles and 100,000 Jews). Cf. K. W. Clark, “Galilee,” in IDB 2:346; R. Riesner, “Galilee,” in DJG, 252. These lower figures may reflect the belief that Josephus only meant that the walled villages had populations of more than 15,000, but this he did not say. Incidentally, Joshua 19:35–38 listed nineteen fortified cities in the territory of Naphtali. Even if the figures of Josephus are exaggerated, the population of Galilee must have been quite large (George Adam Smith, The Historical Geography of the Holy Land [London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1902], 421). Selah Merrill, a leading 19th century authority on Galilee, estimated the population at between two and three million (“Galilee,” DB[Hastings], 2:100). On the distinction between walled cities or towns and unwalled or open villages, cf. Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, 2:188–89.
28. Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ, 56–57.
29. Johnson, “The Messiah’s Year of Public Favor (1),” 1; Alexander, “Galilee,” ZPEB, 2:642.
30. Cf. Roger Nicole, “Offices of Christ,” ZPEB, 4:505–6.
31. Davies and Allison observe that in Matthew “the synagogue is associated with three themes:” (1) It is a place where Jesus preaches and teaches [4:23; 9:35; 13:54]; (2) It is a place of opposition and persecution [10:17; 12:9–14; 23:34]; and (3) It is a showcase of Jewish hypocrisy [6:2, 5; 23:6]. Cf. The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:413.
32. In his itinerant ministry Jesus honored free course or open-air evangelism, says Bruner, and in his teaching in the synagogues he honored established ministries. Cf. Bruner, The Christbook, 129.
33. Carson, “Matthew,” 121.
34. On his teaching, cf. Matt. 7:29; 11:1; Luke 11:1; Acts 1:1, etc.; on his preaching, cf. Matt. 4:17; 11:1; Mark 1:38; Luke 4:18, 43, etc.; and on his healing, cf. Matt. 8:7, 16; 9:35; Matt. 12:15, etc.
35. A future article in this series, it is hoped, will focus on the miracles of Christ, including his healing ministry.
36. Davies and Allison argue that the terms “appear nearly synonymous” (The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 415). Cf. also: Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 1–13, WBC (Dallas: Word, 1993), 80. New Testament scholar C. H. Dodd popularized the thesis that there was a difference between the two (“The Primitive Preaching,” in The Apostolic Preaching and Its Development [Chicago: Willett, Clark & Co., 1937], 1–49, esp. 1–2). Preaching (κήρυγμα, kērygma), he argued, was the proclamation of the death and resurrection of Jesus in the age of fulfillment with a summons to believe and repent. Teaching (διδαχή, didachē), on the other hand, was ethical instruction given to believers. In short, Dodd distinguished preaching and teaching both by their content and their audience. In warning that the distinction is not to be over pressed, scholars have pointed out that in a number of passages in the Synoptic Gospels, one Gospel will call “preaching” (cf. Mark 1:39, “He went into their synagogues…preaching”) what another Gospel will call “teaching” (cf. Matt. 4:23, “teaching in their synagogues”). Furthermore, in the Gospels Jesus is seen teaching and preaching to both believers and unbelievers.
37. Some would limit Jesus “teaching” to the synagogues and his “preaching” to the streets and the open countryside (cf. Eduard Schweizer, The Good News According to Matthew, trans. David E. Green [Atlanta: John Knox, 1975], 77; Gerhard Friedrich, “κηρύσσω,” TDNT, 3 [1965]: 706, 713). This breaks down, however, for Mark says that he proclaimed/preached in the synagogues (Mark 1:39), and he calls the parables, which were not spoken in the synagogue, “teaching” (Mark 4:1–2; cf. 6:6).
38. There were differences, of course, between Jesus and other Jewish teachers. “He is no preacher of the law demanding that men should simply amend their lives…. Jesus did not give theoretical teaching when he spoke in the synagogue…. His teaching…was an address demanding decision either for it or against it.” Cf. Friedrich, “κηρύσσω,” TDNT, 3:706, 713.
39. Karl Heinrich Rengstorf, “διδάσκω,” TDNT, 2 (1964): 139.
40. Rengstorf, “διδάσκω,” TDNT, 2:139.
41. James Orr, The Christian View of God and the World (1893; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1954), 20.
42. Friedrich, “κηρύσσω,” TDNT, 3:697–98.
43. Bruner, The Christbook, 130.
44. Friedrich, “κηρύσσω,” TDNT, 3:703, 710.
45. Gerhard Friedrich, “εὐαγγελίζομαι/εὐαγγέλιον,” TDNT, 2 (1964): 718, 722.
46. It is unlikely that Matthew means the Roman province of Syria, i.e., the large region from the Euphrates to the Mediterranean and from the Syro-Arabian desert to Cilica. Rather, he means a narrower territory to the north-northeast of Palestine, extending from Damascus to Antioch and on to the east. Cf. Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:417.
47. The Decapolis (Matt. 4:25) was the group of ten Hellenistic cities east of the Jordan and south of the Sea of Galilee. Cf. Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:420.
48. The Greek word προφήτης is related to the verb πρόφημι (προ + φημί) meaning “to speak forth.” The OT prophet was a person to whom God gave revelation and who became a speaker, a mouthpiece, a spokesman for God (Ex. 7:1–2; Deut. 18:18).
49. The word “teach” rarely if ever occurs in connection with the ministry of the OT prophets. There are at least three reasons for this: (1) The prophet gave occasional guidance rather than constant instruction. (2) His work of prophecy, whether related to the present or the future, was more in the nature of proclamation than teaching. (3) The Lord God himself is represented as the supreme Teacher of his people [Isa. 48:17; Jer. 32:33]. Cf. Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 95.
50. On the historicity of Jesus’ sayings and the ways of speaking preferred by him, cf. Joachim Jeremias, New Testament Theology: The Proclamation of Jesus, trans. John Bowden (New York: Scribner’s, 1971), 1–37. For further discussion of Jesus’ teaching, in addition to the commentaries, cf. Gustaf Dalman, The Words of Jesus, trans. D. M. Kay (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1902); Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 94–108; John R. W. Stott, Christ the Controversialist (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 1970); Archibald M. Hunter, The Work and Words of Jesus, rev. ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1973); Norman Anderson, The Teaching of Jesus (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 1983); F. F. Bruce, The Hard Sayings of Jesus (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 1983); Robert H. Stein, Jesus the Messiah: A Survey of the Life of Christ (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 1996), 123–40. For a careful study of the Jesus’ teaching methodology, cf. Zuck, Teaching as Jesus Taught.
51. James S. Stewart, The Life and Teaching of Jesus (New York: Abingdon, n.d.), 65.
52. B. A. Hinsdale, Jesus as a Teacher (St. Louis: Christian Publishing, 1895), 12.
53. Cf. W. S. Reid, “Christ, Offices Of,” ISBE, 1 (1979): 654.
54. For most of the examples used here I am indebted to: Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 103–5; Robert H. Stein, Jesus the Messiah: A Survey of the Life of Christ (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 1996), 124.
55. In Luke 4:23, however, παραβολή has the sense of a proverb.
56. The element of divine purpose in veiling the truth is clearly expressed by Mark’s use of the conjunction ἵ́να (“so that”) in 4:12. Jeremias attempted to soften Jesus’ words by resorting to the Aramaic underlying the Greek text. The conjunction μήποτε (“otherwise,” NASB) should be rendered “unless,” he argued, because the underlying Aramaic dilַéma may be so rendered. The sense of the passage, he concluded, is that Jesus’ listeners will not understand unless they turn and find God’s forgiveness. The difficulty confronting Jeremias’ view is that Mark’s ἵνα is in the inspired Greek text, and there is no original Aramaic text that we may consult to verify his thesis. Cf. Joachim Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus (2d ed., New York: Scribner’s, 1972), 17; cf. T. W. Manson, The Teaching of Jesus (2d ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1935), 75–80.
57. Johnson, “The Messiah’s Year of Public Favor (1),” 3.
58. Frederick Dale Bruner, Matthew, A Commentary, 2 vols., vol. 2: The Churchbook (Dallas: Word, 1990), 573.
59. The Latin expression a fortiori means, “for a still stronger reason; even more certain; all the more.”
60. The classic volume on this topic is still C. F. Burney, The Poetry of Our Lord (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925).
61. Such synonymous parallelism is also found in Matt. 7:8—For everyone who asks receives, And he who seeks finds, And to him who knocks it will be opened. Antithetical parallelism is found in Matt. 6:22–23; cf. 7:17–18—So then if your eye is clear, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. Step parallelism is illustrated by Matt. 5:17; cf. Mark 9:37—Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. Chiasmic parallelism is found in Matt. 23:12; cf. Mark 8:35—Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; And whoever humbles himself shall be exalted. Other examples and discussion of parallelism may be found in Burney, The Poetry of Our Lord, 63–99. He also discusses rhythm and rhyme (100–75).
62. Cf. Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology (2d ed., Chicago: Moody, 1999), 293.
63. Ryrie, Basic Theology, 293.
64. Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 100.
65. Stewart, The Life and Teaching of Jesus, 65–66; Ryrie, Basic Theology, 292–93.
66. Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ, 65, 72; Ryrie, Basic Theology, 293.
67. In an era when propositional revelation is demeaned, it is important to emphasize that Jesus was continually revealing or expounding upon a body or deposit of objective truth. His stories, parables, and figures of speech served a didactic purpose—they were not intended to merely entertain people with his subjective impressions about life. “The Lord Jesus taught didactically. He stood up and opened His mouth, and the people gathered round and listened—for hours on end” (Alan Morrison, “Teach Me, O Lord!” Touchstone [May, 2001], 26).
68. W. H. Griffith Thomas, Christianity is Christ, 4th ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1955), 34.
69. Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ, 68–69; J. Oswald Sanders, The Incomparable Christ (rev. ed., Chicago: Moody, 1971), 114; Thomas, Christianity is Christ, 37; Ryrie, Basic Theology, 293; Johnson, “The Messiah’s Year of Public Favor (1),” BBB (1987), 3; Stewart, The Life and Teaching of Jesus Christ, 67–68; Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 96–97; Bernard Ramm, The Pattern of Religious Authority (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 46–51.
70. Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ, 68.
71. Cf. Stewart, The Life and Teaching of Jesus Christ, 67.
72. Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ, 68.
73. Quoted by Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ, 69.
74. The differences between the Rabbis and Jesus are helpfully charted in Zuck, Teaching as Jesus Taught, 40–41.
75. Ramm, The Pattern of Religious Authority, 46–49.
76. James Stalker, The Christology of Jesus (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1899), 241.
77. Frederick Dale Bruner, Matthew, 2 vols., vol. 1: The Christbook (Waco: Word, 1987), 183.
78. The Sanders and Burrell quotes are found in Sanders, The Incomparable Christ, 114.
79. Ramm, The Pattern of Religious Authority, 49.
80. Cf. Roger Nicole, “Offices of Christ,” in ZPEB, 4:505–6.
81. Thomas, Christianity is Christ, 37; For a refutation of the idea that the limitations of his humanity made our Lord subject to error, cf. John W. Wenham, “The Authority of Christ as a Teacher: Does Incarnation Involve Fallibility?” EvQ 17 (1945): 91-105; idem., Christ and the Bible (3d ed., Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 69–90.
82. Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ, 69–71.
83. Brooke Foss Westcott, The Gospel According to St. John: The Greek Text with Introduction and Notes, 2 vols. (London: John Murray, 1908; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980), 1:265.
84. Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ, 70.
85. Sanders, The Incomparable Christ, 115.
86. Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor 1.1, in ANF, 2:209.
87. Quoted by J. P. Alexander, A Priest For Ever (London: James Clarke, 1937), 178.
88. Quoted by Sanders, The Incomparable Christ, 115.
89. Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 98.
90. Johnson, “The Year of Public Favor (1),” BBB (1987):3; Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 97–98.
91. James Morison, A Practical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Mark (4th. ed., London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1884; reprint ed., Minneapolis: Klock & Klock, 1981), 139.
92. Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ, 71; Thomas, Christianity is Christ, 38.
93. Joachim Jeremias, Jesus’ Promise to the Nations, trans. S. H. Hooke, SBT 24 (London: SCM, 1958), 45; F. Godet, A Commentary on the Gospel of St. Luke, 2 vols., trans. E. W. Shalders (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1879), 1:236.
94. William F. Arndt, The Gospel According to St. Luke (St. Louis: Concordia, 1956), 140.
95. Cf. TDNT, s.v. “χάρις,” by H. Conzelmann, 9:392, n. 153; A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, 6 vols., vol. 2: Luke (Nashville: Broadman, 1930), 59.
96. Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ, 71.
97. Stewart, The Life and Teaching of Jesus Christ, 66; Sanders, The Incomparable Christ, 115; Johnson, “The Year of Public Favor (1),” 3; Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 99.
98. Cf. Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, NICNT (rev. ed., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 3.
99. Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 99.
100. Thomas, Christianity is Christ, 39–41; Sanders, The Incomparable Christ, 115–16; Johnson, “The Year of Public Favor (1),” 3; Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 100–102.
101. Quoted by Mark A. Noll, The Princeton Theology 1812–1921 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983), 38.
102. R. Hermann Lotze, Microcosmus, 2 vols., trans. Elizabeth Hamilton and E. E. Constance Jones (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1885), 2:469.
103. Adolf Harnack, What is Christianity? trans. T. B. Saunders (2d ed., New York: Putnam’s, 1903), 76–80.
104. C. G. Montefiore, Some Elements of the Religious Teaching of Jesus (London: Macmillan, 1910), 85.
105. Thomas, Christianity is Christ, 41.
106. Wayland Hoyt, The Lord’s Teaching Concerning His Own Person (London: Religious Tract Society, 1908), 42.
107. Stewart, The Life and Teaching of Jesus Christ, 67, 69.
108. Stewart, The Life and Teaching of Jesus Christ, 69.
109. Quoted by Stewart, The Life and Teaching of Jesus Christ, 67.
110. Stewart, The Life and Teaching of Jesus Christ, 70.
111. Thomas, Christianity is Christ, 36.
112. Thomas, Christianity is Christ, 36–37.
113. Thomas, Christianity is Christ, 37–8.
114. Johnson, “The Year of Public Favor (1),” 4.
115. Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield, “The Theology of the Reformation,” in The Works of Benjamin B. Warfield, 10 vols., vol. 9: Studies in Theology (New York: Oxford University Press, 1932), 464.
116. Johnson, “The Year of Public Favor (1),” 4–5.
117. The expression “kingdom of heaven” is found only in Matthew. The other Gospels use “kingdom of God.” The two expressions “have exactly the same meaning.” Cf. Karl Ludwig Schmidt, “βασιλεία,” TDNT 1 (1964): 582. Matthew, the most Jewish Gospel, uses “kingdom of heaven” to avoid mentioning the divine name. Cf. C. E. B. Cranfield, The Gospel According to Saint Mark, CGTC (3d ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1966), 64.
118. Of God’s people in the future kingdom, the heavenly chorus sang, “They will reign upon the earth” (Rev. 5:10).
119. Alva J. McClain, The Greatness of the Kingdom (Chicago: Moody, 1959), 439. In defense of the futurity of Jesus’ Davidic reign, and in opposition to the thesis that he is presently sitting on David’s throne, cf. Stephen J. Nichols, “The Dispensational View of the Davidic Covenant: A Response to Progressive Dispensationalism,” TMSJ 7 (Fall, 1996): 213-39.
120. Schmidt, “βασιλεία,” 586–87; cf. Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:389. The NT is restrictive in its use of king/kingdom language when addressing the functions of the risen Christ. Saucy argues that after Acts, Christ is not called “king” or pictured as currently reigning until Revelation (Mark Saucy, “Exaltation Christology in Hebrews: What Kind of Reign?” TrinJ 14 [Spring, 1993]: 41-62 [esp. 41]). The “King of Kings” title in 1 Timothy 6:15 is linked in context to his appearing and what follows, viz., the kingdom (William Kelly, An Exposition of the Two Epistles to Timothy [3d ed., London: Hammond, 1948], 144–47). The title is understood by others to refer to the Father, not the Son (e.g., George W. Knight III, The Pastoral Epistles, NIGTC [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992], 269). The present writer understands the reign of 1 Corinthians 15:25 to begin at the Parousia of Christ. Cf. Frederic Louis Godet, Commentary on St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1889; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1977), 790, 804–9.
121. The AV’s reading of Luke 17:21 (“the kingdom of God is within you”) is unhelpful and wrong. The proposition ἐντός should here be rendered, “among you” or “in your midst.” It should be noted that Jesus is speaking to the Pharisees. He is hardly suggesting that the kingdom is in their hearts. The point is that when the king was present the kingdom was in their midst and within their grasp. Cf. Schmidt, “βασιλεία,” 585.
122. It should be noted that these spiritual blessings are to be given in the context of Israel’s dwelling in the land. Cf. Jer. 31:1–26; Ezek. 36:6–12, 24–28.
123. It seems to me that Jesus’ teaching on the kingdom is predominantly “futuristic.” For quite some time in the twentieth century the “realized eschatology” of C. H. Dodd, i.e., the thesis that the kingdom was inaugurated during the earthly ministry of Christ, was quite influential. It is now generally accepted that Dodd’s thesis was quite one-sided. Cf. C. H. Dodd, The Parables of the Kingdom (rev. ed., New York: Scribner’s, 1961), vii-ix, 55–59.
124. McClain, The Greatness of the Kingdom, 439–40.
125. “It is as its Head that He rules over it [the Church], not as its King; for this latter title is never used of this relation.” Cf. S. J. Andrews, God’s Revelations of Himself to Men (New York: Scribner’s, 1886), 284–85. This quote is from chapter four of Andrews’ book entitled, “The Church [Is] Not the Messianic Kingdom.”
126. At least one implication of the futurity of the kingdom for saints in the current era is that the present time is one of service by the saints and not their exercise of power. Cf. Darrell L. Bock, “Current Messianic Activity and OT Davidic Promise: Dispensationalism, Hermeneutics, and NT Fulfillment,” TrinJ 15 (Spring, 1994): 85.
127. This illustration is taken from McClain, The Greatness of the Kingdom, 440.
128. Joachim Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus (2d ed., New York: Scribner’s, 1972), 229. Jeremias here quotes from an article by C. Mauer in Judaica 4 (1948): 147.
129. Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ, 74.
130. G. A. Johnston Ross, The Universality of Jesus (New York: Revell, 1906), 122.
131. C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: Macmillan, 1954), 40–41.
132. Thomas, Christianity is Christ, 44–5.
133. D. S. Cairns, Christianity in the Modern World (London: Hodder and Stoughton, n.d.), 19.
134. Thomas, Christianity is Christ, 45–6.
135. Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ, 75.
136. Stalker, The Life of Jesus Christ, 75.
137. Robert H. Schuller, Self Esteem: The New Reformation (Waco: Word, 1982), 126. Christ did not present his views on sin in one single address. Yet the Gospel materials, when carefully examined, do contain his theology of sin (Matt. 9:2; 12:31; 26:28; Mark 2:10; Luke 7:47; 15:7; 24:7; John 8:21–24, 46; 16:8–9). Cf. M. J. Wilkins, “Sinner,” DJG, 757–60.
138. Johnson, “The Year of Public Favor (1),” 4.
139. Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics, 4 vols. (St. Louis: Concordia, 1950), 2:336.
140. Cf. Joachim Jeremias, The Prayers of Jesus (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1978), 15, 28–29, 57 and passim. There are instances of God being addressed as πάτερ (pater) in the milieu of Hellenistic Judaism, but this is under Greek influence. There are no instances in the whole literature of Jewish prayer of God being addressed as Αββα (Abba), yet Jesus addressed him in this way (cf. Mark 14:36).
141. Cf. Ryrie, Basic Theology, 255–56.
142. Ryrie, Basic Theology, 293–95. Ryrie has helpful summaries of each of the discourses.
143. Stanley D. Toussaint, Behold the King: A Study of Matthew (Portland: Multnomah, 1980), 171.
144. Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 359–60; Johnson, “The Year of Public Favor (1),” 5.
145. William A. Curtis, Jesus Christ the Teacher (London: Oxford University Press, 1943), 12. The evangelical’s question is, “Why, then, the Cross?” Curtis answers, “If we had not the story of the Passion we could not experience the moving power of an absolute self-surrender on behalf of God and man which revealed in His own unique practice and experience what the Preacher had proclaimed for all” (12–13).
146. Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 105.
147. The close relationship between eternal life, salvation, and entering the kingdom should be noted in Matthew 19:16–26 (esp. vv. 16, 23, 25).
148. Michael Green, editor’s note in F. F. Bruce, The Hard Sayings of Jesus (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 1983), 12.
149. Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 106.
150. S. Lewis Johnson, Jr. “The Spirit and Believers: His Teaching Ministry,” EmJ 6 (Summer, 1997): 99.
151. Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor 1.1, ANF, 2:209.
152. Ignatius, To the Ephesians 15.1, in The Apostolic Fathers, LCL 2 vols., trans. Kirsopp Lake (Cambridge: Harvard, 1912), 1:188–89. He said, literally, “There is then one teacher who ‘spoke and it came to pass.’”
153. Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 106.
154. Harrison, A Short Life of Christ, 106.