The finger of God is also referenced in conjunction with the delivery of the Ten Commandments. In Deuteronomy, Moses reports that “The Lord gave me the two stone tablets written by the very finger of God, and on them was everything He said to you at the mountain from the midst of the fire at the time of that assembly” (9:10). Likewise, in Exodus, we read that “He gave Moses two tablets of testimony when He had finished speaking with him on Mount Sinai, tablets of stone written by the finger of God” (31:18). By making mention of the finger of God, in reference to Himself, Jesus brings comparisons to Moses into play.
Though Matthew’s presentation of Jesus as the new Moses is quite explicit, Luke’s is more subtle. Where Matthew has Jesus referencing a commandment by saying “you have heard that it was said, and then adding the rejoinder of “but I say unto you,” Luke’s Jesus is less forceful and less overt. A perfect example from Matthew has Jesus saying “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor’ and ‘hate your enemy’” (5:43), before offering up His response of “But I say to you, love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you” (5:44). In Luke, Jesus says “But I say to you who are listening: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, pray for those who mistreat you” (6:27), omitting the “you have heard that it was said.” The “you have heard that it was said,” making reference to the Mosaic law and the interpretation of that law, is implied.
So Jesus clearly presents Himself as a new lawgiver, in the mold of Moses. In His case however, His status goes beyond that of Moses, in that unlike Moses, He does not point to the finger of God as having written the commandments in stone, thus pointing to an entity separate from himself. Rather, Jesus speaks of Himself using the same finger of God language that was most assuredly meant to communicate something which He believed to be true of Himself. Undoubtedly, this is what Luke wants His audience to grasp. Later, in the same setting, Jesus goes on to say “For just as Jonah became a sign to the people of Nineveh, so the Son of Man will be a sign to this generation” (11:30). This use of “Son of Man” is part of a building process within Luke, that effectively culminates with Jesus’ linking the coming of the Son of Man, referencing Daniel seven and the Son of Man coming on the clouds to the Ancient of Days in order to receive His kingdom, to the destruction of the Temple, with a repetition of “this generation” in connection with the sign, while also speaking of the Son of Man during the course of His passion. So Jesus, in Luke’s structural setting, speaks of Himself in connection to the finger of God, which functions on multiple levels, and then speaks of the Son of Man, which we know to be self-referential. Making the connection, the Son of Man is obviously meant to be understood as a divine figure, and it is the Son of Man (the king of the kingdom of God, the Messiah, God manifest) that is speaking when providing new laws for the people of God and casting out demons.
Finally, we see the finger of God mentioned in the eighth chapter of Exodus. There, Moses has struck his staff on the ground, resulting in the dust of the ground becoming like “gnats throughout all the land of Egypt” (8:16b). As they had done with the previous signs from God that had been provided to Moses in order to prove the veracity of the message he delivered, the magicians of Egypt attempted to match the feat. However, they were unable to do so. In response, “The magicians said to Pharaoh, ‘It is the finger of God!’” (8:19a) This failed to make an impression on Pharaoh, with the Scriptural record informing us that “Pharaoh’s heart remained hard, and he did not listen to them” (8:19b). Likewise, Luke goes on to point out that “As He spoke, a Pharisee invited Jesus to have a meal with him, so He went in and took His place at the table” (11:37). So even though there is a slight change of setting, Luke wants us to continue to keep in mind what has been said by Jesus, which is conveyed by “As He spoke… so Jesus went in.” What is the conclusion of the scene at the house of the Pharisee? Jesus did not win Himself any supporters, as “When He went out from there, the experts in the law and the Pharisees began to oppose Him bitterly, and to ask Him hostile questions about many things, plotting against Him, to catch Him in something He might say” (11:53-54). Like Pharaoh, their hearts remained hard.
How else does this fit with Jesus’ use of finger of God in Luke? Let us look again at what Jesus said there in immediate conjunction with the finger of God and the kingdom of God (which we should probably not allow ourselves to separate). He says “When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his possessions are safe. But when a stronger man attacks and conquers him, he takes away the first man’s armor on which the man relied and divides up his plunder” (11:21-22). Obviously, Pharaoh felt quite secure in rejecting Moses’ requests. Why shouldn’t he? He was strong, fully armed, with guards and a palace full of men ready to carry out his every request. His possessions were safe. Of course, we don’t have to move much further along within the story to find that Pharaoh, truly, had no power, that he was not nearly as strong as he thought he was, and that he had no ability to deal with the stronger man (the Creator God of Israel) that was attacking him. Ultimately, his armor, his army, was destroyed after he fruitlessly chased after Israel. The completion of the thought that we see later in Luke, with the Pharisees and the experts in the law revealing their hardened hearts, casts them in the role of the Pharaoh oppressing the people of God.
To cap it off and to complete the overlay of Jesus’ words on to the situation, as Jesus surely meant to activate this particular historical remembrance (along with the others already mentioned, which must be part of Luke’s narrative plan as well), we can see that the culminating plague of the death of the firstborn, which resulted in Israel’s release from Egypt (without having to lift their hands against their oppressors, it should be pointed out, and as Jesus must have wanted to convey to those listening to Him that were suffering under Roman oppression, as the sentiment of rebellion was always seething beneath the surface), we know that “The Lord gave the people favor in the sight of the Egyptians, and they gave them whatever they wanted, and so they plundered Egypt” (12:36). Later, the death of God’s Son that would be the catalyst to a different type of exodus (Resurrection of Jesus and of His people), in which a different type of strong man (death) would be conquered.
No comments:
Post a Comment