This display failed
to make an impression on Pharaoh, with the Scriptural record informing the
reader that “Pharaoh’s heart remained hard, and he did not listen to them”
(8:19b). In similar fashion, 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 his audience 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 certainly 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 and his encounter with the finger of
the covenant God, their hearts remained hard.
How else does this story
from Israel’s history fit with Jesus’ use of finger of God in Luke? Taking
another looks at what Jesus said there in immediate conjunction with the finger
of God and the kingdom of God (which should probably not be allowed to be
separated), 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, one
does not 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 is encountered later in Luke, with the Pharisees and the experts in the
law revealing their hardened hearts, which casts them in the role of the
Pharaoh oppressing the people of the Creator 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), one can
see that the culminating plague of the death of the firstborn, which would
result 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), and 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, it would be the death of the one that would come
to be recognized as the Creator God’s Son that would be the catalyst to a
different type of exodus (the Resurrection of Jesus and of His people), in
which a different type of strong man (death) would be
conquered.
No comments:
Post a Comment