In Matthew and Luke, Jesus sends His disciples on
mission. In Matthew we read “Jesus sent
out these twelve, instructing them as follows: ‘Do not go to Gentile regions
and do not enter any Samaritan town. Go
instead to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’” (10:5-6) Luke’s sending is different from that of
Matthew, in that there is no national, ethnic, or geographic restriction to
Israel in their exemplification of divine blessing when “He gave them power
over all demons and to cure diseases” (9:1b), sending “them out to proclaim the
kingdom of God and to heal the sick” (9:2). Let us take the time to
notice that Matthew’s and Luke’s record operate on a dual level. At one
level, as they report the instructions of Jesus, they are also informing us as
to what it was that these disciples were going to go out and do. There is
no reason to believe that they did not go out and follow these instructions,
and indeed, Luke, ever the historian, moves from Jesus’ instructions to mentioning
that “Then they departed and went throughout the villages, proclaiming the good
news and healing people everywhere” (9:6).
Shortly thereafter, again playing the historian, Luke
reports that “When the apostles returned, they told Jesus everything they had
done” (9:10). Luke even expands upon this in relation to the time that
Jesus, at the beginning of the tenth chapter, appoints and sends out a much
larger group of His disciples with nearly identical instructions as that which
was given to the twelve (either seventy or seventy-two disciples, depending on
the manuscripts in use), informing his audience that “the seventy-two returned
with joy, saying, ‘Lord, even the demons submit to us in your name!”
(10:17) Though the analogy is not precise, if the Abrahamic covenant is
foundational, as it truly is for the whole of the story of Israel, and
therefore for Jesus as the summation of the story of Israel, then the twelve
can be looked upon as Abraham, while the seventy-two can be looked upon as
Israel.
At the second level, the instructions to the disciples are
something of an elaboration on God’s words to Abraham. When we hear
Matthew and Luke recount Jesus’ instructions to His disciples, can we not also
hear “I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you, and I will
make your name great, so that you will exemplify divine blessing”? (Genesis
12:2) Luke rounds out Jesus’ instructions very quickly. For Luke’s
purposes in this setting, Jesus is done speaking at the fifth verse of the
ninth chapter, concluding His remarks with the “shaking of dust.”
Matthew, on the other hand, extends this time of instruction all the way to the
close of the tenth chapter. In fact, the eleventh chapter of Matthew
opens by informing us “When Jesus had finished instructing His twelve
disciples, He went on from there to teach and preach in their towns”
(11:1). Though the fact that the disciples acted on Jesus’ instructions
is implied by Matthew’s presentation, Luke seizes upon the opportunity to make
it explicit. Though Matthew certainly implies that the disciples
fulfilled the Abrahamic call to exemplify divine blessing, Luke wants to be
sure that his audience knows that this is what took
place.
In the end, for Matthew, because he does not provide any
type of report on the activity of the disciples themselves in relation to
Jesus’ instructions, what is important is that Jesus went out teaching and
preaching and presumably doing all of those things that He had instructed His
disciples to do. Does this mean that Matthew was unconcerned with the
activity of the disciples? Clearly, that is not the case. In all of
this, we do not forget that Matthew and His audience (like the other Gospel
writers) are viewing the story of Jesus through Resurrection-colored goggles as
a community that recognized and worshiped Jesus as God. What this serves
to communicate, keeping in mind the context that has been created through the
way that the story is being told and the covenantal context in which the life
of Jesus unfolds and in which His teaching is presented, is that it is God’s
activity that is of paramount importance.
Even in Abraham’s case, it was the God of Abraham that was
to be recognized through Abraham’s life and actions---not Abraham
himself. It was God that was to be revealed through Israel---they were
not to be made into a great nation (as promised to Abraham) simply to be blessed
by God and to no greater purpose that simply being a great nation. Being
a blessing and exemplifying divine blessing, as these disciples were being
called to do and be, is meaningless if it does not derive glory for the
Creator. Foundationally, it would be God at work, through Abraham.
It would be God at work, in Christ; and it would be God at work, through
Christ’s disciples, when they carried out (and continue to carry out) His
instructions.
No comments:
Post a Comment