A Pair of Parables and a Pericope: An Exegetical Essay on Luke 18:1-17 (Undergraduate)

LUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY









A PAIR OF PARABLES AND A PERICOPE: AN EXEGESIS OF LUKE 18:1—17









SUBMITTED TO DR. CHARLES STEPHENSON
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
MIN 4302.01 PREACHING BIBLICAL GENRES









BY
JONATHAN MARK DANSBY
APRIL 27, 2015





HISTORICAL CONTEXT


Traditionally, Luke himself is taken to be the author of both Luke and Acts. External to the gospel, Luke is identified in some of the New Testament epistles as having been one of the traveling companions of the Apostle Paul on some of his journeying (e.g., Phlm. 24; Col. 4:14; 2 Tim. 4:11). Also, "patristic writers unanimously identify [Luke] as the companion of Paul… suggesting the presence of an eyewitness," at least in the book of Acts which is due to the "we" sections of narrative. These writings include Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho (calling the gospel a "memoir of Jesus"), The Muratorian Canon (noting Luke as the gospel's author, a physician, and companion of Paul), Irenaeus' Against Heresies (citing the "we" passages, attributes Luke's name to the gospel). The gospel of Luke's mention of the author gathering the account of "eyewitnesses" (Luke 1:1—2) also lends credibility to the authorship being attributed to Luke. Whatever the case may be, it is clear that the author, Luke hereafter, was an educated, Hellenized Greek, evidenced by his polished Greek, stylistic diction, rhetoric, storytelling, his apparent proficiency in redaction, and was well versed in Jewish scripture.
It is uncertain as to the exact identity and specific circumstances of his audience, but they were almost certainly Gentile believers being addressed to show the "nature and development of the Christian movement itself." Traditionally, and more specifically, the audience of Luke's gospel and his later writing is the "most excellent Theophilus," By this title, Theophilus could have been a central figure in public and religious life where he lived. I might suggest then, that the Evangelist, is writing to this key figure in an attempt to employ Theophilus himself as a fellow disseminator of the gospel. In a broader scope, the Lukan gospel account most certainly reached an audience much larger than Theophilus alone. It is probable that Luke's gospel was received by Gentile believers who were familiar with "Jewish tradition and its religious practices." Luke's language is also indicative of his readers' social situation: citizens under the rule of the Roman Empire living in a fairly prominent city in the Eastern Mediterranean region.
It is impossible to know the exact date of composition. That being so, educated guesses tend to come both from within the text of Luke-Acts and from early historical tradition. Most scholars tend to place the date of Luke's gospel and the Acts within latter quarter of the first century. In regards to internal evidence for the dating of Luke-Acts, it could be "Luke's failure to use Paul's letters or even to mention that Paul wrote letters" that "argues in favor of an earlier rather than a later date." This, however, does not seem to be a compelling argument for the potential dating of the Luke-Acts narrative. That being said, a time frame of 75—85 CE is a generously broad estimate for the dating of its composition.



LITERARY CONTEXT

It is likely that the author of Luke's gospel used a written version of Mark's gospel, a conglomeration of "sayings" materials, and "the so-called Q source", a collection of circulating, oral traditions. This is evidenced by Luke's reference to many "orderly account[s] of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed on to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word." This is also evidenced by Luke's similar pattern of narrative to that of Mark, while his divergence from Mark's gospel is done with what seems to be an interesting purpose in the forefront of Luke's thinking. While Luke draws on several different sources, there is material that is unique to Luke among the other Synoptic Gospels making up nearly a full half of Luke's gospel.
It would appear that the author of Luke intended to compose a second volume to his gospel and indeed did so, giving us the book of Acts. The links between the two range from similar and referential introductory prologues, referencing the continuation of "all that Jesus began to do and to teach" (Luke 1:1—4 and Acts 1:1), to parallel accounts and miracles of Jesus, Peter, Paul, Stephen, etc., to parallel theological emphases. Darrell L. Bock brings this point out well by saying that in understanding "the emergence of the church" in the book of Acts, "one must understand Jesus and the plan of God" as put forth in Luke's first work.
The four canonical gospels as narrative are comparable to other ancient narrative texts. Among ancient narrative, two kinds are more likely in the case of Luke's writing: historiography and biography. It is seems that 'gospel', at least in terms of Christian writing, became a sub-group of biographical narrative. This particular facet of biographical narrative seems also to have its own sub-groups of stylistic composition: as teaching/Halakah and apocalypse (Matthew), as preaching/auditory/biographical narrative and transitional paradigm for the OT—NT (Mark), as signs and revelation (John), and as history and biography (Luke). From this we could say that gospel as genre may have more to do with what is being said/taught/preached than how the writers of the canonical gospels composed their particular account.
It is important to note Luke's emphasis on the "Jewish roots of Jesus' life and career but also… [the] early hints of the universal reach of the message and of the deliverance it signals," (John's/Jesus' birth and Jesus' youth Luke 1:5—2:52, "light for revelation to the Gentiles," 2:32; "all flesh," 3:6). Luke frames Jesus' rejection in Nazareth as an inaugural event, pointing toward the direction of the rest of the narrative: like the prophets "Elijah and Elisha before him Jesus will carry gracious divine benefaction to outsiders." This resonates with the Markan narrative, probably used as one of Luke's source materials, which narrates Jesus' life as inaugurating God's advent, his coming into the world, the New Exodus he leads with all the nations in tow, and the everlasting reign of God over all the nations.
Regarding the structure of Luke's gospel, it is fairly natural to associate the shifts in the narrative with a shift in geographical location. In a broad scope, Bock makes five divisions in Luke's narrative:
Luke's preface and the introduction of John and Jesus (1:1—2:52)
Preparation for ministry: anointed by God (3:1—4:13)
Galilean ministry: revelation of Jesus (4:14—9:50)
Jerusalem journey: Jewish rejection and the new way (9:51—19:44)
Jerusalem: the innocent one slain and raised (19:45—24:53)
The passage at hand, Luke 18:1—17, is set within the fourth section, while Jesus is on his way to Jerusalem. Previous to this passage, Jesus has just finished a dialogue regarding "the days of the Son of Man." Immediately following, "a certain ruler" asks Jesus about inheriting eternal life, a reference to what this ruler hopes for as a result of the day of the Son of Man.

DETAILED ANALYSIS


This passage can naturally be divided into three parts: the parable of the unjust judge and the persistent widow (18:1—8), the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector (18:9—14), and the pericope of the children being brought to Jesus (18:15—17). Thus, each passage will be addressed in turn. By taking each in turn, my intent is to show some of what Luke may have had in mind in putting all three of these passages right next to each other.

Luke 18:1—8

Then Jesus told them a parable about their need to pray always and not to lose heart. 2 He said, "In a certain city there was a judge who neither feared God nor had respect for people. 3 In that city there was a widow who kept coming to him and saying, 'Grant me justice against my opponent.' 4 For a while he refused; but later he said to himself, 'Though I have no fear of God and no respect for anyone, 5 yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will grant her justice, so that she may not wear me out by continually coming.'" 6 And the Lord said, "Listen to what the unjust judge says. 7 And will not God grant justice to his chosen ones who cry to him day and night? Will he delay long in helping them? 8 I tell you, he will quickly grant justice to them. And yet, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?"

To start, it is important to note why this parable is being included in the discussion. Generally, scholars will attribute this parable as being attached to the previous discourse regarding the coming apocalyptic "days of the Son of Man." Thus, the audience is given a sort of etiology for the coming parable: to highlight disciple's "need to pray always and not to lose heart." The audience, then, should hear an elaboration on what this parable is meant to convey in light of Jesus' most recent apocalyptic monologue.
In this parable's first couple of verses the audience is introduced to the characters of the story: "a judge who neither feared God nor had respect for people," and a widow who constantly cries out for justice against her opponent. To understand the meaning of the parable, it is important to understand the social and cultural baggage that these characters drag with them into the parable. The judge is described as one who possibly fits a common stereotype. He is a "local magistrate… [who] is not religious [by any indication], has no scruple…. [and is] someone incapable of shame." Johnson notes further that the beginning of wisdom, as said in Proverbs 1:7, is directly correlated to the "fear of the Lord" or "fear of God" in our case. It would seem then that our judge is deficient in judicial wisdom and exceeding in injustice toward others, as Jesus himself notes (cf. 18:6).
The widow's social characterization also needs to be addressed, as variously discussed in articles by Bruce J. Malina and Jerome H. Neyrey, and Douglas E. Oakman. We are not told whether this widow has any sons who are alive, but it is certainly obvious that her husband is deceased. With no husband, and probably no son, this woman is at the mercy of anyone who wishes to take advantage of her particular vulnerability. This very thing, willful exploitation, seems to be the case of the widow. With no legal advocate, the widow is entirely at the mercy of her opponent, where her shame (honor and reputation) is at stake with the verdict of the case. What seems odd is that the widow repeatedly and shamelessly reproaches the city judge. Without normal legal advocacy, the widow appears to take upon herself the task of defending her own shame against her oppressor. She is engaging in what is socially not hers to engage. In a sense, she is transgressing a social boundary. Thus we arrive at a picture of the judge and the widow. One endeavors to judge without scruple or justice toward God or people, and the other endeavors to be granted justice in regards to her shame even at the risk of her shame.
The widow's (annoyingly?) repeated call for justice from this un-shamed and unresponsive judge eventually elicits a desperate and weary response. The judge, after an interestingly accurate self-assessment, consents to the cry for justice "so that she may not wear [him] out by continually coming." Thus ends the parable and begins Jesus' words of clarity and encouragement. Jesus is certainly not equating the unjust judge to God. Rather, he is framing them in a "how much more" manner. God is not like the judge in that he does care about the vindication of his "chosen ones who cry out day and night," and this justice comes neither slowly nor begrudgingly. This quickness seems to be at odds with the longing Jesus mentioned in ch. 17 regarding the coming days of the Son of Man. Will faith be found on earth by the Son of Man when he (finally) does come? Will he find the determined, unwavering, unrelenting, undismayed, faithful praying that longs to see the fulfillment of its cry for justice?


Luke 18:9—14

9 He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and regarded others with contempt: 10 "Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee, standing by himself, was praying thus, 'God, I thank you that I am not like other people: thieves, rogues, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I give a tenth of all my income.' 13 But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even look up to heaven, but was beating his breast and saying, 'God, be merciful to me, a sinner!' 14 I tell you, this man went down to his home justified rather than the other; for all who exalt themselves will be humbled, but all who humble themselves will be exalted."

From such a question about faith Jesus enters immediately into his next parable, this time with a seemingly different intent. Tannehill notes that this parable is not primarily concerned with prayer as much as it is with "true and false claims to righteousness." This is seen clearly enough in the introductory phrase the narrator includes about this parable being told to those who believed in their own righteousness and who "regarded others with contempt." However, it is prayer alongside righteousness that connects this parable to the previous one and it's charge to "pray always." As we continue reading, we can see how our current parable connects with the previous parable on prayer by the introduction of our characters "[going] up to the temple to pray." We are told exactly who our characters are in this parable, a Pharisee and a tax collector as opposed to the last one, which, oddly enough, correspond to two groups that appear multiple times in Luke's narrative. So it would seem, as Tannehill also points out, that the Lukan Jesus intended this parable to be heard by the Pharisees as well as anyone else who finds themself in the same precarious position. Thus, prayer would seem, by itself, to be an insufficient lens by which to interpret the intent of placing these parables next to one another. We will get to this soon enough.
In "regard[ing] others with contempt" and "trust[ing] in themselves," the narrator seems to be making a character reference. The unjust judge was not only described in such terms but identified such characteristics in himself (cf. 18:2). Even with this reference as the potential backdrop, it is still not clear why or how it is so. However, the ambiguity is cleared up as the Pharisee takes the stage and begins his prayer. He is grateful that he is not like "other people," and lists out who, or rather what, those other people are: "thieves, rogues, adulterers…." He is even grateful that he is not like "this tax collector," perhaps at the same time gesturing toward his fellow pray-er. He continues his prayer with another list, this time listing the things he is and does, not the things he is not and does not. Observably, the thanksgiving that begins the prayer quickly morphs into self-exaltation. Like the unjust judge, this Pharisee has a considerable amount of social and religious status. The Pharisees were known for their adherence to Jewish law and practice, hints why this Pharisee mentions his excessive fasting and tithing. This is also evidenced in this particular Pharisee's prayer following Jewish liturgy (cf. Ps. 17:3—5). However, unlike the unjust judge's accurate self-assessment, the Pharisee fails to see for himself that his praying in such an exalted manner is an abhorrence in its self-righteous tone, placing him in the very same camp as the one he is deprecating, that of thieves, rogues, and adulterers.
The tax collector is next mentioned as "standing far off." Why would he have to stand far off, distanced from the Pharisee? In the Jewish world, tax collectors were among those considered unclean. But this was not as far as the revilement they endured ended. They were also considered to thieving, treacherous, and adulterous. Thieving in the sense that they had the opportunity, which some took, to tax more than required by Rome and keep whatever the difference was. They were viewed as "unrighteous," as Johnson translates it, in that they were ritually impure, and as adulterous in that they had "sold-out" to the Roman Empire, leaving their own people out to dry. With this in view, it is not surprising to find such a polemic against the tax collector as we find in the prayer of the Pharisee. In looking at the prayer of the tax collector we find something interesting. He, like the Pharisee, also draws from the Jewish liturgy when uttering his prayer (cf. Ps. 51). Such a cry for mercy should give any reader pause given the way tax collectors are characterized in Jewish culture. Another cause for rethinking this characterization, at least in the present case, is Jesus' narration as to how the tax collector is praying for mercy: "[he], standing far off, would not even look up to heaven, but was beating his breast…." This posture shows that he is well aware of his own social and religious status, much like the Pharisee, as an unclean and unrighteous sinner in need of the mercy of God alone. This is a correct self-assessment in terms of the cultural context, as was the Pharisee's; however, that is as far as the similarities go since the assessment by the tax collector was the only correct one of the two.
It is after the tax collector finishes his prayer that Jesus tells of the result of the two prayers. It is "this man," the tax collector, who returns to his house "justified rather than the other." Jesus further explains that "all who exalt themselves will be humbled, but all who humble themselves will be exalted." Talbert notes correctly that this statement on the resulting justification of the sin-filled tax collector represents a consistent "theme of status reversal in [Luke]." The root of the word justified is the same root both for righteousness (cf. 18:9) and justice (cf. 18:2—7). This is, again, one of the key ties to the parable of the persistent widow. As the seemingly powerless widow cried out for justice, which came eventually, so this unrighteous tax collector cries out for mercy and is justified rather than the one typically expected to be so. Both receive justice and both receive it in a way none would expect. On the other hand, the judge and the Pharisee both render judgment. The judge, though unjust, exacts the justice long requested, while the Pharisee, righteous in his own estimation, exacts a judgment of contempt, even condescension. The Pharisee has placed himself in the seat of God Almighty and judged himself as exclusively superior in cleanliness, righteousness, and justice. It is the self-exalted, the self-justified, the self-empowered that will be humbled and made powerless by God, and it is the willingly humbled, the unjustified, the powerless that will be exalted, and vindicated by God.

Luke 18:15—17

15 People were bringing even infants to him that he might touch them; and when the disciples saw it, they sternly ordered them not to do it. 16 But Jesus called for them and said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not stop them; for it is to such as these that the kingdom of God belongs. 17 Truly I tell you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it."

After this statement on status reversal, the narrator moves into a short pericope centered on children. The parents of these children, or infants, seek Jesus for one thing: "that he might touch them." It seems innocent enough, but touching a child let alone an infant was not exactly on of the social expectations in Jesus' day. The disciples appear to adhere to this expectation. They rebuke those who have brought Jesus their children that they might be touched by this miracle worker. The disciples refuse these parents their one request. It would be a mistake at this juncture to think of the children mentioned in this passage as we do presently in Western culture. The high mortality rate of children before they reached the age of five was one of the contributing factors to ancient culture sending children to the very margins of society. They were considered not entirely human because of their recent arrival from the divine realm, which also contributed to the sense of mystery that surrounded them. Viewed in this way and treated so marginally, children had no rights and no power, much like the widow, and neither did they have any social or religious status. On all accounts, children in the ancient world are entirely powerless. But, it is for precisely this reason that Jesus tells his disciples not to hinder the children being brought to him, to let them come that they might be touched.
So it is here that we see the main characters in this pericope: the disciples and the children. The disciples are, in light of our previous discussion, attempting to keep the children on the margin, while the children are entirely without the ability to object to this action let alone reverse it. Thus, for these children, who are entirely without power and status, Jesus becomes the one to call for, almost demand, their vindication and inclusion as whole persons worthy of his touch. And it is at this juncture that the closing remarks are necessary

CLOSING REMARKS
Our treatment of Jesus' final statement draws and sums up most of the conclusions reached in our discussion thus far. Johnson makes the observation that what Jesus is saying here is not that these children own the kingdom, rather it is still in God's possession. What he is saying is that "such as these" children are they who constitute its membership, not those who refuse even contact with them, like the disciples. It is this kind of person who must be welcomed by those who themselves wish to enter the kingdom. It is those who are marginalized, those who are outcast members of society that are the most likely ones to be found included in God's reign rather than excluded. This is the very same case as that of the tax collector. The one least expected, least included in (i.e., excluded from) the Jewish social and religious realms is the only one in that parable who receives, in humility, the very thing pleaded for, and much more than that. The Pharisee, on the other hand, asked for nothing and received exactly that. Talbert speaks to this well when he says that "[f]or Luke, salvation by grace means one can never feel religiously superior. Faith never expresses itself as despising others. Spiritual arrogance is presumption, assuming that one stands in God's place, able to judge. It is this exaltation of oneself that God overturns." This is also reminiscent of the persistent widow, herself crossing social boundaries and expectations, coming again and again to plead for justice against her oppressor. The unjust judge, in his un-fearing and contemptuous attitude, is the only one of the three "antagonists" who rendered judgment in any positive way, but only after becoming weary. So too, as in that first case, God is framed in a manner of "how much more" vis a vis all three antagonists. How much more will God suddenly grant justice to his persistent and chosen ones? How much more will God grant grace and justification to those unrighteous who, in humility, cry out for nothing but mercy? How much more will God grant citizenship to those who are marginalized by the powerful of society? In all three instances God is calling into question those who think of themselves as insiders to the disadvantage of others. Thus, Christ declares that "people enter God's realm, not in a proud triumphal procession, but in complete vulnerability, with no claim to any rights or status," relinquishing all claims to power and dominion.



WORKS CITED

Bock, Darrell L. Luke 1:1—9:50. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. 2 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994.
Carroll, John T. "Luke, Evangelist." Pages 719—20 in vol. 3 of The New Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by Katherine Doob Sakenfeld. 5 vols. Nashville: Abingdon, 2008.
Carroll, John T. "Luke, Gospel of." Pages 720—34 in vol. 3 of The New Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by Katherine Doob Sakenfeld. 5 vols. Nashville: Abingdon, 2008.
Culpepper, R. Alan. "The Gospel of Luke: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections." Pages 3—490 in Luke; John. Vol. 9 of New Interpreter's Bible. Edited by Leander E. Keck. Nashville: Abingdon, 1995.
Dowd, Sharyn. Reading Mark: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Second Gospel. Macon: Smyth and Helwys, 2000.
Evans, Craig A. Luke. New International Biblical Commentary 3. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1990.
Green, Joel B. The Gospel of Luke. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.
Jeffrey, David Lyle. Luke. Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible. Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2012.
Johnson, Luke Timothy. "Luke-Acts, Book of." Pages 403—20 in vol. 4 of The Anchor Bble Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Johnson, Luke Timothy. The Gospel of Luke. Sacra Pagina 3. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1991.
Malina, Bruce J. and Jerome H. Neyrey. "Honor and Shame in Luke-Acts: Pivotal Values of the Mediterranean World." Pages 25—66 in The Social World of Luke-Acts. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1991.
Oakman, Douglas E. "The Countryside in Luke-Acts." Pages 151—79 in The Social World of Luke-Acts. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1991.
Talbert, Charles H. Reading Luke: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Third Gospel. Macon: Smyth & Helwys, 2002.
Tannehill, Robert C. Luke. Abingdon New Testament Commentaries. Nashville: Abingdon, 1996.
Vorster, Willem S. "Gospel Genre." Pages 1077—79 in vol. 2 of The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992.



John T. Carroll, "Luke, Evangelist," NIDB 3:719—20. See also Darrell L. Bock, Luke 1:1—9:50 (BECNT 3A; 2 vols.; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994) 1:4.
Luke Timothy Johnson, "Luke-Acts, Book of," ABD 4:404. For other, specific evidence of patristic attribution of the writing of Luke-Acts to Luke himself, see R. Alan Culpepper, NIB 9:5; and Charles H. Talbert, Reading Luke: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Third Gospel (Macon: Smyth & Helwys, 2002), 1.
Bock, Luke 1:1—9:50, 1:5.
Ibid, 1:4.
Luke Timothy Johnson, "Luke-Acts, Book of," ABD 4:404—5. See also Carroll, "Luke, Evangelist" and "Luke, Gospel of," 3:719—21 for another reference to Luke's literary and social background.
Johnson, "Luke-Acts," 4:405.
Luke 1:3c, NRSV hereafter.
Carroll, "Luke, Gospel of," 3:721.
Ibid.
Johnson, "Luke-Acts," 4:405. See also John T. Carroll, "Luke, Gospel of," NIDB 3:721.
Carroll, "Luke, Gospel of," 3:720—21.
John T. Carroll, "Luke, Gospel of," 3:722. See also Darrell L. Bock, Luke 1:1—9:50, 1:9.
Luke 1:1—2.
Carroll, "Luke, Gospel of," 3:722.
Bock, Luke 1:1—9:50, 1:12.
Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997) 7.
Bock, Luke 1:1—9:50, 1:12—13.
Ibid., 1:13.
Willem S. Vorster, "Gospel Genre," ABD 2:1077
Ibid.
Ibid.
John T. Carroll, "Luke, Gospel of," NIDB 3:722, 725.
Ibid.
Bock, Luke, 20.
Some scholars join not only this parable but also the following parable to be related to the "need to pray always and not to lose heart." See, e.g., Luke Timothy Johnson, The Gospel of Luke (Sacra Pagina 3; Collegeville: Liturgical, 1991) 273; David Lyle Jeffrey, Luke (BTCB; Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2012) 214; Craddock, Luke (Interpretation Series; Louisville: John Knox) 208.
Johnson, Gospel of Luke, 269.
Ibid.
Bruce J Malina and Jerome H. Neyrey, "Honor and Shame in Luke-Acts: Pivotal Values of the Mediterranean World," in The Social World of Luke-Acts (ed. Jerome H. Neyrey; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1991) 63—64; Douglas E. Oakman, "The Countryside in Luke-Acts," in The Social World of Luke-Acts (ed. Jerome H. Neyrey; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1991) 168—9.
Craddock, Luke, 209; Robert C. Tannehill, Luke (ANTC; Nashville: Abingdon, 1996) 264.
Tannehill, Luke, 265.
See footnote 25 as well as Evans (Luke [NIBC 3; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1990] 267) who also makes a case in favor of reading these two parables together.
Tannehill, Luke, 265.
Ibid.
Craddock, Luke, 208.
Tannehill, Luke, 266.
Johnson, Gospel of Luke, 272.
Talbert, Reading Luke, 200.
Johnson, Gospel of Luke, 272.
Talbert, Reading Luke, 200.
Ibid.
Talbert, Reading Luke, 200.
See, e.g., Tannehill, Luke, 266; Talbert, Reading Luke, 201.
The previous discussion on children in the ancient world comes from Sharyn Dowd, Reading Mark: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Second Gospel (Macon: Smyth and Helwys, 2000) 96—7, 104.
Johnson, Gospel of Luke, 276.
Dowd, Reading Mark, 104.
2