in which Jesus warns about the possibility of scandal echoes other reactions to his ministry.169
In Green’s evaluation the testimony of Jesus about the Baptist is consonant with Luke’s previous presentation of John in 3:1–9.170 Never-theless, Jesus’ remarks go beyond that passage to underscore how John is the agent of God who prepares his way not only by proclaiming his message but also by showing a positive response to the good news. Jesus’ homage of John along with the language of the kingdom is an exhortation to the people to put away conventional expectations regarding the plan of God and adopt the perspective advanced by Jesus. With the positive assessment of John in 7:29–30, Luke provides “firm canons” to guide the reader in determining the profile of those who reject and accept the plan of God.171 The response of the people to this plan of God is further illustrated by the parable of the children in the marketplace, in which those who are aligned with the world fail to recognize this plan while the children of wisdom recognize in John and Jesus the manifestation of God’s divine purpose.172
Hans Klein’s commentary on the Gospel of Luke provides a more recent example of the passage’s interpretation. For Klein the Sitz im Leben of the entire pericope is the defense of Christianity against the disciples of the Baptist.173 Within Jewish Christian circles, this results in the handing down of a tradition that places the words of Jesus within a new framework.174 Klein assumes that the section has been taken from Q and highlights the Lukan redactional tendencies as well as the possible layers of Luke’s editorial work. For Klein the passage deals with the relationship between Jesus and the Baptist and the relationship of both with Israel.
To recapitulate, commentaries address many of the issues that studies about John the Baptist discuss but within the broader interpretative context of the Lukan work. Claims that the episode reflects missionary and/or apologetic concerns amid the struggles between the factions of the Baptist and Jesus vie with affirmations about the reliability of passage’s historical reminiscences. Some of these authors emphasize how Luke’s editorial work seeks to clarify the relationship between the Baptist and Jesus as well as John’s soteriological role to the kingdom of God. While some underscore the modification of the sources and the secondary setting of the passage that sought to restrict the Baptist’s role to that of the precursor of Jesus, others highlight the Baptist’s historical struggle to reconcile his messianic expectations with the manifestation of Jesus’ messianic signs.
Specialized Studies
Since the beginning of modern biblical exegesis a number of studies dealing with a variety of NT topics have presented their own interpretations of Luke 7:18–35. One example of such interpretations is the pericope’s assessment by Julius Wellhausen in his introduction to the Synoptic Gospels.175 To support his claim that Mark was the primary source for the teachings of Jesus and that Q represented a secondary version, Wellhausen turns to the passage that deals with John the Baptist. For Wellhausen the pericope suggests that the Baptist was not a disciple of Jesus. The Baptist remains a hybrid between the old and the new era, while Jesus holds a superior religious view. Jesus is the present Messiah, who already establishes the reign of God on earth, and the future belongs to him.
According to Wellhausen, Matthew and Luke are in substantial agreement regarding the relationship between the Baptist and Jesus. In their final analysis Matthew and Luke have transformed into a close relationship what in Mark was only a weak analogy that occurred at the conclusion of the eschatological speech (Mark 1:7–8). Jesus identifies himself as the “Son of Man” in a messianic sense and becomes the “Lord.” For Wellhausen, these changes evidence Luke’s Christianization of the original sources. In comparison to Mark, this speech represents a more coherent composition of Jesus addressed to his disciples and aimed at the church for which Jesus was already the present Messiah.176
Ernst Percy is another author who focuses on the passage in his study about the mission and message of Jesus. For him, Jesus’ reply to the delegates from John seems far better understood from Jesus’ own historical situation than from that of the early community.177 Percy discusses whether the reports about the mighty deeds of Jesus could have been historically based on the evidence of Mark 6:14–16.178 He also ponders how John could have come to the conclusion that Jesus was the “expected fiery-judge-Messiah.” However, the tone of the final beatitude as well as the oblique manner in which Jesus’ answer is delivered convinces Percy that this answer is original. The question of the Baptist itself may have originated not with John but with his disciples. Percy interprets Jesus’ response to John as proof that the prophesied time of fulfillment has arrived.179 The mighty deeds to which Jesus alludes announce the kingdom of God, because although they do not speak explicitly about the kingdom, the mighty deeds cannot be differentiated from it.180
Rudolph Schnackenburg examines the passage in his investigation of the meaning of the kingdom of God in the preaching of Jesus.181 Schnackenburg cites the passage to support his claim that Jesus’ message of salvation centered on the divine mercy of God and that this message, even to the amazement of his contemporaries, included the outcast members of society (7:34). For Schnackenburg the wonders of Jesus (7:21–22) also show that a new era of salvation—the fulfillment of the Deutero-Isaian prophecies—is already present and operative, although not fully realized. The passage plays a fundamental role in Jesus’ messianic claim because in the close relationship of his preaching and wonders the coming of the reign of God was manifested.182
In his “History of the Synoptic Tradition,” Rudolph Bultmann refers to Luke 7:18–35 as an apothegm (7:18–23) to which sayings about the Baptist have been added.183 He considers the question of the Baptist as a “community product” that “belongs to those passages in which the Baptist is called as a witness to the Messiahship of Jesus.”184 The composition of the passage took place amid the arguments between the disciples of Jesus and those of John, who denied the messianic character of the mighty works.185 The difference between the Lukan and Matthean forms of this apothegm must be attributed to Luke’s habit of expanding traditional material that does not appropriately fits in his redactional context.186
The episode about the delegation of the Baptist to Jesus is the first “parable” that Joachim Jeremias deals with in his work on the parables of Jesus, which also treats the parable of the children in the marketplace.187 Jeremias places the former into the category of parables that proclaim “now is the day of salvation,” while the latter is treated as a parable that announces “the imminence of catastrophe.” He does not discuss the historical circumstances surrounding either of them, because in outlining his ten “principles of transformation” he presumes that many of the parables have been modified from their original form and setting by the experience of the primitive church.188 Jeremias seems, however,
