Who was Theophilus?

The Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts are two of the most popular books in the most popular collection of works of all time. It should come as no surprise they share a few characteristics. Scholars believe both books were written by the man whom they refer to as Luke the Evangelist. More interestingly, in my opinion, is the commonality they share in their purpose. Both books are addressed to a mystery man named Theophilus. This guy has two of the most widely read books of the Bible addressed to him, but who is he?

Since names are so symbolic throughout the entirety of the Bible, it could be beneficial to start with the meaning of Theophilus as a name. The name “Theophilus” literally means “loved by God,” but carries the idea of “friend of God.” Because of this meaning carried by the name, many scholars believe it is just a stand-in for the average believer and could easily placed by any name one may choose. If we are to accept this belief, then our work here is done, and we can go on our way. However, I find it too easy to just assume the name has symbolic meaning when there very well could have been a man named Theophilus who had about 1/4 of the New Testament addressed directly to him. 

Luke starts his books in a literary style widely used by Greeks at the time. The author states his intentions, why he has those intentions, and to whom the intentions are directed. Many people believe the reader can skip over this introduction and the story will still have the same effect. However, if the “most excellent Theophilus” mentioned in Luke 1:3 is a real person, it is probably a good idea to learn as much about him as we can. 

According to Luke, he writes his gospel so Theophilus “may have certainty concerning the things [he] has been taught.” This leads some scholars to believe two things about Theophilus the man. First, scholars believe Theophilus may have been a relatively high-ranking Roman official who was sympathetic of the Christians and their movement. Perhaps Luke wanted to persuade him to believe the gospel and all of its implications. The term “most excellent” was used in that time when addressing someone of a higher social strata and position. Interestingly enough, the same title was used only 3 other times in the New Testament, all in the book of Acts (Acts 23:26, Acts 24:3, Acts 26:25).  In each of these cases, the title is used in respect a Roman governor. To me, it makes sense that Luke would see the need to “convert” someone in a position of power. It would greatly assist the Christian evangelists in their endeavor if they had a man of power helping to spur the cause. Secondly, it is clear Theophilus was not completely new to the beliefs of the Christian faith. Looking closely at Luke 1:4 we can see that Theophilus has previously been taught either by Luke or someone else. Apparently Luke's intent was to provide Theophilus with factual evidence of the Christ he had been taught about. This idea plays especially well into themes found in the Gospel of Luke; the author constantly uses logical examples and mentions eye-witnesses in his work. 

Regardless of the identity (or existence) of a man named Theophilus, we know Luke was aware his books would be read by more than one man. Therefore, copies would need to be made. Another theory on the role of Theophilus in this story suggests he was the man responsible for allowing the book to be published and copied. In doing so, he would have been doing Luke a great favor for which Luke would undoubtedly be appreciative. However, we can only speculate on the identity of the man named Theophilus. Perhaps light will soon be shed on the matter, and perhaps we’ll never know. 

How does Jesus relate the other Rabbis of his time?

The primary role of Jesus throughout the New Testament is that of the Messiah. Prophets speak about the coming of a Messiah throughout the Old Testament, and the gospel writers (in this case, Mark) set out to convince the people Jesus is the one they have been waiting for. Jesus is obviously depicted as special in scripture. He is set apart as a divine being, the son of Yahweh. However, Jesus is given another title throughout the gospel of Mark, both by his followers and passers-by. There are several cases in this book when Jesus is addressed as “Rabbi”. This provoked my interest. Knowing there were hundreds of rabbis in Jesus’ time, I am curious to know how he related to them, and how is relationship with his students (disciples) compared to theirs. 

The word “rabbi” derives from the Hebrew word “ravi”, which means “My Master”. In the Jewish faith, a Rabbi is a teacher of Torah, or the as Christians would call it, the Pentateuch (the first 5 books of the Old Testament in the Christian Bible). A Rabbi is literally a master of Torah and other works pertaining to the Jewish faith. They work strenuously to commit to memory Jewish law and teachings. Since we learn from the book of Mark that Jesus is a rabbi, we gain unique insight into what his childhood might have been like. A Rabbi would study throughout his childhood to become more and more proficient in Jewish teachings and scriptures. Jesus would have spent many hours in the temple and following a Rabbi of his own. Once becoming Rabbi himself, he would take on students to instruct them in his interpretation of the law and teachings. 

This presents a problem. Many modern Christians view Jesus’ knowledge as God-given and divine. In fact, Galilee, where Jesus is from, is often given a bad reputation. People consider Galilee to be the home of lower-class, unlearned peasants, not the home of respectable Rabbis. However, upon further investigation, this proves to be fundamentally false. “The level of learning and education in Galilee exceeded that of Judea in Jesus’ day. Galilee surpassed even Judea in its schools of learning, and most of the famous rabbis of Jesus’ day were from Galilee (Johnanan ben Zakkai, Hanina ben Doda, Abba Yose Holikufri, Zadok, Halaphta, Hananian ben Teradyon.)” So, it is very plausible that Jesus is well-educated and an imminent master of Jewish teachings. 

The theory of Jesus being a learned master of the Jewish scriptures is further bolstered by the beginning of his ministry. Jesus began traveling, with his students in tow, to teach in villages across Galilee and beyond its borders. Jesus would not have been the first teacher to do this. In fact, traveling was the norm for Rabbis at the time. Jesus is called Rabbi, travels like a Rabbi, and has students like a Rabbi. All signs are pointing towards Jesus as a learned master of the scriptures. 

The English word “disciple” is derived from the Latin word “descipulus” which means “pupil”. So when Jesus calls his disciples to follow him, he is hand-selecting the students who will learn from his teachings. This is not unlike the way other Rabbis obtain there students. Children in Galilee around the time of Jesus would attend school beginning around the age of 5-6. This school was called Beth Sefer; it focused on the learning and memorization of the Torah. After this level of education was completed, most students would begin working in the family trade; they had fulfilled the extent of their eduction. However, the best students would graduate to the next level: Beth Midrash. Here, students would learn to interpret the scriptures of the Torah and become familiar with additional scripture not found in the Torah. At this point, a very select few of the students from Beth Midrash would seek permission to study under a prominent Rabbi. They would follow him around wherever he went, learning from him, and emulating him. After a period of time, they would become Rabbis themselves. 

A very large difference appears at this point. Jesus’ students most likely did not graduate from Beth Midrash and obtain permission to become his disciples. This is evident from the fact they were already working as tradesmen. However, Jesus hand picked students from the community who had only completed their primary education. As a result of this revolutionary call to discipleship, they fulfilled their duties as students of Jesus. They learned from his teachings and sought to become like him. In the end, they became teachers themselves began educating their own students. 

While Jesus was similar in many ways to Rabbis of the time, he was exceptional. He added much more than his own interpretation to the scriptures he had learned, and he took on students who did not have the proper credentials. These things undoubtedly flustered the other teachers of the time, and they often challenged his authority and authenticity. 

*** I could not find this particular video in the list to embed on Blogger, but it is a GREAT interview that details the relationship between the Jewish faith and the New Testament. Definitely watch it if you have time. 

**************Seriously, watch the video. 

****************************Please. 

Why are trees used as symbols in the book of Matthew?

See? Not exactly barren.

I’m going to level with you here. My grasp on geography probably isn’t as strong as it should be. It’s hard for me to imagine the landscape or weather of a place unless I’ve been there. I’m directionally challenged and have no concept of separating one place from the other. To top it all off, geography is my worst subject on Trivia Crack. It’s sad, truly. However, my subpar understanding of geography is directly responsible for my blog question for this week. When I think Palestine, I think desert. No amount of pictures of lush, beautiful, sprawling gardens could possibly change my perception. For me to think of Palestine any differently, I would need to go there, and seeing as how that trip isn’t on my immediate travel itinerary, I am stuck with my perception of Palestine as a barren desert. That being said, the countless references to trees and fruit in the book of Matthew definitely jumped off the page. So, what exactly is the purpose for the use of trees and fruit as symbols in Matthew (or the rest of the Bible for that matter)?

Trees appear in Matthew many times. Matthew 7:17, 12:33, 21:18-22, and 3:10 are just a few instances of their appearance. What makes them so useful as tools for Matthew to reach his target audience? 

From recreation to resources, trees have played a significant role throughout history. The presence of trees has always been instrumental when determining the location of civilization. Depictions of trees appear in tombs and on monuments remaining from ancient Egypt. The markings on monuments definitely denote the importance of trees and their fruit as they pertain to livelihood, and the presence of drawings of trees in the burial places of pharaohs of ancient Egypt also ties spiritual importance to them. 

Trees find root in religious practices dating back to ancient Greece and Egypt. The ancient Greeks regarded trees as the first temples of the gods and sacred groves as their first places of worship, where the powerful forces of nature inspired human image making.  Characters in the old testament also used trees as markers for holy ground and places of worship. Coincidentally, the Christian creation story highlights a tree in the construction of the very foundations of life. Adam and Eve eating the fruit of a tree effectively set life as we know it on its course.  Therefore, the significance of trees in religion cannot be overstated.

In the time and region Matthew’s book covers, trees are not only prevalent, but they are essential to the people who live there. Fig trees are extremely  important for the sustenance provided by their fruit, and the olive tree is a staple in commerce. The characters who appear in the book of Matthew are not only familiar with the trees mentioned by Jesus in Matthew’s gospel, but they actively depend on them. Therefore, it is easy for them to relate trees to other aspects of life. Since Matthew is writing specifically to Jews, it is important that they be able to connect everything Jesus says to the scriptures and prophecies of the old testament. Trees are mentioned many times in prophecies concerning Yahweh’s temple and the covenant with his people. Therefore, Jesus’ use of trees as symbols help to fulfill prophecies that were given in the past. 

The fig tree in particular is used often as a source of food for the characters in the book of Matthew. The fruit is filling, sustainable, reliable, and predictable. Fig trees routinely begin growing fruit at the same time they begin growing leaves. Therefore, when a fig tree shows leaves, fruit should always be present. This fact plays a significant role in a particular story in the book of Matthew. In Matthew 21:18-22, Jesus curses a fig tree when he finds no fruit on its branches. Previously when reading this story, I always found it very fickle of Jesus to curse a tree for not having fruit when he wanted it. However, thanks to the research I’ve done, I now understand his frustration. The fig tree in the story is full of leaves when Jesus approaches it. Because figs look so similar to the leaves (as seen in the picture), he can't tell if their is any fruit at this point, but according to the growth of said tree, it should bear fruit along with those leaves. However, there are no figs to be found. The tree looks normal. There are branches and leaves, but there is no fruit. So, Jesus curses the tree that it may never grow fruit again. He connects this to people. A person may exhibit physical (branches) and intellectual (leaves) growth, but if the person is not exhibiting spiritual (fruit) growth, they are not doing what they are meant to be doing. The Jews to whom Matthew is writing can relate to this symbol because they rely so heavily on the predictability of the fig tree. 

The symbolism of trees and fruit found in Matthew works for all these reasons and more. To put it bluntly, people understand trees and recognize their importance. Honestly, trees carry an oddly spiritual connotation with people. Therefore, it simply makes sense for them to be used as symbols, made the subject of metaphors, and appear in parables.