#107 Passage Outline and Background: Luke 24:13-35

In this paper, we will explore the structure of Luke 24:13-35 with special attention to the seeing vs not seeing paradigm and the phrase “hearts burning.” This paper identifies the purpose of Luke 24:13-35 in its context. This study examines Luke 24:13-35 using the New American Standard Bible (NASB). This translation is well suited to this task with a focus on word for word translation. We must keep in mind, while examining these verses, the suggestion of Richards and O’Brian that “At some point in this generation, ‘Take up your cross and follow me’ changed into, ‘Come to Jesus and he’ll make your life better’” which is to say these verses have an audience and it is not us.

Luke 24:13-35 recounts the encounter on the road to Emmaus. The account begins immediately after the disciples found out about Jesus’ resurrection. This is followed by the verses in question. Two disciples, Cleopas and another who remains unnamed, went on a walk down from Jerusalem to Emmaus. Along the way they meet a man who tells them about Christ. Once they reach Emmaus they go to have a meal together. Once He blessed the bread they recognised Him and He vanished. Finally, this section ends with the disciples returning to Jerusalem to share their account with the other disciples. This account is followed up by Luke with another account of Jesus’ appearance and then His ascension to heaven. This account is a chiasm. But regardless of structure, this passage follows the natural outline of events. While also acting as confirmation of the account from all of the women who first saw Jesus’ body missing.

The account in Luke 24:13-35 takes the form of a chiasm or an inverted parallelism. For example:

“The Journey from Jerusalem (vv 14–15)

Appearance, “Obstructed Eyes,” Lack of Recognition (v 16)

Interaction (vv 17–18)

Summary of “the things” (vv 19–21)

Empty Tomb and Vision (vv 22–23a)

Jesus Is Alive (v 23b)

Empty Tomb, but No Vision (v 24)

Interpretation of “the things” (vv 25–27)

Interaction (vv 28–30)

“Opened Eyes,” Recognition, and Disappearance (vv 31–32)

The Journey to Jerusalem (vv 33–35)”

This structure adds meaning to the text by giving each section a counterpoint and context. At the center of the Chiasm is verse 23 implying that the point of this section is that Jesus is alive. Whereas, other parts of the structure contrast each other showing us the difference between Jesus and humanity. Such as, verses 19-21, where the disciples explain what is going on which is contrasted with verses 25-27 where Jesus interprets the events.

The account in Luke 24:13-35 is part of the larger narrative of Luke’s gospel as written by Luke. The authorship is widely accepted to be Luke a companion of Paul. This claim is accounted for in Acts. The widespread similarities between Luke and Acts show that both works likely have the same author. In Acts, there are instances where the first person plural “we” is used. Such as, in Acts 16:10, that indicates that both Acts and Luke were written by a companion of Paul, most likely Luke. Luke’s gospel is addressed to Theophilus in Luke 1:3. Yet it is questionable whether “Theophilus either was Luke’s intended reader or that he was representative of the audience Luke hoped to reach.” Theophilus can be translated as “loved by God” or “lover of God.” In any case, Theophilus is identified as a Greek name likely indicating that the expected audience was also Greek. Luke’s gospel was likely written around one of three dates 63 AD, 75-85 AD, or early in the second century. The early date of approximately 63 AD is best evidenced. At the end of Acts, Paul is in prison. The prophecy in Acts 11:28 is in future tense. Furthermore, Acts does not mention the pauline epistles, and most importantly “In Acts no event after AD 62 is mentioned,” such as the death of James or Paul.

The first readers of Luke were Greek. Either Theophilus, if he was a person, or other Greeks. This can be seen in verses such as Luke 2:21, where it mentioned circumcision as if the audience was unfamiliar. Assuming the primary audience is Greek, jewish customs and practices, if mentioned in Luke, are secondary to other details. When reading Luke’s gospel we need to be aware of the Greek perspectives that Luke was conveying.

Exploring the context of Luke 24:13-35 sheds light on the message and importance of the passage. Keeping in mind that “The immediate context exerts the most important control over the meaning of a specific text or passage.” The passage is preceded by the realization that Jesus is no longer in the tomb and followed by His appearance to the other disciples and His ascension. Luke’s gospel recounts the life of Jesus and His ministry. From before He was born all the way to His ascension at the end of Luke 24. The gospel of Luke is further meant to be read in context with Acts. Acts continues Luke’s narrative from the ascension of Jesus, to how the disciples continued the ministry of Jesus, and the eventual imprisonment of Paul. The Accounts of Luke fill in the historical gaps of the other gospel accounts and New Testament letters laying a foundation for our understanding of the life and ministry of Jesus and how the early Church was started. It is further worth noting that the account from Luke 24:13-35 does not appear in the other gospels. This is likely due to differences in sources and purpose. The inclusion of this story in Luke’s gospel highlights the value of women's testimony and of the scriptures; which would be especially meaningful to the gentile audience.

Cleopas is identified in this account in Luke 24:18. It is strange that only one of the disciples is named. It may be conjectured that naming of the other disciple would be distracting or irrelevant to the overall narrative. As opposed to the idea that Luke did not know who the other disciple was. The inclusion of the one disciple’s name strengthened the story by providing more context. Beyond this Cleopas does not appear in the rest of Scripture. Except for a potential connection to John 19:25 where the wife of Clopas is mentioned. Clopas might be a corruption or alternate spelling of Cleopas. Although the connection between Cleopas and Clopas is unlikely.

Within the chiastic structure of this passage one of the more peculiar structures is that of Luke 24:16 where their eyes were obstructed, and Luke 24:31 where their eyes were opened. First, consider Luke 24:16 which says, “But their eyes were prevented from recognizing Him.” This verse writes it plainly as “prevented” which may mean a number of things. Such as, Jesus taking on a different form, or that their eyes were blurry, or even that they did not look at His face. In Greek the word here is κρατέω, which in this case appears to be something that is done to the disciples as in the translation, “their eyes were ‘held,’ prevented from recognising.” From this we may deduce that God prevented the disciples from seeing who Jesus was at this time. The purpose for which they could not recognize Jesus may be “to enable the disciples to be prepared for the revelation of the risen Jesus by a fresh understanding of the prophecies of his resurrection” or it could be to help “Christians living in the era after the cessation of the resurrection appearances” see that it is possible to believe without seeing.

Luke 24:16 is contrasted with Luke 24:31 which reads, “Then their eyes were opened and they recognized Him; and He vanished from their sight.” With these two verses contrasting we can recognize that the literal follows the figurative. The blindness to Jesus’ presence is a spiritual error rather than a biological one. Thus, when Jesus tells them of the messiah throughout the scriptures their eyes are slowly opened and that is when they recognize Him. The word used for “opened” here is διανοίγω which means “to explain something which has been previously hidden or obscure.” Furthermore, the breaking of the bread in Luke 24:30, “points irresistibly to the action of Jesus at the last supper.” Thus, when the disciples' eyes were opened it may be understood to be a miracle performed by Jesus to the benefit of the disciples.

Verse 32 follows up on their eyes being opened by the phrase “hearts burning.” We understand this phrase in a similar way today, but “because God chose to speak first to ancient peoples living in cultures that are radically different from our own” we must consider what this phrase meant to them. In the Greek, the word καρδία is denotative of the “central organ of the body.” But in this context “heart” is obviously connotative. Heart is understood both by the Greeks and Jews of the first century to be figurative or connotative of the seat of emotions, passions, or the intellect. “Burning” should also be taken in the connotative sense. With “burning” meaning to be consumed by. It is suggested that “the main influence is probably that of biblical and Jewish usage.” Which is observed in pseudepigrapha “I was burning inwardly with compassion to tell him that Joseph had been sold.” The phrase is clarified to the Greek audience by the following words “within us” which clarify that it is not a literal fire. Taken together the phrase “hearts burning” implies that the disciples were being overwhelmed by their feelings and thoughts. That everything about the man they met on the road was convincing them that He was Jesus yet they were still blind. That is until “He took the bread and blessed it, and breaking it” Luke 24:30b.

Jesus shared about Himself throughout the scriptures, from Luke 24:27b “Moses and with all the prophets.” This is an extremely important claim to christianity as it confirms the hermeneutic approach of re-reading the Old Testament in light of Jesus Christ that is Christ-centered interpretation. This further helps to bridge the gap from the Hebrew Old Testament into the New Testament reality. We do not know what verses Jesus explored but the “implication with which Luke leaves us is that it does not matter.” Understanding the continuity between the Old and New Testaments is crucial. This account and Jesus’ use of the Old Testament ties together the Old and New Testaments which accomplished several goals. For the gentile audience this cements unequivocally the relevance of the Old Testament to their new faith. Providing a hermeneutical approach that has survived ever since. While also showing potential readers that the christian faith is jewish in essence.

In Conclusion, Luke 24:13-35 accomplishes many goals. It conveys the message of Christ to a Greek audience, establishes the Old Testament narrative, shows that Christ gives faith and understanding to us. Gives credence to the claims in the preceding verses about the women's testimonies. Then goes on to show how the disciples were downcast, and how Christ opened their eyes. Next, it showcases how the disciples' hearts burned and came to recognize Jesus. Finally these verses cement a hermeneutic approach that bridges the gap between the Jews and the Gentiles. Luke 24:13-35 acts as a bridge in the gospel from Luke’s gospel to Acts.

Bibliography

Baumgärtel, Friedrich, and Johannes Behm. “Καρδία, Καρδιογνώστης, Σκληροκαρδία.” In Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, 608. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964–.

Charlesworth, James H. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol. 1. New York; London: Yale University Press, 1983.

Duvall, J. Scott, and J. Daniel Hays. Grasping God’s Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. 4th ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2020.

Green, Joel B. The Gospel of Luke. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997.

———. “Luke, Gospel Of.” In Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, 2nd ed., edited by Joel B. Green, Jeannine K. Brown, and Nicholas Perrin, 549. Downers Grove, IL; Nottingham, England: IVP Academic; IVP, 2013.

Gromacki, Robert G. New Testament Survey. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1974.

Klein, William W., Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard Jr. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017.

Marshall, I. Howard. The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1978.

Michaelis, Wilhelm. “Κράτος (θεοκρατία), Κρατέω, Κραταιός, Κραταιόω, Κοσμοκράτωρ, Παντοκράτωρ.” In Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, 911. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964–.

Schmidt, Karl Ludwig. “Καίω.” In Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, 464. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964–.

Louw, Johannes P., and Eugene Albert Nida. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains. New York: United Bible Societies, 1996.

Morris, Leon. Luke: An Introduction and Commentary. Vol. 3. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988.

Richards, E. Randolph, and Brandon J. O’Brien. Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes: Removing Cultural Blinders to Better Understand the Bible. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2012.