A screenwriter's challenge. Luke 4.

From time to time, we've talked about some of the reasons that understanding the Bible takes work. One of the big reasons is its distance from us in time and space -- the Bible records incidents from a long, long time ago, in a place and culture that is so different from ours. Today's reading from Luke is one of those where, for me, that distance is all too apparent. The distance means that while I understand what took place in Nazareth, I don't understand why it took place. That's not quite right, so let me try to explain this in a roundabout way.

What do you think about screenwriters and screenplays? Better still, do you ever think about screenwriters and the work they do? How about this: have you ever watched an adaptation of the story of Jesus and thought, why is Jesus so wooden? Or, why does this movie/play/musical/enactment seem so unrealistic? Is it the dialog, the direction, the costumes and props, the special effects? Any one of the elements that go into staging can affect the final result and reception by the audience, of course, and often it's the case that many of these elements are poorly handled. But as I think about most of the productions I've seen of biblical stories, especially ones about Jesus, it's in the staging and dialog where the weaknesses tend to show up. Often, that's because they stick to the language in the Bible.

Whoa, wait, hold on. Are you arguing that when we adapt the story of Jesus to stage or screen, that we should change what He said? Well, maybe I am. At least, it seems to me that we don't have enough dialog in the gospels to see the complete picture. Or, we don't have enough of the cultural context to fully grasp what Jesus might mean when He says certain things. When we study the Bible, or hear a sermon, or read a book (maybe even a blog entry), it's possible to bring out that context and enrich our understanding of the events, actions, and speech we're reading. Not so in an adaptation like a movie. This responsibility would fall on the screenwriter(s): to flesh out the picture we have of the people being depicted, including Jesus, so that what's being said makes sense to us, and is real, not wooden.

I actually don't know a whole lot about drama, staging, and movie-making, beyond what any of us picks up as consumers of this art form. But I often try to imagine how I might want to stage a scene from a Bible passage, and what the dialog would be in the scene, in order to bring what I'm reading to life. (Do you do something similar?) With all that in mind, we get to the passage this morning (Luke 4:16-30), and the difficulty I have with it. How in the world could this scene be staged, and have it make sense?

Here's our basic description of what takes place. Jesus comes to his hometown Nazareth, on the heels of a spreading good reputation. He reads from Isaiah in the synagogue. He says, the prophecy contained in the reading is fulfilled that day. At this point, the people are amazed and speak well of Jesus. They marvel that they're hearing this from Joseph's son. (Are they marveling, or is something else being expressed in the question they ask? The question, "Isn't this Joseph's son?") Jesus then says they'll say "Physician, heal yourself," and talks about how prophets aren't accepted in their hometown. (Why does He say that?) And then, as if to defend those statements, Jesus talks about a couple of incidents from their text, the Old Testament to us, and the next thing you know: "When they heard this, all the people in the synagogue were filled with rage." (Luke 4:28).

OK, I left out the fact that the incidents Jesus referred to are times when a blessing is given not to Jews, but to Gentiles. In other words, these two incidents are an extension of what Jesus just said about prophets not being accepted in their own town. (This leads to a problem for the screenwriter... how is that conveyed to an audience that doesn't realize this without the context?) Still, why is Jesus piling this on so quickly? And what does the crowd react to so quickly and angrily, going so far as to try and throw Jesus off a cliff?

In other words, how would I stage this incident in such a way that all of this makes sense to an audience not situated in Palestine in the first century? Going back to what I first said, I understand what took place, and I can even teach the meaning of the incident (coming up shortly), but getting at the heart of the why of this incident, and the seeming speed with which it took place is difficult. I could make some decisions about the staging, but would they be the right ones? Let's start with some possible approaches.

Approach #1 - Add time to the scene. When Jesus says, "today the Scripture is fulfilled," the crowd is divided in two. Some sit amazed, looking upon Him favorably, while others begin to grumble, asking the question in a skeptical way, "Isn't this Joseph's son?" Jesus continues to teach in the background, and the camera focuses on the two groups in the crowd. When the question, which is asked more than once, surfaces loudly enough, the camera cuts back to Jesus, who responds to the question, with the words from the passage about prophets and hometowns.

Approach #2 - Jesus provokes the crowd. As before, Jesus continues to teach, but this time the entire crowd is watching favorably. The question of Jesus' relationship to Joseph is one of amazement. When Jesus talks about prophets in their hometown, it's an extension of His teaching, perhaps even spoken prophetically. This provokes some tension in the crowd, and the camera moves around for a bit while Jesus is silent. Then Jesus tells the stories where the Gentiles receive blessing, and the crowd flares up in anger.

Approach #3 - officials provoke Jesus. This is reading a lot into the story, but in this approach as Jesus teaches and the crowd looks on favorably, a group of officials in the background are upset both by Jesus' teaching and the crowd's response. The camera shot might be over the shoulders of these officials, taking in the crowd, and Jesus sitting at the front of the synagogue but in the center, background of the scene. (hook's note: Make sure there's dust in the sunlight, that'll look real.) When Jesus speaks about a prophet's rejection, He speaks directly to those officials, staring straight into the camera. (And while this does read a lot into the particular version of this incident as described in Luke, it was not an uncommon occurrence in Jesus' life.)

So, which is it? Or did something else take place? Is there a passion for the text, a passion for God, that we have a hard time understanding? Does this passion lead to quick, immoderate actions? Or did some time go by, and the anger mounted, until it burst forth? Was the anger provoked? And who provoked it? Do we have any clues to this culture in the actions of those in the Middle East today?

I don't have an answer to these questions that I would argue against another interpretation of the scene. My opinion right now is that the first approach above is the one that best fits the text. I also know that my own passion for the text and for God is lacking in intensity compared to those we're reading about. So there's a certain unreality to the scene.

As a final note about wooden Jesus portrayals, whatever the interpretation of this scene might be, if Jesus doesn't say anything in relating the stories of Elijah and Elisha, or someone in the scene doesn't convey the fact that these stories are about God's blessing on Israel's enemies, there will be a certain woodenness to the scene no matter how well acted it is.

Well, we don't have to have the answers to these questions to get the gist of what is taking place here, so God hasn't left us hanging. We do have the context of the Old Testament passages, and whether we can make this a real scene in our imagination or not, it did take place, and is very straightforward. In a nutshell:

• Jesus brings the message of fulfillment of God's promise to His people -- He is the anointed One.
  
• The people aren't ready to accept it, either because of the messenger, Jesus, or the manner in which God chose to fulfill His promise (*see below).
• Jesus let's the people know the good news will go to the Gentiles.
• The people get ticked.

This is a picture in miniature, a foreshadowing, of what Jesus' time on earth and His message to the people of Israel would be like. Cool.


*An interesting point here, is to go back and read the passage from Isaiah 61:1&2 that Jesus quotes. He has broken the thought of the second verse into two pieces, and only reported one. The full verse reads "..."to announce the year when the Lord will show his favor, the day when our God will seek vengeance, to console all who mourn..." It's possible that Jesus is announcing here that He's bringing mercy (favor) in His coming, and not to bring justice (vengeance), which will come later. In the Isaiah passage, this could just be Hebrew parallelism at work, but it is true that Jesus has come to earth as suffering servant, and will only later come as righteous judge and conquering king.