Jesus of Nazareth: What He Wanted, Who He Was

If we compare the two stories—setting aside all historical questions!—we see that they have much in common. In both the bringer of benefit encounters a funeral procession and causes the bier to halt. The dead person is young in both cases: in the first, a young woman about to be married; in the second, a “young man.” In the one it is the bridegroom who is mourning, in the other a mother who now has no one left to care for her. In the Hellenistic story the city of Rome shares in the bridegroom’s sorrow, and in the biblical tale many people are accompanying the funeral procession out of the city of Nain. Apollonius is depicted as a sympathetic and selfless benefactor: he wants to put an end to the tears being shed for the dead girl, and he gives his honorarium to the girl as her dowry. Jesus is seized by pity for the widow and tells her, “Do not weep.” Apollonius touches the dead girl, Jesus the bier. Apollonius heals by his word, and so does Jesus. But what is especially striking is that the Hellenistic storyteller recalls the raising of Alcestis by the demigod Heracles, while the biblical narrator uses a literary reference to recall the raising of the son of the widow of Zarephath by the prophet Elijah: “He gave him to his mother” (1 Kgs 17:23).

But now for the differences: Apollonius’s miracle-working words are magical. Philostratus does not want to say it too directly, but that is the precise background. Jesus, in contrast, does not utter any words of wizardry but speaks a very brief command: “Rise!” Further, Philostratus insinuates that the girl only appeared to be dead. In doing so he intends to show that he is a critical and objective narrator. Luke, in contrast, leaves no doubt: the man was dead. A further difference in the story as a whole is the role of God. F. C. Conybeare’s English translation of the Apollonius story omits a detail in the original that is still reflected in German versions: namely, that in the third paragraph instead of “it was raining at the time,” the text reads “Zeus caused dew to fall on her.” But why did Zeus do that? To sustain a spark of life in her? Or was the dew only a signal for the wonder worker that the girl was not really dead? Here again Philostratus maintains an ambivalence that is typical of him. There is no such ambiguity in Luke. For him it is clear that God himself was acting through Jesus: “God has looked favorably on his people.”

But the decisive difference is that Philostratus portrays Apollonius as an effective and humane miracle worker. The real character of this humanity is revealed by the horrifying story in which Apollonius has a supposed plague demon stoned.³² That need not, however, concern us here. In any case, Philostratus wants to celebrate Apollonius as a humane wonder worker. It is true that Zeus is permitted to peek through the curtain a bit, but in reality it is all about Apollonius, and the whole event, despite the sorrow of the city of Rome over the young woman, remains a private matter.

It is just the reverse in Luke: here it is all about Israel. A prophet like Elijah has “risen among us” [or: been raised up among us], and “God has looked favorably on [lit.: visited] his people.” Luke is quoting from Zechariah’s canticle:

Blessed be the Lord God of Israel,

    for he has looked favorably on his people and redeemed them.

He has raised up a mighty savior for us

    in the house of his servant David,

as he spoke through the mouths of his holy prophets from of old.

(Luke 1:68-70)

Thus a whole fabric of relationships is made visible. It is not only that God himself has acted in Jesus to raise up the young man of Nain! Still more, God has acted in Israel, his people. This theological interpretation of the event is breathtaking. It is anything but obvious. What has happened in the little village of Nain, and for one widow, is applied to all Israel. The miracle story opens a vista onto a long history of God’s promises and mighty deeds in Israel. Therefore Jesus’ mercy shown to the widow is not mere human sympathy as with Apollonius, but a reflection of God’s mercy on his people (Luke 1:54, 72). And therefore the witnesses of the miracle are seized with fear that issues in praise of God.

Thus the mighty deed on behalf of the young man of Nain is part of a long history—the history of God’s mighty deeds in his own special people. There is no comparable history in Apollonius, and so his miracle is ultimately “private.” With Jesus nothing is “private.”