3.1 Praise in Luke 1–2

The characteristic of the first praise section (Luke 1–2) is the insertion of long speeches that are actually praises: Benedictus, Magnificat, Nunc Dimittis and Gloria.Footnote ²⁶ Only one other praise acclamation of the third Gospel (19.38) can be paralleled with these. The individual praise occurs more often than the collective ones. Moreover, the individual praises seem to be more crucial since almost all major figures of Luke 1–2 give praise in lengthy, significant hymns which reveal truths about Jesus and John and the salvation plan of God.Footnote ²⁷ This observation coincides with the correlation of praise and providence in Greek literature: ‘praise (and its counterpart, petition) not only mark a person’s recognition of divine beneficence but also a person’s understanding of providence’.Footnote ²⁸

It can be specified that the reasons for praise in these instances stem from the connection that the persons of Jesus and John have in the context of God’s plan. There are miraculous conceptions of both; however, the principal miracle is that God has begun the plan of the liberation of Israel. The miraculous conceptions-births prompt praise-giving of Elisabeth, neighbours, and relatives in 1.58, and Zechariah in 1.64, 66 (because of John); of Mary in 1.46, of John in 1.41 and Elisabeth in 1.42, and of Zechariah in 1.68 (who mentions salvation in the house of David); of angels in 2.14, shepherds in 2.20, and Simeon and Anna in 2.28, 38. What is conspicuous is that the objects of praise are not John’s and Jesus’ deeds (and they might be, e.g., in 2.47 or in Luke 3) but their mere presence, and existence, which reveals God’s activity. On the other hand, the long speeches reveal more clearly than in other sections what the characters understood about Jesus and the salvation of Israel. The Jewish people are mentioned several times in this context (1.54; 1.68–9; 1.77; 2.10–11; 2.30–2).

The praise in Luke 1–2 leaves the implied reader with the following thoughts: praise is the recognition of God’s plan of salvation, expressing a proper reaction to the experience of his action; the characters reveal what is the reason for their praise, which is the realisation of God’s salvific plan. Furthermore, the Lukan pattern of promise-fulfilment-praise, present in Luke 1–2, may be extended for the rest of the Gospel.

3.2 Praise in Luke 5–18

In the ‘middle’ section, which extends between the Infancy Narrative and the entry into Jerusalem, the acclamations of praise are different from those in Luke 1–2. If we exclude the one instance of Jesus’ praise in Luke 13.21 (which does not occur in the pericope with the plot and is not a structural element for the narration), the sections can be described as follows: all instances of praise appear in miracle stories and after healings (once after a resuscitation). Though many individual praises occur, they are all somehow related to communal praises; the Jewish crowd gives praise regularly and most frequently: at the beginning of a section (scholars put the commencement of ‘Galilean ministry’ between 4.14–5.1) and towards its end (which is established between 18.35–20.1).

When the minor characters give praise (four times), this always has some connection with the Jewish crowd. In three cases, they respond in the same way as a minor character. In 17.11–19, the lack of communal praise is the point which the story wants to make. Minor characters and recipients of miracles respond mostly with praise (four times), twice with amazement, and once with fear in miracle stories. The only kind of reaction of minor characters, later shared by collective characters, spectators who are always the Jewish crowd, is praise: three times. This pattern demonstrates that the praise of individual minor characters is always related to the communal one.

The preferred verb to describe praise in PMS is δοξάζω six times, and in 17.18 the lack of praise is expressed by Jesus: δοῦναι δόξαν τῷ θεῷ; in 13.17 occurs ἔχαιρεν; in 18.43b ἔδωκεν αἶνον τῷ θεῷ. The phrase: δοξάζω τὸν θεόν seems to be a technical formula for the introduction of praise discourse and the description of praise. It occurs seven times in PMS (we include 17.18) and once more in 23.47 (in 2.20 the phrase occurs with αἰνέω).Footnote ³⁰ The variations in the description of praise in 13.17 and 18.43 (Lukan Sondergut and addition) reveal particular redactional activity, especially when they do not contain direct speeches. The praise of minor characters is always described stereotypically and appears as one activity in the series of deeds. In three cases, the praise is described by the participle δοξάζων, which means that it is a secondary activity. Only in 13.13 does the description of praise of a woman occur in the imperfect as does the communal praise in 5.26; 7.16; and 13.17, which reinforces the impression that the action was durative. The last communal praise is expressed by an aorist in 18.43. Communal praise concludes the pericopes with the exception of 7.16, which is followed by the notice of spreading Jesus’ fame. It always follows individual praise and in two instances (5.25; 18.43) follows immediately. Furthermore, while individual praises are described by the narrator without giving the exact reason for them, there is always the cause of communal praise (also in 18.43: what they have seen – ἰδών), and it is even given in two direct discourses (5.26; 7.16).Footnote ³¹ The communal praise is always given by the same intradiegetic character, while the minor character disappears after giving praise. Altogether, the Jewish crowd gives praise four times, which is more than any other collective character in the Gospel: disciples do so twice, while the angels, shepherds, neighbours and relatives only once, but in none of these instances is the communal praise preceded by any individual one. In sum, communal praise is depicted far more precisely, which supports the claim that individual praise is subordinated to the more elaborate and significant communal one in Luke 5–18. The bond of individual-communal praise seems to be relevant to understanding the PMS, and this suggests that the reason for the praise of minor characters is shared by the crowd.

The connection of individual-communal praise underscores another crucial aspect of PMS: that the praise follows immediately after the miraculous acts of Jesus (with the one exception of 13.17). This instantaneity is plainer than in Luke 1–2, where praise is foretold and follows, although indirectly, the miraculous conceptions of John and Jesus but directly with some proofs/ signs. Furthermore, in Luke 1–2, God’s action is the actual object of praise, while in Luke 5–18 it is the acts of Jesus. In Luke 19–24, only the act of praise in 24.52 immediately follows the miraculous act of Jesus.

Luke 5–18 is a long section narrated in an episodic style, and the crowd in every PMS is described differently. However, there are good reasons for seeing the continuity of this character. Surely, these praises contribute greatly to the depiction of the Jewish crowd in Luke, especially in that they reveal how the crowd understands, through Jesus’ miraculous deeds, the significance of both his identity and God’s plan of salvation.

In sum, the praise in Luke 5–18 is combined with the character of the Jewish crowd, which is the only ‘element’ that unites those instances of praise. This crowd gives praise most frequently, and the communal praise is given only by the crowd (and never by any of the disciples), and all individual praises are related to communal ones. All these instances appear in miracle stories and are, obviously, strictly related to the miracles (and all eighteen Lukan miracle stories occur in chapters 4–18). Surprisingly, in Jesus’ long public ministry, the praise of the crowd dominates and occurs quite regularly, as this analysis has shown, from the beginning of this section until the end.

3.3 Praise in Luke 19–24

Almost all pericopes of the Infancy Narrative contain praise. In Luke 5–18, praise occurs quite regularly, but the section Luke 19.29–24.53 begins with a story which has the acclamations of praise in the centre (19.37–8) and ends again with praise (24.53). In Luke 24.52–3, there are actually two different praises: one just after the ascension and the second which appears in a summary (which is the only Lukan summary which describes praise) when the disciples returned to Jerusalem and gave praise for continually (which is described by the use of a periphrastic construction).Footnote ³² According to the most common division of the third GospelFootnote ³³, Luke 19.29 begins the Jerusalem section, which ends in 24.53. I include in the section the passage 19.29–48 as well (as the majority of scholars), which forms an inclusion with 24.50–3.

Only in Luke do mere disciples give praise (Mark 11.8 πολλοί; Matt 21.8 ὁ δὲ πλεῖστος ὄχλος), and this is especially striking in the case of 19.39 which gives one to understand that the crowd who are present with the Pharisees are silent: τινες τῶν Φαρισαίων ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄχλου.

This is narratively the most important praise in Luke due to:

1. a) the references from other pericopes: two anticipations, i.e., Jesus’ exhortation in 10.20Footnote ³⁵ and the prolepsis in 13.35; it is discussed in 19.39–40; it is linked to 2.13–14 (other crucial praise given by angels) and also linked to 24.52–3. These affinities are reinforced by the vocabulary: αἰν-; εὐλογ- occurs after Luke 1–2 as praise only in 13.35; 19.38; and 24.53;

2. b) the description: the most solemn description of character in an acclamation of praise: ἅπαν τὸ πλῆθος τῶν μαθητῶν; the most detailed telling of praise – two verbs with the subject of praise χαίροντες αἰνεῖν τὸν θεόν, the manner φωνῇ μεγάλῃ, the reason (which is a summary) for praise although is followed by direct speech with other reasons περὶ πασῶν ὧν εἶδον δυνάμεων, and direct speech with the recognition of Jesus and of God’s action;

3. c) the context: it appears in the crucial and pre-announced moment of the entry to Jerusalem.

The third praise section does not contain PMS, but the praise of disciples is caused by some miraculous event. Furthermore, there is a crucial and redactional instance of praise of the centurion. This praise is quite particular: it should be counted as such because of the narrator’s explicit introduction to the direct speech which, however, does not contain any language of praise. Without the narrator’s voice, it would not be recognisable as an acclamation of praise. The parallel in Mark 15.39 is not introduced by the language of praise, but the content of the speech suits praise better (and Matt 27.54 as well). This relevant praise of the centurion occurs in 23.47, only the second given by a non-Jew in Luke. The first non-Jewish praise was given by the Samaritan in 17.15. Both acclamations can be considered as the signs that God’s plan of salvation embraces also Gentiles. The praise in 23.47 is a sign that this divine plan did not fail after the death on the cross.Footnote ³⁶

The three sections of praise (Luke 1–2/4; Luke 5–18; Luke 19–24) differ significantly. The first section contains many examples of praise given by variety by both individual and communal characters. All these acclamations appear in the promise-fulfilment-praise scheme. The praise in Luke 5–18 centres around the most frequent and relevant one: the Jewish crowd’s praise to which the individual acts of praise are subordinated. The praise in the public ministry is strictly related to Jesus’ miracles. In fact, they are almost always explicitly mentioned as the reasons for the acclamations of praise. Luke 19–24 is a different section regarding the use of praise motif. The disciples are the only communal character who gives praise. Their praise appears in the first and the last scene of the section. The only individual praise is given by a non-Jew (the centurion) after Jesus’ death. The analysis of the three sections highlights the role of the Jewish crowd in the middle part (Luke 5–18).

4.1 Praise in Luke 5.26 – Jesus Recognised as a Miracle Worker

The first PMS occurs in the initial part of Jesus’ public ministry. However, Jesus is already quite popular having accomplished two significant miracles just before 5.17–26 (i.e., a nature miracle in 5.1–11 and a healing in 5.12–16). The spreading of Jesus’ fame is extensively described in 5.15–16, which distinguishes this miracle story from all the others. The spectators from 5.17 came from every village of Galilee, Judah and from Jerusalem. All significant venues of Jesus’ activity are mentioned, which adds symbolic value to the scene.

Luke 5.17–26 is not only about the healing but also about the question of Jesus’ identity, which occupies significant space in the pericope. The Jewish leaders are involved in the controversy, but their reaction to the turning point with the miracle is not described by the narrator (as in Luke 14.6). The reaction of the group that brought the paralytic is not recounted either.

In the various moments of the plot 5.17–26, just two parties or characters are involved: Jesus with the men accompanying the paralytic in 5.18–20 and Jesus with the leaders in 5.21–4. The first moment recounts the courageous action of the group of people. The peak of the tension appears in 5.19, but Jesus does not heal the man in need and forgives his sins. All of sudden, the leaders turn from spectators into opponents of Jesus. This reaction creates the second moment in the scene: 5.21–4. Due to S. Bar-Efrat’s following observation, I suppose that ‘all’ in 5.26 describes only the Jewish crowd (this applies to 7.16 as well):

The above observation fits the Lukan Gospel as well. In 5.17–26, there are two duologues of such: Christ with the people accompanying the paralytic and Christ with the leaders. Usually, the act of praise of the crowd occurs at the end of the story. In 5.26, the subject of praise is described as πάντες. The narrative use of πάντες deserves closer attention. Its use was noted in scholarship as ‘characteristic’ for Luke or hyperbolic.Footnote ³⁸ It occurs mostly in responses to Jesus’ actions (4.15; 4.20; 4.22; 4.28; 4.32; 4.36; 5.26; 7.16; 9.43a; 9.43b). Another peculiar instance of Lukan narrative style is 12.41, where Peter uses ‘all’ as a description of the crowd: πρὸς ἡμᾶς τὴν παραβολὴν ταύτην λέγεις ἢ καὶ πρὸς πάντας; The occurrences of πάντες are also surprising in 5.26; 7.16; 9.43 (final moments of pericopes) given that the crowd was described as ὄχλος in the beginning of those pericopes. Why was the term ὄχλος not chosen? The use of ‘all’ is an indication that not only the concrete gathering of people matters, but that it was a common response made by ‘all’.Footnote ³⁹ This narrative explanation of πάντες helps to avoid the tension between the allegedly positive response of the Pharisees in 5.26 and the very negative one in 6.11. A similar tension is sidestepped in 7.16 when it seems that the disciples recognise Jesus as a prophet, and also, in 9.20 when Peter asserts in the name of others that Jesus is the Messiah. In sum, there are good reasons to think that the Pharisees and scribes do not recognise Jesus’ authority in 5.26.

Verse 25 finally narrates the activity of the paralytic. Marshall’s explanation presents the reason why his acclamation was ‘added’ by Luke: ‘Finally, Luke adds that the man praised God, a fact which could be deduced from Mark’s description of the action of the bystanders: if the spectators glorified God, how much more was the healed man likely to do so also.’Footnote ⁴⁰ Both praises differ: the act of the paralytic is a concurrent action, and the praise of ‘all’ mixed with other emotions appears in direct speech.

The word παράδοξοςFootnote ⁴¹ is a hapax legomenon in the NT. The Markan version is different: Οὐδέποτε οὕτως εἴδομεν in 2.12 and Matt 9.8 stresses the power of Jesus. ‘This word is quite common in secular Gk., Philo, Joseph. and the LXX. It always denotes an “unusual event contrary to belief and expectation” (τό παρὰ δόξαν ὄν, cf. the LXX verb παραδοξάζω, “I do something unusual”).’Footnote ⁴² The word describes the unexpected aspect of a thing, and in this sense, is used by LXX. Two instances are comparable to Luke 5.26, but they do not follow a miracle in the strict sense (3 Mac 6.33; Wis 5.2). Hobart observes: ‘παράδοξον is used by St. Luke alone of the NT writers, and is the very word we would expect a physician to employ in reference to the healing of the paralytic; for in medical language it was used of an unusual or unexpected recovery from illness, or an unexpected death, wonderful benefit derived from a medicine’.Footnote ⁴³ Furthermore, ‘als παράδοξα gelten solche Vorgange, die jenseits der menschlichen Erfahrung liegen (vgl. klassisch Plutarch, Mor. 305a; s. auch Phlegon Trall., Mirab, 26; ein Mann bringt ein Kind zur Welt)’Footnote ⁴⁴. These observations demonstrate that the reaction of the crowd in 5.25 is understandable as a reaction to seeing the astonishing healing that may be miraculous. The term παράδοξος was so frequent that it was used to describe the genre of παραδοξογράφοι that recounts fictional and fantastic events.Footnote ⁴⁵ All told, the word does not belong to a typical praise vocabulary and stresses the unexpected aspect of the healing.

The acclamation in 5.26 per se is an expression of amazement. Only the introduction to the speech makes a praise out of it. Fear and amazement can be understood as a sign of some misunderstanding, and it is fear that immediately precedes the direct speech. What is the praise in 5.26 given for? Busse explains the plural form of παράδοξα in the way that the crowd refers to both the miracle of healing and the forgiveness of sins.Footnote ⁴⁶ They both are unexpected, but the plural form in the crowd’s responses refer to one deed in 9.43b; 13.17; 19.39. In my opinion, παράδοξα broaden the meaning of the acclamation: it is given for all miracles already recounted. Luke 5.26 summarises the crowd’s perception of Christ at the initial stage of his activity, and this is the last acclamation and direct speech of this character until 7.16. ‘The strange things’ are seen today, σήμερον.Footnote ⁴⁷ The eschatological aspect of this term is commonly recognisedFootnote ⁴⁸, and it refers not only to things seen literally ‘today’. In 13.32–3 (‘I cast out demons and perform cures today’), the word has a broader meaning. This consideration is another hint that the direct speech of the crowd in 5.26 summarises the crowd’s perception of Jesus.

The above analysis leads to the statement that the Jewish crowd did not fully understand the meaning of the miracle that they attested. The leaders ask the question: ‘Who can forgive sins, but God alone?’ but the crowd does not enter into this discussion. For them, Jesus is just a miracle worker at the beginning of his public ministry.

4.2 Praise in Luke 7.16 – Jesus Recognised as a Prophet

There are few similarities between the first and the second praise-giving performed by the crowd: the subject of praise is ‘all’, and it is the only acclamation expressed in a direct speech in the scene. The leaders, the men carrying the paralytic and the disciples, and the widow in 7.11–17 do not praise God. No reaction of the widow when she receives her son back is particularly surprisingFootnote ⁴⁹.

The direct speech is immediately preceded by the mentioning of fear that seems to dominate over praise. Jesus is called a ‘great’ prophet, and that adjective appears numerous times in Luke. The word μέγας itself does not describe someone ‘more’ than prophet nor have a messianic connotation. This word is used by the angel Gabriel twice: in 1.15 when he speaks about John the Baptist, and in 1.32 when he refers to Jesus. John, however, as other characters in the Bible (like Nimrod in Gen 10.9 and Elijah in Sir 48.22) is called μέγας ‘before God’. Jesus is ‘just’ great in 1.32. Bovon presents the following opinion:

The adjective ‘great’ stresses the exalted position among prophets, and Jesus is perceived as a special prophet possibly comparable with extraordinary OT figures. Eve points out: ‘Judaism often associated miracle-working and prophets, not least the prophets Elijah and Elisha.’Footnote ⁵¹ However, the crowd rather does not allude to the eschatological prophet since there is no definite article in the speech. The crowd describes Jesus as a prophet and sees in him a special envoy of God: ‘God has visited his people’. The meaning of the word – ἐπισκέπτομαι is to make a careful inspection, look at, examine and can have a religious sense:

The above-mentioned religious meaning of the word corresponds to the theologically significant term – λαός that is the subject of ἐπισκέπτομαι. The narrator broadens in this way the sense of the passage: not only the gathering in Nain but the whole people of God are involved in the scene. This impression is reinforced by 7.17: ‘And this report concerning him went out all over Judea, and in all the surrounding district.’ The spreading of Jesus’ fame is mentioned by the narrator several times: 4.14; 4.37; 4.44; 5.15–16; 6.17; 7.17. All the above indications demonstrate that in the first phase of Jesus’ activity (until chapter 9), Luke stressed that his fame was broadly spread and that he was commonly admired and praised by ‘all’ his audience. Moreover, in this first part (until Luke 9), the responses of the crowd contain four direct speeches, which create the impression that the content of the response is more relevant than its subject. What matters is the fact that there were, with the exception of Jewish leaders, widespread positive effects of Jesus’ activity. After 7.17, the spread of Jesus’ fame is not recounted.Footnote ⁵³ The crowd seems to refer to themselves as λαός in the direct speech; however, they are called ὄχλος by the narrator in 7.11 and ‘all’ in 7.16. This dissonance creates an impression that the people do not completely recognise Jesus’ identity because they might perceive themselves as representatives of λαός, but in the eyes of the narrator, they are just ‘all’. ‘In brief, the author allows the audience to express a not yet complete confession of faith.’Footnote ⁵⁴ The acclamation in 7.16 is the only illeism coming from the mouth of the Jewish crowd.

The speech of the crowd is frequently linked to another praise speech of Zachariah. The obvious connection is created by the use of the word ἐπισκέπτομαι (1.68, 78; 7.16). There are, however, more links:

God’s plan of salvation progresses in Luke 1 and in 7.11–17 as well, regardless of the fact that the characters do not completely understand it (as the witnesses of the miracle in 7.16) or are doubtful like Zachariah in 1.18. The crowd, however, recognises Jesus as someone through whom God acts. Calling Jesus ‘a great prophet’ is significant, ‘one should, however, not refer to this title as having anything to do with Jesus’ messianic role; there is nothing here about his anointed agency’.Footnote ⁵⁶ Jesus is not confessed as the Messiah, but the crowd sees that his ministry extends to the afflicted, the poor and even to people in the grip of death. Luke 7.11–17 is another explication of Jesus’ programmatic speech in Nazareth. In Nain, Jesus demonstrated his ἐξουσία over death for the first time. The crowd, however, did not completely comprehend Jesus’ identity and perceived Jesus as a prophet. This kind of fame was spread by the numerous witnesses of the miracle throughout the whole country.

4.3 Praise in 18.43 – Jesus Recognised as Messiah

The fifth PMS appears at the end of the Travel Narrative. The pericope contains several surprising elements. The cast of the characters in the story is unexpected: the disciples and the Jewish leaders are absent, at least explicitly, which creates the impression that the encounter between Jesus and the beggar has a special meaning for the Jewish crowd, who are involved in the scene from the beginning. Furthermore, the behaviour of the blind man is particular: he tries to approach Jesus with singular determination. The ultimate expression of this attitude is the double cry Ἰησοῦ υἱὲ Δαυίδ that is the first (after the Infancy Narrative) and the last royal title bestowed on Jesus. The title has a messianic dimensionFootnote ⁵⁷ and stays in contrast to the previous description of Jesus in the pericope (Ιησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος in v.37). The title is unusual because it is not a flattery term to attract attention, and ‘Israel was expecting its future sovereign to bring peace but did not dream of that person accomplishing miracles. If the blind man nevertheless addressed Jesus as the Messiah, it was because he had followed his own line of reasoning.’Footnote ⁵⁸ The blind man displays a great faith in Jesus as the messianic King who gives salvation. Elijah was considered an eschatological prophet who could restore sightFootnote ⁵⁹, and the prophetic typology is present in 18.35–43; however, thanks to this double powerful cry of the beggar, the scene serves more to confirm Jesus’ messianic kingship than his status as a prophet.

Luke 18.43 recounts briefly the conclusion of the story. The phrase used to describe the attitude of the beggar (ἠκολούθει αὐτῷ) is the same as in 5.11 (Simon) and in 5.28 (Levi). These are only instances in Luke when an individual character starts to follow Jesus after the first encounter with him. As in the previous cases, the phrase in 18.43a rather means that the beggar becomes a disciple, even if it is the only example when following Jesus happens without a previous call to be a disciple. However, the context suggests this interpretation: the man joins the crowd of Jesus’ followers and has an exemplary faith and understanding of Jesus’ identity suitable for being a disciple.

The praise-giving of the crowd in 18.43b does not appear in the Markan and Matthean versions of the story. In Luke, it is the only example when ὁ λαός finally gives praise. As Fitzmyer states, ‘the added comment shows wherein Luke’s interest really lies, more in the reaction of the people than in the miracle itself’.Footnote ⁶⁰ The miracle which confirms the recognition of Jesus’ messianic status was accomplished for the Jewish crowd. This character was involved in the scene from the beginning (v. 35) and during the development of the action in v. 36 when the beggar asks them for some time (ἐπυνθάνετο, imperfect is more than just ‘to ask’ and denotes a durative action); they speak in v. 37 (only in the Lukan version); the cry about Jesus the King was heard by the whole crowd (even προάγοντες in v. 39, those in front heard it) and afterwards, the shouting was even louder and more persistent (in v. 39 the imperfect ἔκραζεν occurs which describes a repetitive action).

For the first time in the narration, the narrator states in v. 43 that the crowd’s praise was given for what they have seen (ἰδών). The people saw and witnessed the singular determination of the beggar and his faith, which was exalted by Jesus; the cry with a messianic title and the immediate healing that results in following Jesus. The participle of the verb ὁράω has also the meaning ‘to experience, to witness, to perceive’ and refers to the event in general. This word occurs in significant pericopes in connection with the motif of praise: δοξάζοντες καὶ αἰνοῦντες τὸν θεὸν ἐπὶ πᾶσιν οἷς ἤκουσαν καὶ εἶδον in 2.20; εἴδομεν παράδοξα σήμερον in 5.26; αἰνεῖν τὸν θεὸν φωνῇ μεγάλῃ περὶ πασῶν ὧν εἶδον δυνάμεων in 19.37; ἰδὼν δὲ ὁ ἑκατοντάρχης τὸ γενόμενον ἐδόξαζεν τὸν θεόν in 23.47. The participle ἰδών appears many times in the miracle stories when a character experiences some new, surprising event or person (5.8; 5.12; 5.20; 7.13; 8.28; 8.34; 13.12; 17.14; 17.15). Luke 18.35–43 is the last miracle story in the Gospel, and the people have seen numerous miracles already. The most conspicuous and never-experienced-before element of the story in Jericho is the messianic title addressed to Jesus. Jesus does not reject the title ‘Son of David’ but confirms his royal dignity through the miracle, having seen that the crowd responds with a pure act of praise with no trace of amazement or fear as before (5.26; 7.16). The Jewish crowd sees in Jesus not only a prophet but also the messianic King.

Jesus reveals his identity gradually through the miracle stories from the onset of his public ministry until the events in Jericho. This progressive revelation serves to teach the crowd who accompanied Jesus. The four instances of praise of the Jewish crowd demonstrate that they have finally recognised Jesus’ messianic dignity in 18.43.

4.4 Praise of the Crowd in Luke

There is a certain notable ‘development’ in the descriptions of the Jewish crowd when they give praise – what all these descriptions have in common is that the word πᾶς always occurs:

• − 5.19: διὰ τὸν ὄχλον; v. 26 ἔκστασις ἔλαβεν ἅπαντας καὶ ἐδόξαζον – the crowd is described as ὄχλος at the beginning of the story but is not one of the principal characters of the scene (ὄχλος appears in accusative and stays in the background of the action of people with the paralytic); v.26 ἅπαντες occurs in accusative and is actually the subject of amazement. Moreover, the amazement in the nominative stays in the centre of the phrase,

• − 7.11: ὄχλος πολύς the large crowd appears at the beginning in the nominative as one of the important figures of the story; v.16 ἔλαβεν δὲ φόβος πάντας καὶ ἐδόξαζον – again, πάντες in accusative refers primarily not to praise but to fear,

• − 13.17: πᾶς ὁ ὄχλος – the whole crowd appears only at the end of the story in the nominative,

• − 18.36: ὄχλος is mentioned in the genitive; v.43 πᾶς ὁ λαός – the term has the theological meaning of God’s ‘people’ in Luke.

The above descriptions diverge substantially. First, two acts of praise centre on the content of praise, that it was common and given by all. Furthermore, only these two moments of praise have direct speeches, and only these two among all the praises in Luke are combined with other emotions: 5.26 with amazement and fear and 7.16 with fear. In the case of 5.26, one could even wonder whether the direct speech is actually an expression of praise since it is preceded by the description of fear which does not occur in Mark 2.12: ‘they glorified God, and were filled with fear, saying’. Furthermore, the aspect of fear is softened in 7.16 and appears before the mentioning of praise:

The ‘development’ consists not only in the clearer description of the character but also in the clearer description of the praise itself: in 5.26, praise is mixed with amazement and fear (in W, only fear occurs; in D, only amazement); in 7.16, with fear; in 13.17, it is described as joy; and in 18.43, there is pure praise of the λαός.

The two first praises are described by the technical formula (δοξάζω). The subject of praise differs, however: in 5.26, they are unexpected deeds seen today; in 7.16, Jesus is praised as a prophet, and God’s coming is seen in him. This praise resembles praises from Luke 1–2 mostly, not only because of the reference to Zechariah’s acclamationFootnote ⁶², but as it follows a similar pattern of underscoring an aspect which goes beyond what was seen: that Jesus acted as a prophet.

Two final communal praises stress the importance of the character. The last one in its allusion to 2.10–11 gives the impression that God’s plan of salvation succeeds. The crescendo of reason for praise can be observed in four steps which cannot be anything but deliberate in the development by the Evangelist:

The last two communal praises indicate clearly that the Jewish crowd gives praise: 13.17 expresses it by ὄχλος and in 18.43 by the theological term λαός. Both terms are preceded by πᾶς which makes a representative entity of them: ‘the phrase πᾶς ὁ λαός should probably be translated as by “the whole people” rather than by “all the people”’Footnote ⁶³. The reason for praise is precisely presented in 13.17 and briefly in 18.43 (ἰδών). The praise in 13.17 is contrasted with the shame of opponents (the only example where praise occurs with a negative reaction); 18.43b follows the individual praise. All communal praises describe the ‘totality’ of this response but in slightly different ways. In the first two PMS, what matters most is that the praise was given and for what reason rather than which character is giving it.