Chapters 18-24
The Gospel According to Luke
Luke 18:1-17, Parables about prayer (06/27/22)
Blaise Pascal was a 17th-century French genius - a mathematician, physicist, inventor, philosopher, writer, and theologian. He said, "God instituted prayer in order to lend His creatures the dignity of causality." Now, I can't tell you how prayer works. Obviously, I can't tell God something he doesn't already know, and I can't get God to do something contrary to his clearly stated principles. So how does it work? I don't have a clue.
Two things I do know, however. First: if I'm sure something is in accordance with those clearly stated principles, but it doesn't seem to be happening, I must not give up but keep bugging God about it until justice is done. This is the dignity of causality that Pascal was talking about. Of course, God may answer me by saying, "Hey! What are you going to do about it?" That's the downside of the dignity of causality. Hahahaha!
Second, prayer is not a time for tooting my own horn. On the off-chance that I'm actually doing something right, God already knows. Prayer is a time for me to figure out what I'm doing wrong, get forgiveness, and get aligned with God's program.
Both of these parables are also only in the book of Luke. I never realized before how much of Luke's unique material is made up of parables unreported by Mark and Matthew.
Luke 18:18-30, Problems presented by wealth (06/28/22)
I'm not sure why Williams translates the same Greek word "good" in vs. 18 and "perfectly good" in vs. 19. It's the ordinary word for "good." Some things are just a mystery.
This gentleman is feeling that something is lacking in his life. He's kept all the commandments, but what else does he need to do? Jesus says that he needs to sell everything and give it to the poor, and then come back and go with him. There are a couple of important points about this instruction. First, Jesus is talking to this one, very rich guy - the verbs are singular. Not all of us are required to sell everything, and in fact, if everyone did this, who would continue to support the poor? Second, Jesus tells him to "come and follow me." This guy needs help for his soul, but it's not the kind of help he can get in one afternoon session! The verbs are still singular, although I think following Jesus is a good idea for the rest of us, too.
Third, he went away sad. This implies to me - probably not the majority opinion - that he was actually considering doing something about what Jesus told him. Getting rid of everything would be a lot of work, and some of his stuff was important to him, so sadness seems to me to be appropriate. Don't you think that if he rejected Jesus' instruction, he would have gone away indignant?
Finally, the disciples amuse me. Since the standard thinking was that good = blessed = rich = saved, they wonder who on earth can be saved, if the rich cannot? But they are quick to point out that they already left everything, so they should be okay, right, Jesus?
Reader Question: In Luke 18:29-30, Jesus says, "I solemnly say to you, there is no one who has given up home or wife or brothers or parents or children for the kingdom of God, who will not receive in return many times more in this world, and in the next eternal life." If everyone leaves their family to follow Jesus, what happens to the family?
Regina's Answer: Good question. Not everyone is called in such a way, and as a matter of fact, Paul says (indirectly) in 1 Corinthians 9:5 that several of the apostles took their wives with them: "Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?" My mental picture (from their behavior) of James and John is that they were in their late teens or early twenties, and James was martyred early, so they may not have been married. We know of couples who worked together, e.g., Priscilla and Aquila (cf. Acts 18:26) and Andronicus and Junia (Romans 16:7). Paul also tells us to take care of our family members (1 Timothy 5:16). So I don't think there's any suggestion that families should be abandoned. On the other hand, remember that Jesus was a traveling rabbi who knew that he had only a short time to instruct his disciples. What was a good idea for them might be a less good idea for the average Christian or even the average pastor. Finally, who raised the issue? Peter, not Jesus.
Luke 18:31-19:10, Physical and spiritual healing (6/29/22)
Remember the rich man who came to Jesus just the other day? Jesus said, "Sell everything and come with me," and he went away sad. What a contrast with Zaccheus! Here is a rich man who hasn't been following the whole Law. Nevertheless, he's glad to welcome Jesus into his home, to give to the poor, to repay anyone he has defrauded, and to receive salvation. Wow.
Have I explained lately the difference between a "version" and a "translation"? Theoretically (because you really can't always tell from the name attached to a specific Bible), a "version" is more of a word-for-word rendering from Hebrew or Greek to a different language. A "translation" doesn't necessarily go word-for-word, but more idea-for-idea. A "free translation" is more idiom-for-idiom, and a paraphrase often puts in a lot of explanatory material that isn't in the Greek or Hebrew at all. (I recommend against a paraphrase unless you are already very familiar with a version or translation.) On the (rare) occasions that I translate for you, I usually end up somewhere between "translation" and "free translation." All that is by way of introduction to this: I love the Williams New Testaent's rendering of vs. 34: "this statement was an insoluble riddle to them; they did not even begin to grasp what He meant." The first half is a translation, not a version; the second half is more of a free translation.
Luke 19:11-27, Parable on the importance of working until his return (6/30/22)
I'm not sure when King Jesus is coming back, but I'm fairly confident that that I will go where he is sometime within the next 35 years. In the meantime, I've been given a lot. I need to use it productively, because there will be a final accounting.
Luke 19:28-48, Entry into Jerusalem (2009, 7/01/22)
The last quarter of the book of Luke is devoted to the last week of Jesus' three-year ministry. This distribution is roughly similar to the other Gospels, but even so, I had never noticed it until just a few years ago, probably in Orville Daniel's Harmony of the Four Gospels, which you may remember that I used here in 2014. Dr. Daniel inserted headers with the day of the week for all of the Holy Week scriptures. Of course, none of us needs a commentary to know that Jesus entered Jerusalem on the first day of the week, now known as Palm Sunday.
Like David, Jesus chose symbols of humility as he came into the city of Jerusalem. Even though Jesus was mounted on a donkey, the crowds on their way to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover recognized him as the Messiah. They waved palm branches and put their coats down for the donkey to walk on. They called out a blessing on "the king who comes in the name of the Lord," singing the words of Psalm 118. Naturally, some people were unhappy about the way Jesus entered Jerusalem, just as Michal was unhappy about the way David entered the city so long before. When his detractors insisted that Jesus quiet his supporters, his response hearkened back to the prophet Habakkuk. Testimony about Jesus and his work could not be silenced. If the people were silent, the stones would cry out the truth.
Luke 20:1-19, Parables and traps (7/04/22)
It seems to be Tuesday of Holy Week, and Jesus is teaching in the Temple that Herod built in 20-19 B.C. After a debate with the high priests and scribes, he tells a story about some dishonest stewards who should be put to death, and then he quotes Psalms 118:22, "The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone." Now, I've seen cornerstones for assorted bank buildings and churches, and they are certainly big enough to trip over, and I wouldn't want one to fall on me, but they weren't much longer than a couple of feet in any direction. But take a look at these pictures of some of the stones in Herod's Temple. Start by scrolling down about 6 pictures. You'll see that the cornerstones of the Temple are enormous. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that some of the builders fell from the stones as they were being moved, or that some were crushed beneath them. Certainly the people listening to Jesus would have known whether that happened, and they could see the size of the stones even if it didn't happen. The parables of Holy Week tend to be pretty grim.
Luke 20:20-26, Scripture for Tax Preparation Day, April 14 (4/14/2008, 7/05/22)
Warning! Today's tip is meddlin', not preachin'!
Isn't this a great country? I love paying taxes, because here and now it means that I earned money. In first-century Judah, it just meant that the Romans were more powerful than the Jews.
Hunter's Loose Translation.
The scribes and the high priests sent spies to trap Jesus in some anti-government statement. They wanted to
turn him in for punishment. So they asked him, "Teacher, we know you teach the way of God. Is it lawful for us
to pay taxes or not?" But he detected their cunning and said to them, "Show me a dollar bill. Whose face and
name does it have?" They said, "Washington's." So he said to them, "Then give back to Washington the things that
are Washington's, and to God the things that are God's." So they couldn't catch him before the people in what he
said. Amazed at his answer, they became silent.
Now comes the meddling. If you are still giving Washingtons to your church - although with this group I seriously doubt that is the case! - then you need to increase immediately to Lincolns and move up to Hamiltons, Jacksons, and Grants in a timely fashion. I'm trying to make this easy on you. Do you want to become a missionary? Do you want to go to seminary? If not, then your easiest means of giving to God what belongs to God is to give generously to your church, which will use it for all sorts of kingdom programs.
Here's a guide to US currency, for those of you who use pounds, kiwis, loonies, plastic, bitcoin, cryptocurrency, etc.
Luke 20:27-47, The trappers entrapped (3/12/26)
It's one thing to ask serious questions about the meaning and interpretation of scripture; rabbis debated such questions with each other all the time. It's another thing entirely to ask questions with the sole purpose of catching your opponent in a paradox or, even worse, a contradiction of scripture. Unfortunately for the Sadducees, Jesus was better at the game than they were.
Luke 20:45-21:22, Questions about the end times (7/06/22)
What is it with people and their obsession with the end times? It seems like every time there's a war, an earthquake, a tsunami, a famine, or a new disease like COVID-19, somebody decides that it's a sign of the end times. Make sure you're ready for your own end time - which you know is coming in the next 100 years! - and let God worry about everybody else's. Jesus says he and the angels don't know when the end is coming (Matthew 24:36), so I've always thought it would be a little presumptuous of me to think I know.
John Wesley says that the disciples are confusing two issues here: "Concerning the time of the destruction of the temple; Concerning the signs of Christ's coming, and of the end of the world, as if they imagined these two were the same thing." (This confusion is clear in the parallel passage, Matthew 24:1-3.) Jesus answers them separately, but for those of us who still confuse the two, it all looks like one answer. The destruction of the temple and city - which came about in 70 A.D., when the Romans overthrew it - is addressed in Luke 21:8-22 and Luke 21:28-33. Jesus' coming and the end of the world - which hasn't happened yet - is covered in Luke 21:25-27 and 21:34-36. We'll read the rest of the answer tomorrow.
Luke 21:23-38, Predictions of the end of Jerusalem (2007, 07/07/22)
Do you have a dog or cat? If so, you have probably seen your pet stand up and lift its head expectantly toward the door. You know that someone is coming. We had a German Shepherd who knew five minutes in advance that my husband was going to pull into the driveway - apparently she could hear the car well before it turned onto our street. Jesus commented that we often recognize the signs that earthly things are about to happen, but we have more trouble recognizing that heavenly things are about to happen. It's probably because we aren't paying attention. Do you suppose we could hear Jesus coming if we stayed alert and listened?
The fall of Jerusalem is pretty clearly foretold in vss. 23-24 and again in vss. 32-33. The end times come in vss. 25-28 and 34-36. Vss. 29-31 are a general admonition that you need to be aware of what's happening, and they could go with either topic.
Notice that Jesus is saying that that "all this" will take place within a generation, and in fact Jerusalem fell about 35 years later. Any prophet could have predicted that the Romans would get tired of the Jews and their uprisings and put them down with extreme prejudice; Jesus just happened to be the prophet on the scene. Jesus doesn't give a date for the end times, and in fact, as I mentioned yesterday, he says (in Matthew) that he doesn't know. I think the disciples and the Gospel writers, who weren't prophets, couldn't imagine the world without the Temple in it, so they had trouble keeping these two events apart in their reporting.
Luke 22:1-23, Preparing and serving the Last Supper (07/08/22)
Luke treats the Last Supper in 22:14-38, i.e., 15 verses. Matthew has 16 verses, Matthew 26:20-35. Mark has 14 verses, Mark 14:18-31. If you really want to know what happened during supper, you have to read John, which devotes five chapters - John 13:1-17:26 - to the Last Supper. Luke, Matthew, and Mark wrote fairly early, and apparently, they didn't yet realize the significance of the Eucharist or of Jesus' farewell discourse. John, writing after several decades in the company of the Holy Spirit, and after the ritual was well-established in the early Church liturgy (see, e.g., 1 Corinthians 11), covers the discourse and the supper in much more detail.
Luke 22:24-38, Discussions at the table (07/11/22)
Last Sunday Pastor Randall preached on Exodus 4:1-5 and God's question, "What's that in your hand?" His point was that Moses had everything he needed for ministry right there with him already. Jesus makes the same point to the disciples in vss. 35-37. You are equipped for ministry - now just get out there and do it! The disciples, as usual, don't completely understand what Jesus is saying: "Oh, swords? Look! We've got swords!" Wesley says that when Jesus replies, "That's enough," he's saying, "I did not mean literally, that every one of you must have a sword." So I like Williams' translation, "Enough!" Presumably this was said in exactly the same way that an exasperated parent quells the children when they are roughhousing in the living room. The interpretation of Wesley and Williams will be reinforced in tomorrow's reading.
Luke 22:39-62, Gethsemane and Peter's denial (first trial implied) (07/12/22)
The disciples picked up their two swords and followed Jesus to the Mount of Olives. John doesn't mention that the disciples went to sleep; Luke admits that they fell asleep once; Matthew and Mark say that they couldn't stay awake and fell asleep three times. When Judas and the soldiers arrive, one of the disciples, whom only John identifies as Simon Peter (John 18:10), cuts off the ear of the high priest's slave. Only Luke tells us that Jesus heals the man's ear.
Each Gospel writer tells the story in his own way, including what he thinks are the important points. If you want to understand the whole story, you have to read all four Gospels and more than one translation.
Random Walk in a Gallery of Religious Art, Step 22: Luke 22:47-54, Judas's Kiss of Betrayal(3/31/15
The best thing about the illustration at the top of the page, I think, is the depiction of Judas. Judas Iscariot must have had great potential, because otherwise Jesus wouldn't have chosen him to be his disciple. For a time he was sincere; there's no suggestion anywhere in the New Testament that he was anything but a real disciple of Jesus until the last few days before the feast of the Passover. But then something twisted inside him, and he betrayed his master to the authorities, knowing they wanted to kill him. In Doré's illustration, Judas's body is twisted, which to me is the closest art can come to showing a twisted soul.
Previous Step. Next Step.
Luke 22:63-23:7, Trial in the Sanhedron and first trial before Pilate (07/13/22)
Jesus was tried six times. Luke mentions the first trial only briefly, in 22:54a, and then moves on to Peter's time in the courtyard. John, who was "known to the high priest" (apparently Annas, the old high priest) went in behind Jesus and the soldiers, so he gives some of the details of the first trial in John 18:12-13, 19-24. The first trial was illegal because Annas actually had no jurisdiction and because trials could not be held at night.
Around daybreak, Annas sent Jesus on to the current high priest, Caiphas, and the elders and scribes for a second trial, which is where Luke picks up in 22:66. They find him guilty of blasphemy in a trial that is also illegal. They had jurisdiction, but they needed two witnesses. Jesus' testimony shouldn't have been considered, because you weren't allowed to self-incriminate. The council was acting as the judges, so the fact that "we have heard it ourselves from His own mouth!" also shouldn't have been used as evidence. After finding Jesus guilty, they bring him to Pilate.
Knowing that Pilate wouldn't be interested in blasphemy, the council changes its charge from blasphemy to insurrection for the third trial. Pilate examines Jesus and finds him innocent of insurrection as well, but upon discovering that Jesus is a Galilean, he sends him on to Herod.
Reader Question: Did you ever wonder how Luke knew what was said while the floggers were at work? One might think he'd offer that information.
Regina's Answer: Good question. Luke says he did research (Luke 1:1-3), and remember that Nicodemus was a "ruler of the Jews" who seems to have become a follower (John. 3:1, 19:39), Joseph of Arimathea was an "honorable councilor" who definitely did become a disciple (Mark 15:43, John 19:38), and John was probably the "other disciple" of John 18:15. It's entirely possible that Luke got this intel from one or more of them.
At the time of writing, sources were not a big thing (unless you were a Jewish scribe), so I'm not surprised that Luke didn't include footnotes. I've also read, however, that historians of the time routinely made up dialog and speeches suitable to the occasions they were reporting, although I personally am reluctant to attribute such things to the Gospel writers rather than the speakers without some sort of evidence.
Luke 23:8-25, Trial before Herod and second trial before Pilate (07/14/22)
I said yesterday that Jesus was tried six times, and that seems to be the consensus; however, the second and third trials were both before the Sanhedrin, or council, and they seem to have run together a bit. They decided before dawn that Jesus was guilty, but they couldn't actually find somebody guilty at night, so they met again very early in the morning. Then they went to Pilate, as we saw yesterday. I'm sorry for confusing you, but in my defense, it was a confusing situation. Remember that all six of these trials seem to have occurred on the same day, between about midnight and noon, and they are reported by four different writers. Anyway, Pilate wanted nothing to do with this whole business and was relieved to be able to send him to Herod. Herod can't find anything against Jesus except that he won't talk, and he sends him back to Pilate. Pilate examines Jesus again in trial number six, and he finds him innocent again. Nevertheless he caves to avoid a riot (Matthew 27:24).
Luke 23:26-48, Execution (07/15/22)
There are two different Greek words for other/another, allos and heteros. Apparently, in classical Greek, allos meant or tended to mean "another of the same or similar kind," and heteros meant "another of a different kind." This distinction was just about lost in 1st-century Palestine, but I think it's worth noting that in vs. 32 Luke uses heteros. Then in vs. 33 he says they crucified Jesus and the "criminals," again distinguishing between Jesus and the two other men. Matthew 27:38 copies Mark word for word, "two robbers, one on his left and one on his right." This departure from the other two synoptic Gospel can hardly be an accident. Luke tends to be very precise in his word usage, and he is saying, "The other two were criminals, but Jesus was not!" He comes back to this in vs. 47, when the centurion says, "This was an innocent/righteous man," which only Luke reports.
Luke 23:49-24:12, Burial and resurrection (07/18/22)
It's Friday. Jesus has died on the cross, and the Sabbath is about to begin. It's my understanding that in most of the Roman Empire, people hung on the cross until they died, no matter how long that took, and it usually took several days. In Judea alone, the Romans bowed to popular pressure and did not require prisoners to stay on the cross on the Sabbath (hence the breaking of legs, so that they would die sooner, John 19:31-32). Notice how careful Luke is (following Mark) to point out that the followers of Jesus - even in the face of the horrendous circumstances of Jesus' death - did not do any work on the Sabbath. Joseph of Arimathea takes Jesus' body down from the cross and puts it into the tomb as "the Sabbath was just beginning." The women watch and prepare the spices and perfumes for anointing the body, but they do not return until "the first day of the week."
Even though Jesus had predicted his resurrection, it caught the disciples completely off guard. When the tomb was empty, they had no idea why.
Luke 24:13-32, Appearance on the road to Emmaus (07/19/22)
A fellow-reader writes to ask why the disciples didn't understand what had happened. Jesus has clearly told them that he would rise from the dead after three days, but when it happens, they draw a blank. Our colleague wants to know what we should make of that. This is a good question, and one that has probably been asked for a couple thousand years, starting with the disciples themselves. You could ask the same question about why people didn't recognize him, and I'd give about the same answer.
First, they were clueless. We look back on the resurrection from a vantage point of 2000 years of experience. For them, it hadn't happened yet, and when you think about it, it wasn't very plausible. Everybody dies; nobody comes back. So yeah, they had been told, but they had no way of understanding it, just as I have no way of understanding the practical applications of string theory. And I don't recognize people out of context; do you? On resurrection day, Jesus was the most out-of-context person in history.
Second, the idea that the Messiah would die right away, before throwing out the Romans and restoring the kingdom of Israel, was totally outside their idea of the way things were going to work. Even after the resurrection, they asked Jesus if he was going to restore the kingdom now (Acts 1:6). When we look at Messianic prophecy, we concentrate on the Suffering Servant, but in the first century, they were concentrating on the Conquering Hero, which has about equal scriptural support.
However, the fact that they weren't expecting the resurrection (Luke 18:32-34), didn't believe it when it happened (Luke 24:10-11, John 20:25), and were hiding out from the cops (John 20:19), and then a month later were boldly and loudly preaching in the streets (Acts 1:1-6, 14), is to my mind the best evidence for the bodily resurrection and appearances of Jesus. Empty tomb? Anybody can steal a body. Appearances? Anybody can convince themselves they've seen a ghost. Complete turn-around in behavior in 40 days for 120 people? That convinces me. One of the very first such incidents takes place on the road to Emmaus.
Luke 24:33-43, More appearances (2007, 07/20/22)
Today's passage emphasizes the physical reality of the resurrection. I have a hard time understanding how some folks can read this and still deny bodily resurrection. The scripture, here and elsewhere, clearly states that Jesus had a physical, flesh-and-blood body after his resurrection.
Cleopas and his companion return immediately to Jerusalem to talk to the Eleven, only to find that they are not the only ones to have seen the risen Christ. They apparently hung around and went to Bethany with the others. And to save you the trouble of asking, I don't know. I don't know who his companion was. I don't know why Jesus appeared to them and not to others whom we know more about. I don't know why we've never heard of Cleopas before or since. I don't know why, when "apostles" are those who have seen the risen Christ and are "sent" ("apostles" = "those sent," see vs. 48), Cleopas and his companion are never mentioned as being among the apostles. Nobody else knows, either.
Luke 24:44-53
After the resurrection, Jesus spent some time teaching his disciples. He appeared to more than 500 people. His teachings from this period are not recorded; apparently he was repeating what he had said before, but the difference this time was that the disciples understood it. He had told them prior to his death that he would die and be raised again, but until he died and was raised again and appeared to them, they didn't understand it. To be fair, we wouldn't have understood it either. Just before he ascended into heaven, he told them to return to Jerusalem until they were "clothed with power from on high." Certainly they could not have foreseen the nature of Pentecost, but they joyfully did as Jesus commanded, confident in the goodness of God's plan.
Luke ends Volume 1 of his work where he started, in the Temple, praising God (Luke 1:8-9, 2:28-32, 36-38).
Acts 1:1-14, Final appearance and ascension (07/21/22)
Here's an important thing to remember about what we call the Gospel of Luke. It's actually the first volume in a two-volume book. Luke begins the second volume, which we call Acts, with a very brief summary of Volume 1. He reminds Theophilus that the first volume was all about Jesus, which suggests that he's going to change topics at least slightly for this second volume, and that turns out to be true. The title of Acts, Acts of the Apostles, was assigned at a later date, as with all the other New Testament books. Since the Holy Spirit is mentioned 65 times, and several of the apostles are mentioned only once, it has been suggested that a better title might be Acts of the Holy Spirit. Acts, as you know, is the only history we have of the infant Church. It traces the path of the Church from Jerusalem through Judea, Samaria, and eastern Europe to Rome and northern Africa: "the ends of the earth." Thank God for Luke!
Acts 1:15-26, Replacement of Judas Iscariot (07/22/22)
One of Luke's hallmarks in Acts is a repeated accounting of the number of believers in the early Church. We've seen earlier that thousands upon thousands of people followed Jesus around or came out to see him during his ministry. When it became clear that he was persona non grata with the Jewish leadership and in danger of crucifixion by the Roman governor, the crowds melted away. Five weeks after his resurrection, 120 believers are left. After the betrayal and death of Judas, the Twelve became Eleven. This wouldn't do; twelve is an especially symbolic number, as we've seen in earlier studies. They started out with twelve, and by golly they would have twelve! Starting with these 120 men and women, including the Twelve, the Church grew explosively, spreading like wildfire across the Roman Empire.
|
