Chapters 1 - 7

The Gospel According to Luke

Luke 1:1-4; Acts 1:1-14, Theophilus: "One who loves God."


Luke 1:5-17, The angel's message to Zechariah

Luke 1:18-38, Contrasts: Zechariah vs. Mary, Elizabeth vs. Mary

Luke 1:39-45, Mary's visit to Elizabeth

Luke 1:46-66, A song and a name

Luke 1:67-80, Zechariah prophesies over John


Luke 2:1-7, The birth of Jesus

Luke 2:8-20, Angels and shepherds

Luke 2:21-35, Purification and prophecy over Jesus

Luke 2:36-52, A second prophesy and a story from Jesus' youth


Luke 3:1-6, Luke's methods

Luke 3:7-20, The ministry of John

Luke 3:21-38, Jesus' baptism and ancestry


Luke 4:1-20, The beginning and proclamation of Jesus' ministry

Luke 4:21-44, Early miracles

Luke 5:1-16, Gathering disciples

Luke 5:17-39, Early criticisms

Luke 6:1-16, Early disputes about the Sabbath, more disciples


Luke 6:17-19, Introducton to the Sermon on the Plain

Luke 6:20-49, The Sermon on the Plain

Luke 7:1-23, Miraculous healings

Luke 7:24-35, Jesus and John

Luke 7:36-50, Dinner out




More of the Gospel of Luke

Copyright information, disclaimers, and sponsors
Return to homepage


 Random Walk in a Gallery of Religious Art, Step 40: Luke 2:21-35, Jesus presented at the Temple, by Romani Girolamo (7/24/15)

Romani Girolamo shows us a tender picture of Simeon as he holds the infant Jesus when Joseph brings Mary and the baby to the Temple to be purified. Two items catch my eye. One is that Joseph, as usual, is depicted as an old man. This has been the tradition of the Church for a long time, but you should know that the scripture doesn't say he's old. Joseph is never mentioned after Jesus is 12 years old, so apparently Joseph died, but that doesn't mean he was old.

The second item is more important: the two turtledoves. Any family who could afford a lamb had to bring a lamb and either a dove or pigeon. Only those who couldn't afford a lamb could bring two pigeons or turtledoves. Since Joseph had a good business as a carpenter, I take this as another indication that he was a young man, just starting out in life, and that he and Mary were still poor when their first child was born. But if you disagree, that's okay and puts you in the majority.

Previous Step. Next Step. 		Simeon holding infant Jesus during purification at the Temple. Click to enlarge.
 "Jesus presented at the Temple" by Romani Girolamo, from the Gamble family Bible, now in the private collection of Regina Hunter. Photography by Daryl Lee.


Introduction. Over the years we've read a lot from Luke, but apparently we've never read all of Luke, so that's what we're going to do now. Who was Luke? Where did he get his information? How does his Gospel differ from the other three? What stories and parables of Jesus are only found in the Luke's Gospel? What's a "gospel," anyway?

"Gospel" is a literary form invented, as near as I can tell, by Mark. It's not biography, because it doesn't even try to tell some individual's life story in detail. It isn't history, strictly speaking, because it isn't interested in a dispassionate account of events and how and when they happened. (Luke is more interested in an "orderly account" and in dates than Matthew, Mark, or John, however.) "Gospel" is short for "good spell," or "good message," which is the literal translation of the Greek euangellion, or good news. You've heard of "evangelism"? Exactly the same word! Gospels and evangelism bring the good news about Jesus to people who haven't heard it. The specific person to whom Luke is bringing the good news is Theophilus.

Luke 1:1-4; Acts 1:1-14, Theophilus: "One who loves God." (04/29/22)

A few New Testament names have "God" in them, such as the Greek Timothy (either "God [-thy] honors [timo-]" or "He honors God") or the Hebrew Zechariah ("God [-iah] has remembered" [zechar]). Some of them require a little digging: John is the Greek form of the Hebrew Johanan; in Greek it doesn't mean anything particular, but in Hebrew it means "God-favored."

Today is the last day of our study on lesser-known but mostly important people in the Bible, and it's also the first day of our study of the book of Luke. Mark starts with action, Matthew starts with genealogy, and John starts with the Word. Luke starts with a dedication to Theophilus [thee-OFF-ih-luss]. Theophilus is probably the best-known New Testament name with "God" in it. It means "One who loves [philos] God [Theo-]." Luke is Vol. 1 of Luke's work, and Acts is Vol. 2. Both are dedicated to Theophilus. (And by the way, the reading for Acts is especially appropriate for the time between Easter and Pentecost, since that's what it's talking about).

We actually don't know who Theophilus is. Some scholars think he is a real person who sponsored Luke's work. Some think he is a real person who was very new to the faith and whom Luke was trying to educate or convince. Other scholars think it is you, dear reader of Luke, who loves God. God loves you, too. Love God. Love your neighbor.

Luke 1:5-17, The angel's message to Zechariah (2007, 5/2/22)

The first bit of Luke differs in two ways from the other three Gospels. First, it begins with a dedication, which I think is unique in the Bible (although I'm sure one of you will correct me if I'm wrong). Look in just about any book on your shelf, and somewhere in the very front there will be a dedication - to family members, friends, co-laborers, teachers, or whomever. Luke's work is dedicated to Theophilus. Second, Luke provides unique information about the predictions of the births of John and Jesus, the pregnancies of Elizabeth and Mary, the Song of Mary, and the prophecy of Zechariah (also spelled Zacharias). This information is so lively and intimate that it makes me think (and I am not the first to think it) that Luke must have interviewed people very close to the action, possibly even Mary herself, and Elizabeth if she lived to be a very old lady.

Today we read about the messenger who will precede the Messiah, who turned out to be John the Baptist. John was so important that an angel appeared to his father to announce the forthcoming birth. This was the first of six angel appearances connected with the coming of the Christ child. Would you like to meet an angel? The first thing they ever say is "Don't panic!," so they must be pretty scary. We see in today's reading that they are sometimes short-tempered.

Keep your eye peeled for Luke's special interest in the Temple, women, and foreigners, and for his tendency to tidy up as he goes along.

Luke 1:18-38, Contrasts: Zechariah vs. Mary, Elizabeth vs. Mary (05/03/22)

The material in this reading is also unique to Luke and also sounds like it came almost directly from Zechariah, Elizabeth, and Mary. They have three different reactions to the news brought by Gabriel. Zechariah is skeptical and says so. (My advice: if an angel comes to you with a message from God, don't mouth off.) Elizabeth is happy, but - presumably because she's old and knows something could go wrong - doesn't tell her family and friends that she's expecting. Mary is puzzled.

Now, most of us have read or heard about the angel's visit to Mary at least once a year for our entire lives. It is what it is, and we don't think very much about her question, "How may this be, because I have had no knowledge of a man?" One of the commentaries on my shelf that I can't currently find, however, points out that Mary's surprise should come as a surprise to us. She's betrothed, which is quite as binding as marriage, and presumably expects to be married soon. She's a country girl, so she should know how babies arrive. And (as we'll see later) she's familiar with scripture, which means she should know about Sarah and Samson's mother, both of whom were visited by angels and then had babies in the ordinary way. So what exactly is she asking? I'm not sure. Scripture doesn't require belief in the virgin birth, by the way, although I think some denominations do. If you believe in it, fine, and if you don't, that's fine, too. It's not worth breaking communion over.

Quite a few translations of vs. 34 have "because I am a virgin/I have no husband/am not married." I checked the Greek, and these translators are putting their own interpretations into the text. The Greeks text says "since I do not know a man." This could mean "because I haven't yet met my groom-to-be." This is my own minority opinion, and you are free to ignore it.


Luke 1:39-45, Mary's visit to Elizabeth (2007)

After Gabriel visits Mary and tells her that Elizabeth is pregnant and that she, Mary, will be pregnant, Mary dashes off to see Elizabeth. John Wesley says that the city Elizabeth lived in was probably Hebron, which belonged to the house of Aaron (see vs. 1:5). The distance between the two towns is about 20 miles, a one- or two-day journey. Mary stayed there about three months; probably she went back home after the birth of Elizabeth's baby, John.

I'll bet you already knew that Jesus and John were cousins - second cousins at least, because Mary and Elizabeth are also called cousins. When Mary came to visit Elizabeth, John leapt in the womb at the sound of her voice. I still love this picture of Mary's arrival at the home of Zechariah and Elizabeth.

Luke 1:46-66, A song and a name (05/04/22)

When Elizabeth told Mary what had happened and blessed her, Mary sang this song. (Well, she may have just said it, but it's called "The Song of Mary.") I once read a commentary, and both my pastor husband and I have heard it elsewhere, that the Song of Mary is just a repetition of Hannah's Song (1 Samuel 2:1-10). That's just not true. I've compared them before, and I just compared them again in Greek, thinking, "Well, maybe it is the same in the Septuagint." Nope. You have to read the Bible for yourselves, people, and use commentaries - especially mine! - only to assist your own studies. Don't believe everything you read or hear.

What is true is that Mary really knows her scriptures. If you have a Bible with cross references (and I'm just sure that you do), you'll see references to Psalms, Habakkuk, Genesis, Malachi, Deuteronomy, Proverbs, Job, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Micah, and 2 Samuel. She isn't quoting any of them, but she's using scriptural ideas from these books to make up her own song of praise. Notice vs. 56. Elizabeth was six months pregnant when Mary arrived, and Mary was there for three months, so very likely she was there when John was born. Luke likes to finish up each story as he goes along, however, even when it throws off the chronology, so he tells us that Mary came, stayed, and left, and only then does he go on with the story of John's birth.

One of the most important things about a birth is the baby's name. If you ever had a child, you probably got lots of suggestions for names, and so did Elizabeth and Zechariah. To the surprise of all their friends and family, Elizabeth chooses "John," which is the name given by the angel Gabriel. When Zechariah confirms this, he can speak immediately.

All of this is still unique to Luke. Finally, Hahaha! In vs. 62, while Zechariah still can't speak, the friends make signs to him. Tell me again who exactly is dumb? The miracle of restored speech associated with John's name makes everyone wonder what is so special about this baby.

Luke 1:67-80, Zechariah prophesies over John (05/05/22)

Some time back I sent you a link to this beautiful graphic on Chris Harrison's website. Each arc shows a link between two scriptures, in the opinion of the person who did the graphic. The site says that the graphic shows 63,779 of them. Now, any two sets of study notes are going to give you a different set of links, but I think we can all agree that scripture refers to scripture a zillion times. I said yesterday that Mary didn't "quote" from scripture, and I'd say the same thing about Zechariah when he prophesies over the baby John, because my Greek New Testament doesn't have any italics, which it uses to show direct quotes. My Jerusalem Bible, on the other hand, has some italicized phrases in both the Song and the prophecy. And on the third hand, the Bible in Basic English has some italics that aren't in the Jerusalem Bible. So what you need to do is go to the very front of your paper Bible and see what italics and other symbols it uses.

Anyway, most prophets aren't priests, and most priests aren't prophets. We learned the other day that Zechariah is a priest. Today, after his speech is restored, he is filled with the Holy Spirit and begins to prophesy. Luke has nothing to say about John's childhood and youth, so he ends with a one-verse summary of this birth narrative that puts John out into the desert, waiting to begin his ministry.

Luke 2:1-7, The birth of Jesus (05/06/22)

Years ago, my mom and I tried to compile an ordered list of all the places we had lived when I was growing up. My dad was an operating engineer who worked on roads and dams all over Oregon, so it was a fairly long list. After a couple of hours, we were pretty sure we didn't have it correct in every detail, even though we had both been there and we did the best we could to get it right.

Matthew tells about the birth of Jesus from Joseph's point of view, and Luke tells about the birth of Jesus from Mary's point of view. They agree that Joseph was a direct descendant of David and that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, the city of David. Luke says that Mary lived in Nazareth and strongly implies that Joseph lived in Nazareth, and he explains why they were in Bethlehem by referring to a census ordered by Caesar Augustus. Matthew says that they moved to Nazareth after returning from Egypt, although he doesn't say they didn't live there before. Matthew sets the time of Jesus' birth under King Herod, who died in 4 B.C. Luke puts his birth during the reign of Quirinius in Syria, which is well documented as 6 to 12 A.D. We aren't certain that this is the period Luke is referring to, because there's some thought that he could be referring to some earlier activities of Quirinius, also well documented but not normally thought of as "rule."

So here's the point: not every detail in the four Gospels is easy to reconcile with every other detail or with what we know from Roman records, but all four writers were doing the best they could to get it right. Cut them some slack; they didn't have Google.

Luke 2:8-20, Angels and shepherds (2007)

I have a beautiful crèche that my sister made for me in 1976. It has, in addition to the people, an ox, an ass, 2 camels, 2 sheep, a lamb, and a goat. Quick! How many of these animals does the Bible say were present around the manger?

Answer: None. The only animals mentioned at all are the flocks in the fields.

Luke 2:21-35, Purification and prophecy over Jesus (2007, 5/9/22)

We're still reading material unique to Luke, which sure sounds like it came from Mary. Any woman with children can tell you details about the birth of her first child, even if that child is now 60 or 70 years old. Nobody else remembers. Luke doesn't talk about the visit of the magi, but he does give us some indirect evidence about the timing of their visit. In spite of all the Christmas cards and paintings that show the magi worshiping the Christ child in the manger, they could not have brought expensive gifts within the first 40 days. Why? Joseph had to take Mary and the baby boy Jesus to Jerusalem 40 days after the birth so that Mary could be purified (Lev. 12:2-8) and Jesus, their firstborn son, could be redeemed (Ex. 13: 2, 13). The offerings for purification and redemption are specified; a pair of turtledoves or young pigeons was the prescribed offering for the poor.

In the Temple they met a very old, devout man named Simeon. I like what Simeon says. "Lord, I can die happy, because I've seen the salvation you have prepared for all peoples!" Wouldn't it be great if we could all be this happy that God is saving someone else? The "consolation of Israel" seems to be another name for the Messiah, or Christ, possibly from the Messianic passage in Isaiah 49, where the same word is used in the Greek OT.

Luke 2:36-52, A second prophesy and a story from Jesus' youth (05/10/22)

We've seen that Luke is more interested in Mary than Joseph - or at least he has more information about her. This interest in women carries through his entire Gospel. He only has a few words to say about the prophetess Anna, but the other Gospels don't mention her at all. We can see that Luke has finished his account of the birth of Jesus, because he tells us that "the child grew and became strong, filled with wisdom. And the favor of God was upon him." This is similar to what he told us back in 1:80 when he finished up the story of John's birth. When Luke has recounted all the information he has about Jesus' childhood, he says, "Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man." Luke said in 1:3 that he wanted to write "an orderly account," and he does, giving clear markers - remember that there were no verse or chapter numbers - at the end of each episode.
Reader Question on Luke 2:48-49: Is there any difference in the word for Father as Jesus uses it here and the word for father that Mary uses in her questioning of Jesus? Is the original word identical or is there another word Jesus uses to differentiate Father and father?

Answer: Good question, but it's exactly the same word, and of course the original Greek did not distinguish between Father and father, because the whole thing was written in capital letters.

There's only one Hebrew word, ab, and one Greek word, pater, that means "father." There's an Aramaic word, abba, used only in Mark 14:36, Romans 8:15, and Galatians 4:6. It's immediately translated as pater/father in all three places, so it's apparently a word that Greek has no equivalent for. My lexicon says abba was used only in prayer and within the family. I've heard in sermons, etc., that it means "Daddy," but I can't vouch for that from my resources.

Luke 3:1-6, Luke's methods (05/11/22)

Luke, a well-educated man and a careful historian, sets the time of the beginning of John's ministry in considerable detail. I did some looking around, and (dating from his co-reign with his adoptive father Caesar Augustus), Tiberius began reigning in A.D. 13. This would put John at A.D. 28. If Luke is dating from the death of Augustus Caesar in A.D. 14, when Tiberius began to reign alone, then John began his ministry about A.D. 29. Pontius Pilate was in Judea from 26 or 27 until 36 or 37, which is consistent. Herod the tetrarch and Philip the tetrarch ruled from 4 BC to 39 and 34 AD respectively. Lysanius is a bit of a mystery. Annas was officially the high priest from A.D. 6 to 15, and Caiaphas from 18 to 36. (There was another guy in there for a very short period.) Annas was deposed by the Roman procurator, but he hung around and was influential among the Jews, which accounts for Luke's "high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas."

Now, I want to talk to you a little about sources, but just skip to the scripture if you aren't interested. I'd say that most scholars agree with this chart, although (as usual) not everybody does. Most scholars (not all) agree that Mark was the first Gospel, and it's largely action. As my boss and I used to say, "The paper was blank when I started," and that's where Mark started - with a blank sheet of papyrus and (probably) Peter's stories about John's and Jesus' actions. Luke and Matthew both use about 76% of Mark, and between them they incorporate about 97% of Mark. Very often they quote Mark verbatim. Luke and Matthew had a second source, called Q (for Quelle, German for "source"), which we no longer have. From this material, missing from Mark but common to Luke and Matthew, we think it was mostly a compilation of Jesus' sayings, with some action. Finally, Luke and Matthew each introduce their own material, based on their own recollections and research.

Luke 3:7-20, The ministry of John (2007)

John was a fiery preacher straight out of the Old Testament prophetic tradition. He brought a message of rebuke, threats, correction, and the promise of deliverance. Most people concluded that he was a prophet - at least - and they came out to him in throngs to repent and be baptized. John insisted that repentance doesn't mean saying you're sorry: you have to change your behavior. He apparently invented the idea of baptism for repentance and forgiveness of sins. All four Gospels talk about John's preaching before they introduce the ministry of Jesus. Notice that Luke finishes John's story by telling us that Herod put him in prison, even though we know from the other Gospels that it was John who baptized Jeus.

Luke 3:21-38, Jesus' baptism and ancestry (05/12/22)

Remember how carefully Luke dated John's ministry? John Wesley says this about vs. 23: "John's beginning was computed by the years of princes: our Saviour's by the years of his own life, as a more august era."

Much ink has been spilled trying to explain the difference between Matthew's genealogy of Jesus and Luke's genealogy of Jesus. Matthew goes back to Abraham, because his interest is in showing that Jesus is the rightful Messiah of the Jews. Luke goes back to Adam, because his interest is in showing that Jesus is the Savior of all humanity. That's all that's really important, so you can just skip from here to the scripture reading.

Instead of trying to explain the minor differences convincingly, which to the best of my knowledge no one has ever been able to do, I'm going to give you a bit of my own genealogy and a tiny Greek lesson to think about.

Here's my genealogy: The bolded James is the same, and Miles and Robert are the same. The second James is the husband of Elizabeth, and Jones is the husband of Diza. I'm sure that both lineages are correct. James is his own fourth cousin. (If there were three Gospel genealogies, I could give you another lineage of mine that goes back to Robert through a different son.) The smaller your community, and the farther back you go, the more likely you are to have this situation in your own family history. So I have no problem with Joseph being descended from David through two different lines.

Here's a little Greek lesson to explain that: Even though most translations have Luke saying "the son of," all he really says is "of." In Greek, this use of "of" can mean "the son of" but very often means "the relative of." For example, "James of John" is James the brother of John. Sometimes in Greek, "of" means "the son-in-law of." In my example, James is the son-in-law of James, and James is the son-in-law of Jones. So I also have no problem with Joseph being the son-in-law of Heli, and Mary being descended from David.

In fact, I have no problem with both Joseph and Mary being descended from David. After that much time, probably half the Jews were descended from David, but most of them didn't know it. Probably many fewer were of the "house of David," which probably means something more like "in a direct male line."

Luke 4:1-20, The beginning and proclamation of Jesus' ministry (5/13/22)

What's one thing we know for sure about the Devil? He's a liar (John 8:44). So don't be fooled when he says, "it has been delivered to me, and I give it to whom I will." In the first place, "the earth is the Lord's, and everything in it" (Psalms 24:1 and elsewhere). In the second place, why on earth would God turn it over to the Devil after already putting humanity in charge of it (Genesis 1:28, 2:5)? And in the third place, you can bet your bottom dollar that if the earth had been delivered to the Devil, he wouldn't be giving it to anybody else!

There's a lot of uses for "if" in Greek, just as in English. When the Devil says to Jesus, "If you are the Son of God..." he's using the form that means, "Assuming for the sake of argument that you are the Son of God..."

Luke 4:21-44, Early miracles (5/16/22)

Most of you know that I have a Ph.D. in geology; my graduate work was in paleontology. A year or two after I got my degree, my dad came for a visit. We drove up into the mountains, and - using a guidebook! - I said we ought to be able to find some fossils right across the road. So we walked over to the road cut, and I reached under a ledge and pulled out a fossil. I showed it to my dad and told him it was a brachiopod. He gave me the oddest look and said, "You really are a doctor." The people in Jesus' hometown of Nazareth had heard about the things he had done, but like my dad, they hadn't completely taken it in. I can imagine the odd looks they gave him while they were listening to him and wondering, "Where did he get this stuff? Isn't he the kid from down the street?" (vs. 22; also Mark 6:2-3, Matthew 13:54-56).

Anyway, Jesus moved his base of operations to Capernaum, where not only weren't they trying to throw him off a cliff, but they really didn't want him to leave! Capernaum, on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee, was also where Simon's family lived. The story of Simon's mother-in-law is also recorded in Mark 1:29-39 and Matthew 8:14-15, and Mark says that Jesus followed her healing by preaching in the synagogues of Galilee. Now, if you look at vs. 44, Luke says that Jesus was preaching "in the synagogues of Judea," which would be a pretty long weekly commute from Capernaum (see map; the Sea of Galilee is at the left center of C-4, and Judea is down in the south). Probably Luke just means "wherever Jews had synagogues in Palestine." Luke's medical background shows up once in a while. Matthew and Mark both say the Simon's mother-in-law had a fever; Luke says she had a high fever. Mark says the demon came out of the man; Luke says the demon came out without doing the man any harm.

Luke 5:1-16, Gathering disciples (5/17/22)

In modern classrooms, the teacher stands and the students sit. In first-century Palestine, teachers sat and students stood. (Remember when Jesus fed the 5000 after teaching for three days? He told his disciples to "have them sit down.") When the crowd is about to push Jesus into the water of Lake Gennesaret, he gets into Simon Peter's boat, sits down, and continues teaching. (Note that Lake Gennesaret = Sea of Galilee = Lake Tiberius.)

If you are or were married, what made you married - as opposed to single - was the act of the preacher (or JP or whomever) saying, "I now pronounce you married." Speaking the words made it so. In vs. 13, Jesus says, "Be cured." His saying the words makes it so. The man can't be accepted back into society, however, until the priests say he is clean, so Jesus sends him to the priests to be inspected and to make his offering. I especially like Williams's translation, "If you choose to...; I do choose to." This is closer to the original meaning than modern English's "If you will."

Luke 5:17-39, Early criticisms (5/18/22)

What if somebody came to your church, claimed to work miracles, and taught a new doctrine? Wouldn't you want to keep a close eye on that person? So I do have some sympathy for the Pharisees and scribes in this passage. They are presumably listening carefully and taking notes as Jesus is teaching, when suddenly he tells the paralytic that his sins are forgiven. What?! Who does this guy Jesus think he is?? Well, he shows them who he is, and they are at least temporarily impressed (vs. 26). Later, the same bunch, or maybe a new bunch, grumbles about his choice of companions and how he chooses to celebrate with them. Notice that Jesus doesn't condemn them (here) for their narrow attitude. He just says that the Pharisees and scribes aren't the primary target of his ministry (vs. 32).

And by the way, there's a simple explanation for why Peter, Andrew, James, and John, and now Levi, just drop everything and go with Jesus. Most of them had met Jesus down in Judea, when Andrew and (probably) John were disciples of John the Baptist (John 1:35-45). They were convinced then that he was important, but for reasons that aren't reported, after the wedding in Cana and the cleansing of the Temple (John 2), they apparently went back home to wait for Jesus to come and get them.

I like Williams's translation of parabole as "short story." Parables range from very short stories to very, very short stories. Each story gives the listener a memorable idea to think about and mull over later. Jesus could have said, "You guys are good at old ideas, so of course you don't like new ideas. I have to bring the new ideas to people who aren't doing so well under the old ideas," but little stories are easier to remember.

Luke 6:1-19, Early disputes about the Sabbath, more disciples (5/19/22)

Do you have a nickname? What about a last name? If you compare Luke's list of apostles with Matthew's list (Matthew 10:2-3) and Mark's list (Mark 3:16-19), you'll see some variations. The Gospel writers in some cases tell us that they are using nicknames or surnames, as in "Peter" or "Sons of Thunder." Other times scholars have to figure out who is who. Yesterday, Luke told us that Jesus called Levi the tax collector, but in Luke's own list, Levi is called Matthew, and in fact, Matthew calls himself "Matthew the tax collector." Judas the son of James is called Thaddeus by Mark and Matthew; probably his name was Judas Thaddeus, just as my name is Regina Hunter. Bartholomew is thought by most scholars to be the same as Nathanael, whom Jesus saw under the fig tree (John 1:45-49, 21:2). Thomas is also called Thomas Didymus or Thomas the Twin, depending on your translation. This is a clear example of why it doesn't usually pay to get really excited about "contradictions" in the Bible. They almost always have an ordinary, boring explanation, like this one.

And by the way, feel free to do good on any day of the week.

Luke 6:17-19, Introducton to the Sermon on the Plain (2007)

Have you ever gone to the 8:15 and 11:00 services on the same day? Did you hear the "same" sermon? The Sermon on the Plain (SP), from which today's scripture from Luke is taken, is similar to the Sermon on the Mount (SM, Matt. 5 - 7). Many commentaries and papers conclude that there was only one sermon, but when Luke recorded it, he took stuff out and put other stuff in, set it on the plain, and noticed one set of people in the crowd, and that when Matthew recorded it, he took different stuff out and put different stuff in, set it on the mount, and noticed a different set of people in the crowd.

Other than that, say these commentaries, there are very few differences, so obviously Jesus only preached one sermon. I can tell you (because I actually counted) that the SP comprises 30 verses, SM, 107. Of the 30 verses in SP, 73% are parallel to verses in SM (counting partial and similar verses). Of the 107 verses in SM, 23% are parallel to verses in SP. John said that Jesus did so many things that all the books in the world couldn't tell about them. Apparently one thing that Jesus did was preach similar sermons on different occasions. The important thing to remember is that commentaries and study tips are useful, but you shouldn't believe everything you read.

Luke 6:20-49, The Sermon on the Plain (5/20/22)

Today we're going to read the entire Sermon on the Plain, but don't worry, it isn't all that long - 29 verses in contrast to Matthew's three chapters (Matthew 5-7). Many scholars think the Sermon on the Plain is identical to the Sermon on the Mount. In order to think that, you have to assume that Luke only reported a portion of it, added some stuff that Matthew didn't report, and changed the crowd and the setting. Personally, I think it's a lot easier to assume that Jesus preached two similar sermons on the same day, one on the mountain and another later in the day after coming down the mountain to the plain. This is the sort of thing where you, too, can think whatever seems most reasonable to you.

If you know anything at all about martial arts, you know that different styles, say, Tae Kwon Do and Shotokan karate, have different levels of belts. Tae Kwon Do has nine ranks of black belts; Shotokan has only five ranks; however, getting to any level of black belt in any style takes much training and practice. Jesus says, "A pupil is not better than his teacher, but everyone when fully trained will be like his teacher." Jesus says we should practice doing what he tells us until we are like him, our teacher.

Reader Question: Luke 6:30 brings to mind today's huge number of solicitations by phone, TV, and mail. I ask myself, "Is 'everyone' really every one?"

Luke 7:1-23, Miraculous healings (2007, 5/23/22)

Back in Luke 5:12-13, we saw that Jesus could cure a leper simply by saying, "Be clean." Here are three more reports of miraculous healings. The first and third incidents in today's reading are also in Matthew, suggesting that they might have been recorded in the hypothetical Q document. Or maybe Matthew was there, and Luke found out about them during his research. Hard to tell.

A centurion was a Roman soldier, leader of 100 men. This centurion loved the Jewish nation, and he had built them a synagogue. Probably the reason he sent his friends to speak to Jesus is that he knew that a Jew who visited the house of a Gentile would be ceremonially defiled. (Jesus didn't care about this stuff, but most Jews did.) The centurion's servant was ill, and Jesus was willing to go to him, but the centurion sent a message telling Jesus, "You don't have to come; just say the word." Jesus was amazed at the faith of this foreigner!

The second incident, the raising of the son of the widow of Nain, is unique to Luke. Luke likes to fill in gaps with the results of his own research, especially if they involve women or Gentiles. We've seen examples before of God's compassion for the childless widow. In more than one case, God gave a child to a barren woman. In another, Elijah called on God to raise a dead child for his widowed mother. Is it any surprise that Jesus, when he happens across the funeral of a dead youth, raises him and returns him to his widowed mother? When Jesus saw the plight of the widow who had lost her only son, all he did was say, "Get up!" The people's response was "A great prophet has arisen among us!" When Jesus asked his disciples, "Who do people say I am?", naturally one of the responses was "Elijah."

When John was discouraged and doubtful in prison, Jesus doesn't answer the question directly; he just tells John's disciples to report what they've seen and heard. Jesus is the Word.

Luke 7:24-35, Jesus and John (5/24/22)

I once complained to my boss that a certain group "wouldn't take yes for an answer!" There's just no pleasing some people. So I should have understood vss. 31-32, but I didn't until I read John Wesley's comment:
They are like children sitting in the market place - So forward and perverse, that no contrivance can be found to please them. It is plain our Lord means, that they were like the children complained of, not like those that made the complaint.
There's just no pleasing the Pharisees and experts in the Law. They were unhappy when John preached fire and brimstone and called for repentance, and now they're unhappy that Jesus is preaching good news and offering salvation.

Luke 7:36-50, Dinner out (5/25/22)

People are always writing to advice columnists to find out what to do about "friends" or relatives who invite them to dinner and then complain about the guests' children, ignore the guest completely, make unkind remarks about the guest's spouse, or whatever. The advice is always a variation on "Don't go there!" Why would someone invite you to dinner just so they can be rude to you? And why on earth would you go back?

The Pharisee who invited Jesus to dinner didn't offer the standard courtesies of a greeting kiss (think "shaking hands"), or water for Jesus' feet (think "a place to sit"), or oil for his head (possibly more like "a piece of cake"). The Pharisee was just rude. Now he has the gall to think critical thoughts about the woman - admittedly a sinner - who did all these things for Jesus. Jesus gently rebukes his host. Be sure to notice that the woman loves Jesus because she has already been forgiven, and not the other way around. That's clear both from the parable and from the verb tenses in Greek.

By the way, did you know that "Mary" and its variants is the all-time favorite girl's name in the western world? "Mary" was also a popular name in first-century Palestine, and six different Marys are known to us from the New Testament: We don't know the name of the sinful woman in today's reading who bathed Jesus' feet with her tears. There is no scriptural basis for the idea that the sinful woman is Mary Magdalene, who was cured of seven devils. There is no scriptural basis for the idea that she is Mary the sister of Martha, who anointed Jesus' feet with precious ointment. There is no scriptural basis for the idea that the either the sinful woman or Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. Marys of the World, Unite!

More of the Gospel of Luke
The Gospel According to Luke - Chs. 8-17
The Gospel According to Luke - Chs. 18-24