Luke 15 -- part 1

Here is a very rich chapter in the Bible. For a more complete discussion, I would refer you to a book entitled Jacob & the Prodigal by Kenneth E. Bailey--he's taught me to look at these "familiar" stories in a new light. Here's a few of his observations as I understand them:

First of all, notice that Jesus tells the parable in response to something--namely the tax collectors and "sinners" gathering around Jesus to hear Him and the Pharisees and Torah teachers mutter, "This man welcomes sinners and eats with them." This is the context of the parable, and while I'm at it, I believe that these three stories compose one parable. Notice that after the first story (lost sheep) Jesus says, "Or suppose..." clearly a continuation on the same idea. After the second story (lost coin), luke writes, "Jesus continued..." So they are not three parables, but one.

It is also clear from these parables that Jesus is casting Himself in the lead role of each parable. Interesting note here: in the psalms, God is sometimes portrayed in human terms--most often as a king. Sometimes as a Judge. But there are three portrayals of God that are more personal, one might say more tender. Do you know what they are?
Psalm 23 -- shepherd
Psalm 131 -- mother
Psalm 68 -- father
Look at those three stories again. Who are the main characters? Who is Jesus claiming to be? The boldest claim of the three is the last one, but Jesus has been building up to it with the first two by drawing those parallels from the Psalms.

Luke 14

This chapter starts off with another Sabbath healing (by touch again). I think that Jesus is also giving His interpretation of ordering the commandments here: "Pekuah Nefesh (quality of life--think 'Love your neighbor as yourself')" is more important than Sabbath laws. When a situation arises when one or the other must be broken so the other can be kept, we're to care more for the quality of life. I think that it may even be likely that some in Jesus' audience would not have pulled an ox out of a well on the Sabbath because they arranged the commandments opposite to this (I think most if not all of them would pull a son out of a well without any hesitation). But rather than argue from lesser to greater here, I think Jesus is making a point about the high importance of pekuah nefesh.
(14:12) This chapter makes me think of a book I read called The Shadow of God. It's historical fiction, but the author (Leo Sangren) captures the essence of so many time periods so accurately that it's a very compelling read. There's a chapter in there (entitled "I see") which is a fictional account of a Sadducee's interaction with a blind beggar after they have been visited by Y'shua, the itinerant rabbi. When you have time, this is a very compelling read.
(14:15) Again, verses like this as well as verse 1 of this chapter tell me that Jesus is actively engaging the Pharisees in dialogue, and they are engaging Him. Sure Jesus rips them from time to time, but they were already doing that to each other in the first century.
(14:25-35) Very challenging words. I think that the sense of the greek word here rendered "hate" is closer to "love less than" than our current understanding of the word "hate." There is a similar passage in the Mishnah that explains that if a person's rabbi and father are both being held for ransom, that person must first ransom his rabbi and then his father (unless his father is also a great teacher). The reasoning is explained this way: while the man's father gave him life in this world, a man's rabbi teaches him about how to gain eternal life (living God's way right now) and the life to come. Verses 31-33 (and possibly also verses 28-30) refer to very specific events in the reign of Herod Antipas, who was a political bungler. This clever usage by Jesus of linking His teaching to historical events no doubt made His point more prominent in the heads of His hearers.

Luke 13

First of all, I would like to let those of you scattered far and wide know that tonight we are having our first good rain storm since (I think) a Tuesday afternoon in late March (the 27th to be specific). Do you remember it? :)

Luke 13...
(13:13) This is really significant because usually when Jesus healed someone on the Sabbath, He did it with spoken words only, and not touch (because that wouldn't qualify as most people's definition of "work"), but here He's making a really bold statement about doing good on the Sabbath by healing this woman with a touch.
(13:18-21) Two scandalous images about the Kingdom of God, which I think Jesus maybe used for shock value. The first image is a stinkin' weed that farmers might spend their whole life trying to eradicate from their property (unsuccessfully). The second image is usually used to represent sin in life. But Jesus says that the Kingdom can work similarly, but for a person's good. That's really cool.
(13:31) As hard as Luke is on the Pharisees as a group, I think this verse points out the fact that the Pharisees (who didn't agree with Jesus all the time) still valued Him. I don't buy the NIV Study Bible's explanation here that the Pharisees are trying to scare Jesus away from the area. Also, "fox" is not a very nice thing to call someone in that culture. It would be like calling someone a "poser" or a "wanna-be."

Luke 12

Here is a chapter pretty tough to comment on, so I'll keep my remarks brief.

(12:13-21) This story is a great challenge and also strangely comforting all at the same time. As they say, "You can't take it with you," but that also means that it's not all that important right now. This was driven home to me just last week, when I was at a graveside service at a very large cemetery. One of the people who went with me found something surprising on the ground there: a one dollar bill--just blowing along the ground until it happened to come to rest on the grass. None of those tombstones were able to stop it or track it down or retrieve it for the people whose lives they represent. Maybe I'm not doing a very good job of communicating right now, but there's something about finding a dollar in a cemetery that really makes you stop and think...

Luke 11

(11:5-10) I almost tried this once as an experiment with some of my friends, but I kind of chickened out. I wasn't really sure that I could pull it off. Even the thought of it still brings a small (and mischievous) smile to my face.

(11:11-13) Jesus makes use of a kal v'homer (lit. "light and heavy") statement here, characterized in the first century by the phrases: "If...then how much more...?" This one sticks out to me especially as a father now. Of course I want the best for Caleb and Josiah. If that's true, then how much more does God want the best for us, His children?

(11:27-28) Interesting interplay between Jesus and the crowd.

Luke 10--part 2

Who is my neighbor? Let's look at the context of the familiar quote from Leviticus: "Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD." So the opinion of who exactly my neighbor is ran along the continuum. Some of the more conservative Pharisees and many of the Sadducees said, "Aha! So my neighbor must be one of 'my people.' That means my neighbor is someone who is like me--a fellow Jew for sure, probably a well-off Sadducee or Pharisee." On the other end of the continuum (liberal side, now), Pharisees argued my neighbor is everyone except for three groups of people: 1. Adulterers. 2. Idolaters. 3. Samaritans (Samaritans were seen by Judeans as 'half-blood' Jews from the days of the Northern Kingdom's exile. The quarrels between the old northern kingdom and Judah intensified and in Ezra and Nehemiah, they are told they have no share in the worship of God in Jerusalem. The Samaritans for their part believed that Mt. Gerazim was the mountain God actually intended for His worship to be carried out [based on their reading of Deuteronomy]. By Jesus' time, the relations were strained in the best places and downright hostile and lethal in the worst--remember what James and John wanted to do to the Samaritan village that wouldn't welcome them? Pilgrims from Galilee would typically cross the Jordan river just south of the Sea of Galilee to avoid Samaria and then cross it again at Jericho to go up to Jerusalem. Perhaps as early as Jesus' time, there was a saying that expressed how Jews felt about Samaritans: "Not even God can love a Samaritan.") But the feeling on who my neighbor was ran the gamut. It is in this context that Jesus tells the story, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho... (do you remember the pictures I showed you of the road?)" He's robbed, stripped, beaten, and left half-dead. Now this is technical language here, because it means he's unclean--in which case, certain people were not going to touch him because of how they 'ranked' the commandments (see previous post). The first guy Jesus sends past him is a priest (Sadducee) who passes by on the other side. The second guy Jesus sends past him is a Levite (also a Sadducee) and he too passes by on the other side. . Stop there a second. Why did they pass by? Was it just because they're mean? I don't think so. I think it was because of how they ordered the commandments. If "touch no unclean thing" comes before "love your neighbor" then no, you don't help him. And many priests saw it this way! I'm going to go out on a limb here, but stay with me and see what you think...I think the audience expected the next guy to be a Pharisee, because he had "love your neighbor" before "touch no unclean thing" and furthermore, this beaten, naked, and robbed man fits their definition of neighbor. I think the audience was probably laughing at this guy (maybe a Sadducee or stricter Pharisee) because they think Jesus is going to tell him off by sending a righteous Pharisee down the path to help this guy.

Then came an absolute BOMBSHELL! "But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was..." I don't know if they were laughing before, but I bet you could have heard a pin drop after Jesus said "Samaritan." Jesus is totally changing the story from what they expected! I'm telling you this was shocking if not downright scandalous. And just to make sure they don't miss the part about "touch no unclean thing" being less important, the Samaritan undoes the harm done to the man: 1. Robbers went away leaving him (alone) half-dead--Samaritan took pity on him and went to him. 2. Robbers stripped him--Samaritan bandaged him 3. Robbers beat him--Samaritan poured on oil and wine 4. Robbers robbed him--Samaritan left money for his expenses with the innkeeper. Did you ever have a brother (or sister) try to annoy you by going, "touch-touch-touch-touch." Do you know what I mean? It's like Jesus is doing that here. If they weren't still in shock, the Pharisees in His audience might have found that funny, too. But that's not the point. Remember, the audience thought that it was going to be about which of the three people saw THE ROBBED MAN AS HIS NEIGHBOR. But instead, Jesus asks, "Which of these three do you think WAS A NEIGHBOR TO THE MAN who fell into the hands of robbers?" The answer Jesus is going for is, "The Samaritan is my neighbor." Look at the Text: it's like the guy can't even bring himself to say "Samaritan" so he says, "The one who had mercy on him." Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise." I think helping people who are in trouble is a great idea--a Biblical idea, even. But that is NOT what Jesus is talking about here! The question was, "Who is my neighbor? Who am I supposed to love?" The answer is, "The Samaritan" or to put the same idea differently, "my enemy." Here's the challenge for us. I'll put it like my teacher put it: Think of the person who you can't stand--the person who annoys you more than anyone else. Do you have someone in mind? Good. Jesus says, "Love that person."

Luke 10--part 1

My apologies for the long delay, but here I'd like to comment on a passage people tend to think they're more familiar with than they actually are (including me): the story of the Good Samaritan. First of all, look at the question: "What must I do to inherit eternal life?" How would you answer that question? I'd probably say, "Believe in the Lord Jesus and you'll be saved" (Acts 16:31--Paul's answer to the Philippian jailer's question, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"). I think that's a good answer, but notice it isn't Jesus' response: "What does the Torah say?" Notice Jesus responds with a question--how cool is that! But Jesus points him to the Torah--the Law. How does that work? The way I had looked at this passage, I figured Jesus wanted to point out that he couldn't keep the whole thing, so he'd need something else (grace). But that came from my NOT UNDERSTANDING THE ORIGINAL QUESTION. "To inherit eternal life" doesn't just mean "how do I get to heaven," it is an idiomatic expression meaning "how do I live the way God wants me to? NOW." So it's not a question about forever-after as much as it's a question about living well right now. Again, if it's a question about salvation, Jesus' responses don't make sense. Jesus points him to the Law, the guy recites Shema along with "Love your neighbor as yourself" and Jesus says, "You have answered correctly. Do this and you will LIVE [really live--God's way]." I think Jesus is talking about really living NOW.

Second thing--there were 8 great debates about the Torah in Jesus' day. Different rabbis interpreted the Torah differently and they argued feircely about their differences. One of those debates was "What is the greatest commandment?" Actually, everyone agreed on the greatest (Shema Israel...), but the disagreement about which was next most important raged. Why the discussion? Aren't they all important? Well, yes, but what if you were in a situation where you couldn't keep both commandments? Which would you keep and which would you break? For example, Exodus 20:8-12: Keep the Sabbath Holy--don't do any work on it. Exodus 23:4-5: If you see someone else's animal wondering off, take it back to him. Two commands. What if you see someone's animal wondering off on the Sabbath? Bringing it back would definitely qualify as work. So do you bring it back (keeping the second commandment and breaking the first) or do you not bring it back (keep the first commandment and break the second)? Your answer will depend on which commandment you think is more important. By the way, for those who think this Sabbath thing is passe, read Isaiah 56:1-7--the chapter that talks about Gentiles (you and me) coming to know God. Three times God talks about how important Sabbath is. Anyway, if you ask Rabbi "A" what is the most important commandment he may say something like Shema, then Sabbath, then Kosher, then touch no unclean thing, then love your neighbor as yourself,... (although you probably wouldn't get a list--that's Western--you'd probably get a series of stories/parables). Ask Rabbi "B" and he may say, Shema, then love your neighbor, then Sabbath, then touch no unclean thing, then kosher,... We're used to seeing this as cut and dried because we're at least a little familiar with Jesus' sayings, but here Jesus was entering a debate, but anyone following Jesus as closely as this guy was would have known Jesus' answer to this question, so his pals are probably laughing at him at this point for having such a nudnick question. The Text says, "He wanted to justify himself, and so he asked Jesus, 'And who is my neighbor?'" Enter another one of the great debates! To be continued in the next post...

September 9

I must apologize...yesterday, I was at a student council retreat, and tonight, I have not left myself enough time to post on all of Luke 10, and now Josiah just woke up screaming, I'm afraid I'll have to postpone my post until tomorrow.

Luke 9

I'd like to share with you a neat little bit of cultural context I found in the Bible commentary I consult first (JNT Commentary). In 9:5, Jesus tells his talmidim that if people in a town do not welcome them, shake the dust off your feet when you leave their town as a testimony against them. In the first century, as it turns out, "Jews would often shake the ritually impure dust of a Gentile city from their feet upon leaving it and returning to the land of Israel." The secondary, symbolic effect was to demonstrate to those in the Gentile city that they had no fellowship with Israel. You can imagine the shock that a first century Jew might have if someone did that outside their city because the message is: because you refuse the Kingdom of God, you have refused to be a part of the true Israel.
Also, look at 9:14. I had read over this verse many, many times before I grasped some more significance in there. Why is Luke telling us specifically that Jesus is dividing the people into groups of 50? Well, the answer is that someone else in the Bible divided people into groups of 50. Who was it? Moses! So again, because of the prophecy in Deuteronomy 18:15, if Jesus really is the Messiah, then he ought to remind us of Moses occasionally.
9:35 -- When the Messiah comes, it was said, all three parts of the Tanakh (Old Testament) will testify to His coming. The voice from heaven says, "This is my Son, whom I have chosen, listen to Him." Psalm 2:7, Isaiah 42:1, Deuteronomy 18:15. Game. Set. Match. (That's for you, Cristina.)
9:54 -- Just kind of a funny observation here...notice that it's James and John who ask Jesus if they can call down fire on this city to destroy it. What nickname had Jesus given them, do you remember? Sons of Thunder! (Calling down fire from heaven?! Sons of Thunder, indeed.) Although here it's misplaced, these guys must have had some intense passion.

Luke 8

Lots of really interesting stories in this chapter, but many of them I have already commented on in their parallel accounts, especially the sick woman touching Jesus' tzitzit. But I would like to point out a cool thing in the story about the demon-possessed man. Remember that the people thought of the Sea of Galilee as the symbol of the Abyss--entry into utter chaos (which was why the disciples were so terrified of drowning in it). The demons even refer to the Abyss (8:31) when they're right there. In fact, they beg Jesus not to send them there. Here's the funny part (how Jesus is always in control of the situation): the demons see the pigs and ask Jesus' permission to go into the pigs instead. But when they do so, where do the pigs take them? Right into the Abyss! Don't tell me that's not funny; you know it is. Then the people come out and see the guy in his right mind and with clothes on, and they were afraid and asked Him to leave. So Jesus goes to the land of the expelled (land of the 7 nations driven out before Joshua and the Israelites), He expells the demons, and then He himself is expelled by the inhabitants of the land. That's interesting at least. But we're not done with this other guy yet. He asks to come with Jesus, but Jesus says no, and instead of telling him to be quiet, Jesus asks him to tell others what God has done for him. The next time Jesus comes through this area, there's a group of believers here--perhaps started by this one man. That's very cool.

As I wrap this up, I feel compelled to tell you that Tyler--the little boy who had a bone marrow transplant (we were introduced to his family toward the end of the last school year)--took a turn for the worse these past few days and in fact went to be with Jesus earlier today. Of course, this is really hard on Tyler's family, so please keep them in your prayers. I, too, am writing this with a heavy heart tonight. One of the first things I thought of was the verse we highlighted yesterday: (7:13) When the Lord saw her, His heart went out to her... Pray with me that the Lord holds Tyler's family close to Him through these next days, weeks, months...

Luke 7

In the first century, the relationship between Jews and Romans was not generally one of good will. But here we have an astonishing example of the opposite. These elders of the Jews "pleaded earnestly with him" to heal the centurion's servant. Notice that the basis for this good will is action on the part of the centurion ("he built our synagogue"). The most common use of love in the Bible is associated with action of some sort. Very incredible faith story, too.
Nain is close to Nazareth, and you've probably heard this story before somewhere along the line, but read verse 13 again: When the Lord saw her, his heart went out to her and he said, "Don't cry." His heart broke for this woman and it compelled Him to action.
For a detailed discussion of the dialogue between Jesus and John's talmidim, check what we posted on Matthew 11. Actually, I think I commented on it in the post on Matthew 14, but you'll find the parallel passage in Matthew 11. Notice that this account records Jesus not only talking about the blind receiving sight, etc., but Jesus also heals a bunch of people standing right there to emphasize his point and drive home the remez.
The story about being at Simon's house is quite convicting, but let me point out something that we tend to read right over: look again at verses 39-40: in verse 39, Simon says something to himself (maybe outloud under his breath, but he apparently never intended for Jesus to hear it, so it may have really been an internal conversation--literally to himself). And in verse 40, Jesus answered him... What?! Jesus just entered (and answered) this guy's internal conversation. Are you kidding me?! Wow!

Luke 6

Just a few thoughts on this pretty straight forward chapter:
(6:12) What a lot is packed into this verse! Look at what The Rabbi does for His talmidim! When I read this, I am forced to ask myself when the last time was that I "went to bat" for my talmidim with this kind of intensity.
(6:23) "Leap for joy" at persecution? Wow. I was just watching the end of a movie you may have heard of called Braveheart. I do not wish to spoil the ending for those of you who haven't seen it, and I realize that William Wallace had some standards other than the Christian life, but after Jesus on the cross (who of course showed us what this looks like), this is the picture I have of "leaping for joy" and finishing well.
(6:27-42) Wow! Some hard words (but important words) to live up to.
(6:40) As we talked about in class, in this verse (especially the second part) is the heart of the rabbi-talmid relationship.

Luke 5

In a way, I don't like to harp on something, but look at the first part of chapter 5 again. What are the people (including Jesus) doing? STANDING and LISTENING TO THE WORD OF GOD. After that, Jesus got in a boat and SAT DOWN to teach the people. I really think there's a whole new level of respect and awe for the Text of God's Word that I'm not sure we have captured.... Anyway, fishermen--remember that this is significant because of Jeremiah 16:16, where the LORD declares that He will send for many fishermen and they will catch them [His people]. Now this (in Jeremiah) is a broader reference to coming judgment, but Jesus reapplies it here to call His disciples. Look at the wording Jesus uses in Luke 5:10. Very similar. Think about the claim that Jesus is making here--in Jeremiah, it isn't simply God's messenger or emissary that calls the fishermen, it is GOD HIMSELF doing the calling!

Look at 5:13. This poor fellow has leprosy bad. According to the Torah, he can't touch anyone nor can anyone touch him without becoming unclean. That's how a world in chaos works--the unclean makes the clean unclean (read that again if you have to). The amazing thing here is not merely that Jesus heals the man, but that Jesus heals the man BY TOUCHING HIM! Because in the Messianic era, this is how the world is supposed to work--the clean makes the unclean clean. Remember our lesson on the riverbed? Jesus doesn't just offer to pray real hard for him, He enters into his chaos and offers him shalom.

(5:17-26) I'm not sure I have a whole lot to add to this story, but a number of reminders come to mind...the effort of the paralytic's friends to go through the roof..."When Jesus saw their faith..." Tommy, Jonathan, and Luke getting banged up going through our roof...
I would like to point out verse 26 again... EVERYONE was amazed and gave praise to God (even those who were skeptical at the beginning).

"The old wine is better." My NIV study Bible says that "Jesus was indicating the reluctance of some people to change from their traditional religious ways and try the gospel." I'm not sure that I quite agree with this take on this passage, but right now I haven't got anything a whole lot better, so maybe I should look into it more.

Luke 4

There's alot here, but I want to spend some serious time talking about the middle section here: Jesus teaching in the synagogue at Nazareth. First, what is a synagogue? It's something that the Jewish people brought back with them from the exile. When the Temple was destroyed in 586 BC, there could be no more proper sacrifices. This caused a religious crisis among those who wanted to remain distinctively Jewish. What binds them as a people if there is not a Temple with a sacrifice system. So they came together in groups and built buildings like community centers. Their primary function was religious convocation (Sabbaths and Holy Days), but they were also used in education, juciary, and "town hall" functions. Even when the temple was rebuilt by Zerubbabel, the synagogues continued to be meeting places for worship ("prayer"--remember?). By Jesus' time, the synagogues probably followed a lectionary, which means that there would be a prescribed reading from Torah as well as from the Prophets and Writings established long in advance. There would also be a list of those who would be reading the passages (and then might comment on them) long ahead of time. So apparently Jesus is on the list in the synagogue in Nazareth. Well, what about Nazareth? The people that lived here are the ones who took the idea of synagogue very seriously--they were passionate and charismatic in worship and this caused the Judeans to look down on them somewhat. But they were proud of their heritage. Most scholars believe that Nazareth is related to the word netzer meaning "shoot" or "branch" (check Isaiah 11:1-3). They were related to the tribe of Judah even though they were geographically located in Galilee, and they believed themselves to be the Lord's people even to the extent that they believed the Messiah would come from among them. Even though they weren't doing weird things, they were thought of almost as cultish by other Jews (check the number of times someone says, "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?!"). Now let's go to the text: Luke 4:14-15 -- Jesus is doing amazing things and word is getting around and then (:16) He goes to Nazareth, where He was raised. Picture growing up in a small town where someone, one of "your own" becomes a major league baseball player and eventually the MVP for the team that wins the World Series. And then he makes a stop back at this small ville where he grew up. Multiply the emotions in that picture by about 20 and you have something like the feel for Jesus returning to Nazareth. And it's His turn to read (by the way, notice that He STANDS to read the Words of God (:16) and after He reads, he SITS DOWN (:20) to teach). And the scripture portion for the day turns out to be about Him! That right there is pretty cool in itself, that God would orchestrate those things to communicate to His people. But back to the story: they are hanging on His every word and He says, "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing." And the crowd goes wild! I'm telling you that this is exactly what they wanted to hear! They're ecstatic! But Jesus isn't done. Jesus talks a bit about Elijah, and apparently this crowd that was so excited a few minutes ago is ready to kill him (:29). Why the big change? The answer, I think, is in rabbinic tradition. This tradition talks about Elijah. The rabbis said that the reason Elijah didn't do any miracles in Israel was because the Israelites thought they had it made simply because they were descendants of Abraham. There was no passionate faith. No intense persistence after God's will. No true repentance. No path-walking. So when Jesus brings Elijah into the picture, He's calling the Nazarenes out. He's telling them not to rely merely on who they are for their salvation. He's saying that you'd better get out there and live like God wants you to--repent and walk the path. And because those people had so much pride in who they were, they missed out on the Kingdom. It is interesting to note that Jesus never goes back to Nazareth after this incident. So what about us? Are we relying heavily on the fact that we grew up with Godly parents or in a Christian school? These are certainly things to be thankful for, but we can't enter the Kingdom of Heaven riding on our parents' coat tails. Are we taking our faith seriously? Is there true repentence? Is there a return to the path?

Luke 3

Chapter 3 opens with the historical setting for John's and Jesus' ministries. Luke gives us a little more detailed account of John's teaching in the desert--notice the religious folks, the tax collectors, and the Roman soldiers right next to each other in the text. Chapter 3 also includes another genealogy of Jesus, like Matthew 1. But upon inspection, this one is different in a few ways. Matthew 1 starts with Abraham and goes forward to Jesus while Luke 3 starts with Jesus and goes all the way back to Adam. A closer look also reveals that there are some different names in this genealogy, most notably from Jesus to David. The explanation that seems most reasonable to me is the one offered in the NIV Study Bible: Matthew follows Joseph's line (Jesus' legal line) while Luke follows Mary's line (Jesus' biological line). If you look closely at the wording in each genealogy, you can see that each author has something special he wants to communicate about Jesus, and this explanation seems to fit well.