Luke 9:18-27
Prayer led Jesus to put the crucial question of his true identity to the disciples he had been preparing for in sharing his ministry (vs. 18). The disciples response was to repeat the gossip and sincere inquiries they had been hearing from the crowds they mingled with and on their first mission tour (vs. 19). It was Peter, always the most forthright, who answered for them all: “The Messiah of God.”
What came next is notably different from Matthew’s version of the same incident. In Luke’s narrative, Jesus offered no words of praise or commendation such as Matthew reported. Why? Because each of the Gospel authors used his own judgment as to the meaning of the confession.
Generally Luke followed Mark in having Jesus immediately command the disciples to keep this revelation secret. Then he declared as clearly and simply as possible what lay ahead of them: his passion and death. Luke also had Jesus state unequivocally the prospect of resurrection.
Did Jesus know this? The gospel record is ambiguous. If he did, why the fervent request in Gethsemane to go free from crucifixion? And why, both in Gethsemane and on the cross, did he yield himself to God’s will and death as all humans must do? This is one of the enigmas of the nature of Jesus, the Messiah/Christ. Was he both human and divine as the church has declared in its doctrine and theology since the 4th century CE?
We, like Luke, know the answer from a post-resurrection faith. The disciples did not. Through the next sequence of thoughts Luke expressed what he believed, putting them into the mouth of Jesus himself. These words were unlikely to have been from the memory of the disciples. They were more probably drawn from the preaching and teaching of the early church as they reflected on what they had seen and heard.
Like so much else that we read as quotations from Jesus (sometimes in printed in red to distinguish them), they were interpretations of the deeper meaning of the life and ministry of Jesus. To regard these words literally contradicts Jesus’ full humanity. He certainly would have known the risks of declaring the arrival of God’s reign of love and acting upon that conviction by showing compassion to those on the fringes of his time. To quote Sharon Ringe:
“That the passion predictions are principally theological statements not historical reports is clear from the way these formal predictions, like other summaries of Jesus’ passion, are linked to divine necessity (9:22; 13:33; 17:25; 24:6-7) or the fulfilment of scripture (18:31-33; 24:44-46).”
The point of denying oneself to be a follower of Jesus (9:23-27) “form the core of a set of teaching about the meaning and nature of discipleship.” This does not mean giving up pleasures and comforts of life. It means to set aside such goals as status and privilege that depend on competing to be known, recognized and esteemed.
Monday, March 22, 2010
31 - Harder Discipleship
Luke 9:57-62
If we ever think we have no need to be told how difficult a committed discipleship may be, we need only to read this brief passage. In these three brief anecdotes that Luke told almost in passing, we have the full measure of what a sincere follower of Jesus might face. All three present us with the challenge to our security and individual identity.
First was a man who promised without hesitation that he would follow Jesus wherever he went. Jesus responded with what may have been a proverb. He really did not know whether he would have a place to sleep each night or where it would be.
An article in the Biblical Archaeology Review (21:04, Jul/Aug 1995) gave explicit details of a cave not generally shown to pilgrims about the Cave of Gethsemane.. There Jesus and his disciples are thought to have sheltered on the night when he was betrayed. Known since the 4th century CE, it is now owned by the Franciscan Custody of the Holy Land. It lies not far from the traditional site of the Garden of Gethsemane pilgrims are usually shown at the foot of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples could well have stayed in caves like this along their route from Galilee to Jerusalem.
The second man heard a challenge from Jesus to follow him. The man’s excuse for not going was that he had to bury his dead father. Jesus’ immediately retorted that the dead could bury their own dead. To many it would seem that this man’s request was legitimate enough. He was certainly concerned about his family responsibilities. So why would Jesus be so critical and deny the legitimacy of his very human desire? This can only be interpreted as a challenge to the man’s spirituality as well as his depth of commitment. It implies that those who want to delay their commitment may not yet have reached the required sense of vocation to be a disciple, come what may. Many modern Christians can tell of a similar lack of decisive dedication.
The third would-be disciple received the same challenge as the second, but chose instead to go home to say farewell to his family and friends. Even the Hebrew scriptures tell of the prophet Elijah allowing his disciple Elisha to do that before taking up his call as a prophet (1 Kings 19:19-21). That too was not good enough for Jesus. He made it absolutely clear that there were to be no second chances. Only a total commitment would do.
But this was a totally different situation than had pertained previously during Jesus’ ministry in Galilee. The whole company of disciples would all be in danger as they reached Jerusalem. In his Rabbi Jesus: An Intimate Biography, Bruce Chilton suggests that the entry into Jerusalem and the overthrowing of the money-changers’ tables was a deliberate riot Jesus planned to occur during the thanksgiving festival of Sukkoth, several months prior to Jesus’ arrest and crucifixion. If so, there was reason to demand that those who were identified as his followers would be in grave danger for some time.
Was Judas Iscariot just afraid of this?
If we ever think we have no need to be told how difficult a committed discipleship may be, we need only to read this brief passage. In these three brief anecdotes that Luke told almost in passing, we have the full measure of what a sincere follower of Jesus might face. All three present us with the challenge to our security and individual identity.
First was a man who promised without hesitation that he would follow Jesus wherever he went. Jesus responded with what may have been a proverb. He really did not know whether he would have a place to sleep each night or where it would be.
An article in the Biblical Archaeology Review (21:04, Jul/Aug 1995) gave explicit details of a cave not generally shown to pilgrims about the Cave of Gethsemane.. There Jesus and his disciples are thought to have sheltered on the night when he was betrayed. Known since the 4th century CE, it is now owned by the Franciscan Custody of the Holy Land. It lies not far from the traditional site of the Garden of Gethsemane pilgrims are usually shown at the foot of the Mount of Olives. Jesus and his disciples could well have stayed in caves like this along their route from Galilee to Jerusalem.
The second man heard a challenge from Jesus to follow him. The man’s excuse for not going was that he had to bury his dead father. Jesus’ immediately retorted that the dead could bury their own dead. To many it would seem that this man’s request was legitimate enough. He was certainly concerned about his family responsibilities. So why would Jesus be so critical and deny the legitimacy of his very human desire? This can only be interpreted as a challenge to the man’s spirituality as well as his depth of commitment. It implies that those who want to delay their commitment may not yet have reached the required sense of vocation to be a disciple, come what may. Many modern Christians can tell of a similar lack of decisive dedication.
The third would-be disciple received the same challenge as the second, but chose instead to go home to say farewell to his family and friends. Even the Hebrew scriptures tell of the prophet Elijah allowing his disciple Elisha to do that before taking up his call as a prophet (1 Kings 19:19-21). That too was not good enough for Jesus. He made it absolutely clear that there were to be no second chances. Only a total commitment would do.
But this was a totally different situation than had pertained previously during Jesus’ ministry in Galilee. The whole company of disciples would all be in danger as they reached Jerusalem. In his Rabbi Jesus: An Intimate Biography, Bruce Chilton suggests that the entry into Jerusalem and the overthrowing of the money-changers’ tables was a deliberate riot Jesus planned to occur during the thanksgiving festival of Sukkoth, several months prior to Jesus’ arrest and crucifixion. If so, there was reason to demand that those who were identified as his followers would be in grave danger for some time.
Was Judas Iscariot just afraid of this?
30 - On The Road To Jerusalem
Luke 9:51-56
From Luke 9:51 to 19:27 the Gospel follows Jesus along the journey Matthew and Mark agree was the only one he took to Jerusalem. Far from being a travel narrative, Luke used the journey only as a framework for extensive instruction to the disciples for their future mission as apostles after the resurrection.
Sharon Ringe suggested that Luke may also have had in mind the travels of the Israelites under Moses from Egypt to the Promised Land, especially as that journey was summarized in the Book of Deuteronomy. Some of Luke’s material contained in these chapters came from Mark. Other stories are exclusive to this gospel alone. Most of the material Luke shared with Matthew from an unknown source know to scholars as Q(uelle).
The general theme of discipleship runs through the whole narrative requiring a complete change of behaviour and understanding on the part of those accompanying Jesus. Gone are the usual kernels of ordinary folk wisdom. Very much to the fore is the life required of those seeking the reign of God in this world. These teachings were designed to prepare the disciples for the traumatic events of the Passion and the apostolic mission beyond Resurrection Day.
First, along the way was a brief stopover in Samaria (9:51-56). It didn’t turn out so well. Learning that Jesus and his company were bound for Jerusalem, the Samaritans refused to provide them with hospitality. The cause of that rejection had to do with the traditional hostility that had existed between the Samaritans and the Judeans since the 8th century BCE.
After the capture of Samaria in 722 BCE, the Assyrians had exiled a great many of the leading citizens of the Northern Kingdom of Israel which had been separated from Judea since the civil war after death of King Solomon in the 10th century BCE. The Assyrians then replaced those Jews with other tribes imported from other territories they controlled. Over the succeeding centuries, natural intermarriage had produced a mixed population with a unique culture and religious traditions different from the Judean Jews in the Southern Kingdom.
As reported in John’s Gospel (4:8-15) due to these cultural differences there was much suspicion to the point of open hostility between Samaritans and Jews. The story of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25-37 was based on this premise.
James and John, always impulsive and somewhat crude in their discipleship, wanted to call down a thunderbolt from heaven to destroy the inhospitable village. Jesus would have none of that.
He just did as he had earlier advised the twelve when he sent them out on their first tour of mission duty. He shook the dust off his sandals and went on the another village.
This was the disciples’ first lesson in behavioural change. Love doesn’t react negatively when people reject you . Jesus believed in his mission and wanted them to do likewise.
From Luke 9:51 to 19:27 the Gospel follows Jesus along the journey Matthew and Mark agree was the only one he took to Jerusalem. Far from being a travel narrative, Luke used the journey only as a framework for extensive instruction to the disciples for their future mission as apostles after the resurrection.
Sharon Ringe suggested that Luke may also have had in mind the travels of the Israelites under Moses from Egypt to the Promised Land, especially as that journey was summarized in the Book of Deuteronomy. Some of Luke’s material contained in these chapters came from Mark. Other stories are exclusive to this gospel alone. Most of the material Luke shared with Matthew from an unknown source know to scholars as Q(uelle).
The general theme of discipleship runs through the whole narrative requiring a complete change of behaviour and understanding on the part of those accompanying Jesus. Gone are the usual kernels of ordinary folk wisdom. Very much to the fore is the life required of those seeking the reign of God in this world. These teachings were designed to prepare the disciples for the traumatic events of the Passion and the apostolic mission beyond Resurrection Day.
First, along the way was a brief stopover in Samaria (9:51-56). It didn’t turn out so well. Learning that Jesus and his company were bound for Jerusalem, the Samaritans refused to provide them with hospitality. The cause of that rejection had to do with the traditional hostility that had existed between the Samaritans and the Judeans since the 8th century BCE.
After the capture of Samaria in 722 BCE, the Assyrians had exiled a great many of the leading citizens of the Northern Kingdom of Israel which had been separated from Judea since the civil war after death of King Solomon in the 10th century BCE. The Assyrians then replaced those Jews with other tribes imported from other territories they controlled. Over the succeeding centuries, natural intermarriage had produced a mixed population with a unique culture and religious traditions different from the Judean Jews in the Southern Kingdom.
As reported in John’s Gospel (4:8-15) due to these cultural differences there was much suspicion to the point of open hostility between Samaritans and Jews. The story of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25-37 was based on this premise.
James and John, always impulsive and somewhat crude in their discipleship, wanted to call down a thunderbolt from heaven to destroy the inhospitable village. Jesus would have none of that.
He just did as he had earlier advised the twelve when he sent them out on their first tour of mission duty. He shook the dust off his sandals and went on the another village.
This was the disciples’ first lesson in behavioural change. Love doesn’t react negatively when people reject you . Jesus believed in his mission and wanted them to do likewise.
Monday, March 15, 2010
29 - True And False Authority
Luke 9:37-50
At least until the middle of the 20th century, the description of the epileptic child in 9:39 and 42 was the best medical description available. Neuroscience and digital imaging have given us much greater detail and understanding of what happens in the brain during epileptic seizures. Surprisingly, this passage focuses attention on two aspects of Jesus’ character: his compassion for those who are sick and his impatience with those who do not share that understanding and love for those in need.
The significance of this incident, however, is in vs. 43. Jesus’ healing miracles always pointed to the greatness and glory of God. That was not what the disciples who had not been with Jesus on the mountain shortly before may have felt. He castigated them for their failure to help the anxious father who had brought his son to Jesus for healing. His criticism may have been due to the fact that he had so recently shared with them his power and authority. On this occasion they had not been successful in making use of it.
Jesus followed this healing with some harsh words about the difficulties of following him in what lay ahead. He knew that his betrayal was likely to occur in the not too distance future. He may not have known who would do it, but he was well aware of that those opposed to his ministry were seeking an end to his disruption of their power and authority. The disciples, of course, were still dealing with their very mixed feelings about their recognition of his presence as the Messiah and the sting of his criticisms for their failures. They had no comprehension whatever of his warning about the darkening future.
Instead, they engaged in a childish debate as to which of them was the greatest. The discussion revealed the depth of their confusion. His frustration perhaps hidden, Jesus seized the opportunity to show them what he really meant about humility. He set a child beside him as they stood around eager to hear what he might have to say next. This child, he pointed out, was the greatest in God’s sight because this child had welcomed the chance to be near him and so near to God. Whoever welcomed a child like this welcomed him.
This attitude completely contradicted the normal basis for society. Children are at the bottom of every hierarchically structured social order. Those with power, authority, honour and merit always have precedence. By placing himself beside this child, he was actually putting himself in the child’s place. In so doing he also rebuked their argument about which one of them should have precedence. He was reiterating what he had said earlier: those who chose to save their lives for their own sake would lose it, while those who sought to lose their lives for his sake would find salvation.
The final episode brings another issue to the fore. A stranger had been using Jesus’ name in casting out demons. The disciples had stopped him. But Jesus again rebuked them, adding that whoever was not against them was really helping them.
At least until the middle of the 20th century, the description of the epileptic child in 9:39 and 42 was the best medical description available. Neuroscience and digital imaging have given us much greater detail and understanding of what happens in the brain during epileptic seizures. Surprisingly, this passage focuses attention on two aspects of Jesus’ character: his compassion for those who are sick and his impatience with those who do not share that understanding and love for those in need.
The significance of this incident, however, is in vs. 43. Jesus’ healing miracles always pointed to the greatness and glory of God. That was not what the disciples who had not been with Jesus on the mountain shortly before may have felt. He castigated them for their failure to help the anxious father who had brought his son to Jesus for healing. His criticism may have been due to the fact that he had so recently shared with them his power and authority. On this occasion they had not been successful in making use of it.
Jesus followed this healing with some harsh words about the difficulties of following him in what lay ahead. He knew that his betrayal was likely to occur in the not too distance future. He may not have known who would do it, but he was well aware of that those opposed to his ministry were seeking an end to his disruption of their power and authority. The disciples, of course, were still dealing with their very mixed feelings about their recognition of his presence as the Messiah and the sting of his criticisms for their failures. They had no comprehension whatever of his warning about the darkening future.
Instead, they engaged in a childish debate as to which of them was the greatest. The discussion revealed the depth of their confusion. His frustration perhaps hidden, Jesus seized the opportunity to show them what he really meant about humility. He set a child beside him as they stood around eager to hear what he might have to say next. This child, he pointed out, was the greatest in God’s sight because this child had welcomed the chance to be near him and so near to God. Whoever welcomed a child like this welcomed him.
This attitude completely contradicted the normal basis for society. Children are at the bottom of every hierarchically structured social order. Those with power, authority, honour and merit always have precedence. By placing himself beside this child, he was actually putting himself in the child’s place. In so doing he also rebuked their argument about which one of them should have precedence. He was reiterating what he had said earlier: those who chose to save their lives for their own sake would lose it, while those who sought to lose their lives for his sake would find salvation.
The final episode brings another issue to the fore. A stranger had been using Jesus’ name in casting out demons. The disciples had stopped him. But Jesus again rebuked them, adding that whoever was not against them was really helping them.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
28 - The Transfiguration
Luke 9:28-36
However else this incident may be interpreted, it clarifies two major issues Luke had been dealing with throughout his narrative: Who is this Jesus of Nazareth? What does his life, death and resurrection mean for Luke’s audience and for us today?
Some scholars see the story as a misplaced post-resurrection event. Sharon Ringe agrees that this is not likely for two reasons: 1) Unlike resurrection events, Jesus goes up the mountain with the disciples; he does not suddenly appear among them. 2) The voice from heaven is about Jesus whereas in resurrection events, Jesus commissions his disciples in some way or other.
By coming in the midst of a cloud, the voice from heaven clarified once and for all Jesus’ identity as the Chosen One and Son of God. For Jews this meant that he is the promised Messiah. He would rescue them from the disasters that they had encountered all through their history and lead them into God’s eternal kingdom. That this intensely spiritual experience happened on a mountain where Jesus was joined by Moses and Elijah was the symbol of Israel’s whole past and anticipated future to come at the end-time.
For Gentiles the story clarified that Jesus is the Son of God on whom they can depend to guide them through life. By various means of divination, Gentiles looked to their gods for guidance in living, especially in difficult times when they needed answers to critical questions. Both groups were in Luke’s audience.
There is yet another significant way to interpret this event. It tells of the continuity and also the discontinuity between Israel’s faith history with the Apostolic Church and its mission. This double and paradoxical relationship continues to this day.
The Apostle Paul regarded the early congregations that he founded as “the New Israel” fulfilling the hopes and promises of the prophets of the Old Testament. This included the Gentiles to whom he felt called to proclaim the gospel of Jesus as the Messiah and reconciler of all people to God. Regardless of their previous religious or ethnic background, everyone he welcome everyone - Jew or Greek, slave or free - into the fellowship of Jesus’ followers. In this same tradition, Luke told the Transfiguration story with a similar intent.
As the story concluded, the three disciples were both mystified by what they had experienced and wished to remain connected to what they knew. Peter proposed building three little tabernacles. On the Feast of Tabernacles Jews commemorated their ancestors’ forty year journey through the wilderness under Moses’ leadership from slavery in Egypt to the Promised Land. Peter wanted to cling to the past, as all religious conservatives want to do.
The scene ended with the disappearance of Moses and Elijah leaving Jesus alone with the disciples hearing God bid them to listen to Jesus, the Son of God. This signals that now fully revealed Jesus was about to set out for Jerusalem to die and to be raised to live forever in the Christian fellowship.
However else this incident may be interpreted, it clarifies two major issues Luke had been dealing with throughout his narrative: Who is this Jesus of Nazareth? What does his life, death and resurrection mean for Luke’s audience and for us today?
Some scholars see the story as a misplaced post-resurrection event. Sharon Ringe agrees that this is not likely for two reasons: 1) Unlike resurrection events, Jesus goes up the mountain with the disciples; he does not suddenly appear among them. 2) The voice from heaven is about Jesus whereas in resurrection events, Jesus commissions his disciples in some way or other.
By coming in the midst of a cloud, the voice from heaven clarified once and for all Jesus’ identity as the Chosen One and Son of God. For Jews this meant that he is the promised Messiah. He would rescue them from the disasters that they had encountered all through their history and lead them into God’s eternal kingdom. That this intensely spiritual experience happened on a mountain where Jesus was joined by Moses and Elijah was the symbol of Israel’s whole past and anticipated future to come at the end-time.
For Gentiles the story clarified that Jesus is the Son of God on whom they can depend to guide them through life. By various means of divination, Gentiles looked to their gods for guidance in living, especially in difficult times when they needed answers to critical questions. Both groups were in Luke’s audience.
There is yet another significant way to interpret this event. It tells of the continuity and also the discontinuity between Israel’s faith history with the Apostolic Church and its mission. This double and paradoxical relationship continues to this day.
The Apostle Paul regarded the early congregations that he founded as “the New Israel” fulfilling the hopes and promises of the prophets of the Old Testament. This included the Gentiles to whom he felt called to proclaim the gospel of Jesus as the Messiah and reconciler of all people to God. Regardless of their previous religious or ethnic background, everyone he welcome everyone - Jew or Greek, slave or free - into the fellowship of Jesus’ followers. In this same tradition, Luke told the Transfiguration story with a similar intent.
As the story concluded, the three disciples were both mystified by what they had experienced and wished to remain connected to what they knew. Peter proposed building three little tabernacles. On the Feast of Tabernacles Jews commemorated their ancestors’ forty year journey through the wilderness under Moses’ leadership from slavery in Egypt to the Promised Land. Peter wanted to cling to the past, as all religious conservatives want to do.
The scene ended with the disappearance of Moses and Elijah leaving Jesus alone with the disciples hearing God bid them to listen to Jesus, the Son of God. This signals that now fully revealed Jesus was about to set out for Jerusalem to die and to be raised to live forever in the Christian fellowship.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)