Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, February 14, 2013 Read – 1 Kings 19:19-21 We have read the story right before this one of Elijah on Mount Horeb receiving a re-commissioning to be God’s prophet. The story now turns to the call of Elisha who will be Elijah’s successor. The story is reminiscent of the story Luke has told us about the would-be followers of Jesus. As we hear this story we may begin to think of Luke’s story in a slightly different light. In Luke’s story Jesus says that one who “puts his hand to the plow and looks back is not fit for the kingdom of God” (Luke 9:62). What makes the Elisha story powerful is that Elisha does go back to bid farewell to his family – and he burns up his plow and sacrifices his oxen! There will be no going back. Elisha’s story informs Luke’s story about what true discipleship will look like.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, February 13, 2013 Read – Luke 9:51-62 As we return to Luke’s gospel we discover that Luke is now striking out mostly on his own. Mark is set aside to be picked up later. And, although we will discover that Luke will tell some episodes that he shares with Matthew, he is basically into new territory. Many readers of Luke have come to the conclusion that, just as Jesus’ question to his disciples about who they think Jesus is and Peter’s answer that Jesus is the Messiah are the hinge upon which Mark’s gospel turns, Luke’s statement that Jesus “set his face to go to Jerusalem” (Luke 9:51) is the hinge upon which Luke’s gospel turns. The passage is reminiscent of Isaiah 50:7 where Isaiah is said to “set his face like flint” knowing that he will be vindicated by God in his mission. Even more striking is the connection to the call of God to Ezekiel, “set your face toward Jerusalem and preach against the sanctuaries; prophesy against the land of Israel” (Ezekiel 21:1-2). Luke has informed his readers through the words of Simeon that Jesus will cause the rising and falling of many in Israel (Luke 2:34). The destiny of Jesus at Jerusalem will bring this to fulfillment. Beginning at this point Luke is embarking on a long “travel narrative” of a journey that Jesus is making to Jerusalem. While it might seem here at the beginning that Jesus is anxious to arrive, the journey will be slow and steady. Mark had also told the story of Jesus as a journey from Ceasarea Philippi to Jerusalem. Luke expands that concept. As have noted Luke takes three times as many chapters to describe the same journey. The journey does not appear to begin well. From Galilee to Jerusalem one would need to pass through Samaria unless one took a journey east across the Jordan River. The problem is that the Samaritans do not welcome Jesus and his entourage because they are destined for Jerusalem. Only Luke tells us of this encounter of Jesus with the Samaritans and of the suggestion of James and John that Jesus call down fire from heaven to destroy the Samaritans. Perhaps this is where Mark got his title for these two brothers – the “sons of thunder” (Mark 3:17). No fire falls and Jesus proceeds on his way. Luke now dips into his “Q” source briefly to share a story of those who would be followers of Jesus by their own volition. Matthew had told the same story but he inserted it much earlier into Mark’s itinerary on the very first day of Jesus’ ministry in Capernaum (Matthew 8:18-22). Likely the story is related here by Luke because of its connection to the call of Elisha. We will read the Elisha story tomorrow and notice the similarities then. Like the story of the rejection of by the Samaritans, this story does not lead one to think that Jesus’ journey is off to a good start. The story is reminiscent of the rejection of Jesus by the people of his hometown of Nazareth. Luke does not tell us whether or not the inquirers actually follow through on their desire to follow Jesus – but he does lift up the great cost of doing so. Luke has marked the destiny of Jesus to be one of struggle. We will need to follow him along the way.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, February 12, 2013 Read – 1 Kings 19:1-18 Today, we turn to the other character who met with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration – Elijah. Elijah has played a prominent role in Luke’s gospel up to this point. It is only Luke who reminds his readers of Elijah who was sent to the widow of Zarephath (Luke 4:26). It is only Luke who tells the story of the raising of the widow of Nain’s son which is a story reminiscent of the story of Elijah raising the widow of Zarephath’s son to life (Luke 7:11). Perhaps the best known story of Elijah is his battle with the priests of Baal on Mount Carmel. Our story today comes right after that more famous story. We might expect the Elijah would have been riding high after the great conquest of the priests of Baal when God sent fire to burn up not only the offering but the whole altar Elijah had constructed. But what we hear in the story is Elijah fleeing from Jezebel – the Baal worshiper who was insulted with Elijah. It is significant that Elijah flees into the wilderness back to Mount Sinai (called Mount Horeb in this story but it is the same mountain). On the mountain Elijah is confronted by God. And in the confrontation Elijah is commissioned once again to serve as God’s prophet. Elijah gets his instruction from God and is sent down the mountain to confront Ahab once again and to anoint his successor, Elisha. The story of Elijah on Mount Horeb receiving instruction from God through the still small voice shapes and informs the story of Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration receiving instruction from God through Moses and Elijah about his “exodus” to be accomplished at Jerusalem. All of these stories inform one another and it is good for us to hear them together.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, February 11, 2013 Read – Exodus 19:16-25 & Exodus 24:9-18 We have just looked at the Transfiguration story and the appearance of Moses and Elijah. We’re going to take a couple of days to step away from Luke and think more about the Transfiguration story and what it might mean. The presence of Moses in the Transfiguration story is meant to draw our attention back to the experience of Moses on Mount Sinai and the giving of the law. The two stories from Exodus tell us both of the majesty of God on the mountain and even the dangerous possibility of coming into contact with God on that mountain and the role of mediator that Moses was given by God. One way of looking at the whole experience of Moses and the giving of the 10 commandments is to see that experience as God giving direction to his people about living. In Hebrew the word we translate as “Law” is the word “Torah” which is much broader than just legal material. To give the Torah was really to give instruction for the whole way of life. It was really instruction about how to live as God’s people. What Moses received on Mount Sinai was God’s instruction – God’s gracious word that leads to life. On the Mount of Transfiguration Jesus receives instruction too – and it is apparent that Luke wants his readers to know that the instruction Jesus received was instruction that would lead to Jesus’ death – and through his death, ultimately to life. So, maybe in Luke’s thinking the Transfiguration was as much for Jesus as for anyone else. Jesus received instruction.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, February 10, 2013 Read – Luke 9:28-50 Yesterday, we made the observation that Luke has seriously edited Mark’s story. As we begin reading today we might think that, that was an exaggeration. Luke seems to be essentially following Mark once again. But as we crack open the stories we will notice some significant differences. The first story is the story of the Transfiguration of Jesus. This is a very complex story and one that is difficult for us to comprehend. We wonder exactly what happened. The word that is translated “transfiguration” is the Greek word “metamorphosis” which means to “change forms.” Did Jesus change forms – or did he just appear to be glistening white? All of those questions are difficult for our modern minds to comprehend because we are so concrete in our thinking – we think only factual things are true. I don’t think the people of Jesus’ day would have had as much trouble with the story as we do. They probably weren’t so concerned about “the facts” as we are. We wonder how they would have recognized Elijah and Moses and even whether Elijah and Moses were real people in the scene – or were they ghost-images or something like that. Of course our preoccupation with those sorts of things takes us away from the reality that Elijah and Moses are really important to the story and to the ministry of Jesus. We need to learn to live with more mystery! While the story is essentially the same, Luke has changed a few things and added his own touches to the story. Luke has actually expanded the story. He comments that Jesus went up on the mountain to pray. That ought to tip us off that something is coming. It is through prayer that Jesus received his direction from God – the Spirit works through prayer. Luke also tells us something of the content of the words that Elijah and Moses bring to Jesus – they tell Jesus of the “departure” that he is about to accomplish at Jerusalem. In Greek the word “departure” is actually the word “exodus” which leaps off the page with meaning – the whole Exodus tradition of the OT comes into view – God freeing his people from bondage – Jesus freeing the captives! Luke also tells us that the disciples were weighed down with sleep which draws us immediately to the Garden of Gethsemane later in the story where they will also be weighed down with sleep as Jesus struggles with the “exodus” he is about to accomplish at Jerusalem. Luke has connected these two stories in a way no other gospel writer did. And finally, Mark will have a whole scene in which Jesus and the disciples discuss the coming of Elijah and its meaning that Luke will simply drop out of the story. Again John the Baptist is avoided. And while Mark will tell us that Jesus commanded his disciples to be silent about what has happened until after Jesus has been raised from the dead – something the disciples are clueless about – Luke simply says the disciples kept silent about all these things – for Luke it appears that keeping silent was their choice – maybe they just didn’t know how to talk about what happened. Having skipped the part about Jesus and his disciples coming back down the mountain and discussing the role of Elijah, Luke tells the same story that Mark told about the epileptic boy and his father though in a shortened form. Surprisingly, since prayer is such an important thing in Luke’s story, it seems strange that Luke omits Mark’s comments by Jesus that the disciples were unsuccessful in casting out the epileptic demon because that kind only comes out through prayer. Or was it that prayer has a different function for Luke and he did not want to confuse it here? Or, maybe Luke is once again protecting the disciples from the ridicule that Mark seems to lay upon them. Mark is hard on the disciples – Luke is sympathetic and positive about them. Following Mark, Luke provides a shortened version of Jesus predicting his impending betrayal leaving off the prediction of death this time, but also retaining Mark’s observation that the disciples did not understand what Jesus was saying. While the disciples come off much more positively in Luke they are not without the need to grow. Luke also retains Mark’s story about the disciples arguing about who is the greatest and Jesus taking a little child as his example of true greatness. Luke would have liked the reference to the little child since children were of little value in that time – they were little more than “outcasts” and Luke’s gospel leans toward such as these. Finally Luke retains Mark’s story about the exorcist who casts out demons in Jesus name even though he is not part of the “in-group” of Jesus’ followers. In all of these stories, Luke maintains Mark’s order but he shortens each story and takes the edge off of Mark’s harshness.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, February 9, 2013 Read – Luke 9:1-27 As we begin reading chapter 9 of Luke’s gospel we need to notice that while Luke is essentially following Mark, he has done some serious editing to his source. What takes Mark almost three chapters to relate, Luke tells in about one-half of a chapter. Luke begins by following Mark’s story of Jesus sending his disciples on a mission. Just as in Mark that mission is interrupted by the announcement of the death of John the Baptist. But, what takes Mark 16 verses, Luke tells in three! In fact, Luke does not tell the gruesome story of the beheading of John (Mark 6:14-29) but simply has Herod announce that he had John beheaded. Luke retains the questioning about just who Jesus might be – John the Baptist raised from the dead, or Elijah, or perhaps one of the prophets of old – but where in Mark, Herod thinks Jesus is John the Baptist raised from the dead (Mark 6:16), in Luke, Herod comes to the opposite conclusion – he knows Jesus is not John the Baptist since he had beheaded him and Herod seeks to see Jesus (Luke 9:9)! We need to recall that Luke had already removed John the Baptist from the scene way back in chapter 3 just before the baptism of Jesus. Luke is no longer interested in John. For Luke, a firmer line of demarcation is drawn between John and Jesus than in any other gospel – though all of them will deal with the relationship between these two. John also deals more fully with the relationship between John the Baptist and Jesus in his gospel than Mark or Matthew do. Perhaps this reflects an ongoing tension between John the Baptist’s disciples and Jesus’ disciples in the years following the death and resurrection of Jesus. There are hints that John the Baptist retained a following even after Jesus comes to the forefront. Luke’s omission of the material he found in Mark regarding John the Baptist may reflect his attempt to deal with that tension. Following Mark, Luke now relates the story of the feeding of the 5000 with little change. And then Luke begins his serious editing of Mark. Omitted by Luke are the story of Jesus walking on the water, the healing of the sick at Gennesaret, Jesus’ long discussion regarding the “tradition of the elders,” the story of the Syrophoenician woman and her daughter, the story of Jesus healing a deaf man, the feeding of the 4000, the Pharisee’s demand for a sign, the discussion of the yeast of the Pharisees and Herod and Jesus’ scolding of his followers for lack of faith, and finally the story of the blind man who needs to be healed twice in order to receive his sight. None of those stories are to be found anywhere in Luke! One can’t help but wonder why Luke has done this. The truth is that we will likely never be able to give a definitive answer. A few remarks about particular stories may help explain a bit – the stories of the deaf man being healed and especially of the blind man needing to be healed twice may have been offensive to Luke. Both of those stories fit together and seem patterned after each other and may be seen to not put Jesus in as favorable light as one would like. Perhaps Luke thought the story of the feeding of the 4000 was redundant since he had just told the story of the feeding of the 5000. Perhaps Luke did not particularly like Jesus’ controversy with the religious leaders over the “tradition of the elders” since Luke has depicted people like Zechariah and Elizabeth, Simeon and Anna, and others as faithful followers of OT tradition. Perhaps Luke does not share Mark’s negative opinion of the disciples and chose not to tell of their scolding. But the story of the Syrophoenician woman and her daughter would have worked so well for Luke – why did he leave it out? We’ll never know. Immediately following the feeding of the 5000 Luke moves to the scene where Jesus questions his disciples about his identity. This was a major part of Mark’s gospel – some have called it the hinge upon which Mark’s gospel swings. While the story may have importance for Luke it is far less crucial. We may remember that Mark created a block of material beginning with the double healing of the blind man (Mark 8:22-26) and concluding with the healing of blind Bartimaeus (Mark 10:46-55). In between Mark explores the identity of Jesus and Jesus’ attempt to reveal to his disciples that it is the suffering and death of Jesus that finally define who he is. Three times Jesus tells his disciples that he must suffer and die and three times they misunderstand. Mark’s argument is one of the most tightly and skillfully woven arguments in the Bible. Luke tears Mark’s tightly woven masterpiece apart and makes it nearly unrecognizable. We’ll need to think about that more as we move forward – because just as Luke has omitted much from Mark, he has also now added considerable material to Mark’s outline. Mark’s argument is told in three chapters. Luke will take almost nine chapters to get from Jesus’ first question about his identity (Luke 9:18-20) to the story of blind Bartimaeus (Luke 18:35-43)! Luke has totally recast Mark at this point. In Luke, when Jesus asks who people think he is, like Mark, Luke provides the same “wrong” answers – John the Baptist, Elijah, or one of the prophets. In Luke, when Jesus asks who the disciples think he is, like in Mark, Peter responds with the correct answer – Jesus is the Messiah. But now everything changes. When Jesus goes on to explain to his disciples what it means for him to be the Messiah – that he will undergo great suffering, be rejected, killed, and on the third day rise – we expect Peter to protest and Jesus to rebuke Peter. But that is not in Luke’s story!! There is no protest of Peter to be found – no rebuke – what was so crucial for Mark is simply absent from Luke! Why did Luke do that? Perhaps Luke does not see the disciples in the same way Mark did – Mark saw them as unknowing, bumbling failures, Luke sees them as the faithful representative of Israel who receive the Messiah! Luke preserves Mark’s description of what it means to be a follower of Jesus – to take up one’s cross daily, to lose one’s life to find it – and it appears that Luke thinks followers of Jesus are both capable of and will do this! Of course he retains the possibility that there are those who will be ashamed of the Son of Man too but the edge has been shaved off from Mark’s harsh rhetoric at this point in the story. Perhaps what we need to recognize when we are reading Luke is the obvious – we are reading a very different story than we were with Mark! We have lots to ponder today! Should we be troubled to discover these differences? What does closely reading the story do to our understanding of just what the Bible is and how we should hear it? Does the reality that Luke and Mark tell the same old story in remarkably different and sometimes contradictory ways excite us? Does it frighten us? Perhaps this story of Jesus and the Bible is far more fantastic than we might think. One thing for sure, we are going to need from here on to be careful to not let our understanding of Mark over-ride what we hear from Luke. We will need to resist saying – “but Mark said…” Luke is not Mark! Luke will stand on his own and he will proclaim to us a powerful gospel just like Mark did! We will need to let Luke speak on his own if we are to hear that powerful gospel.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, February 8, 2013 Read – Luke 8:40-56 Luke continues to follow Mark with little modification as he relates the twin story of the healing of the woman with the hemorrhage and the raising from the dead the little twelve year old girl. The significance of the number twelve is important to the story. Twelve is the number of the tribes of Israel and also the number of the Apostles. Jesus may well have chosen Twelve to match the earlier choice of twelve tribes. Actually there may have been little choosing in the twelve tribes since they are the sons of Jacob. What if he had only had ten sons or what if he had thirteen? We can only guess what difference that might have made. And such speculation is really of little value. Both these stories fit Luke’s emphasis on women and on the helpless. They are the very people Jesus came to help according to Luke. It is at this point in the story that Mark tells of the rejection of Jesus at Nazareth by his own kinfolks. Luke has already told us that story – moving it forward to be the keynote of his story of the ministry of Jesus – so Luke does not tell it again. Noting its absence here helps us to retrace how Luke used his sources and reminds us how Luke went about his work. Luke is indeed a wonderful writer – creative in his way of retaining as much of Mark as possible and necessary, moving things around to help him proclaim his gospel, and omitting what is not helpful or necessary.

Weekly Announcements Feb 10 2013

Click Here

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, February 7, 2013 Read – Luke 8:1-39 Luke begins with a summary story that wraps together the four episodes that have preceded the story he now tells. Verses 1-3 are unique to Luke. At the end of his gospel Mark will tell us that there actually were women who followed Jesus from Galilee – but they play no role in Mark’s story (Mark 15:40-41). That episode of Mark may have been brought forward here by Luke but at least its placement so early in the gospel is unique. The Twelve are joined by a cadre of women – Mary Magdalene who will be the first witness of the resurrection – especially in John’s telling of the story (John 20:1-18) – and Joanna, the wife of Herod’s steward, and Susanna are named. Others are mentioned. It is significant that Luke includes these women at this point – the “Sermon on the Plain” demands it. Outsiders are made insiders. Just as easily as Luke had laid aside Mark’s narrative, he now picks it up again. As we may recall, Mark had just told about the calling of the Twelve. In Mark’s sequence Mark now goes on to discuss the deadly conflict between Jesus and the religious leaders – they think that Jesus is controlled by Satan. And in the process of discussing these religious leaders and their blasphemy which will lead to un-forgiveness – Mark brings Jesus’ own family into the conflict. According to Mark, Jesus’ own family think he is crazy and they come to take Jesus home (Mark 3:21). Apparently this was just too much for Luke – he omits this part of Mark and moves the story about the religious leaders and the unforgivable sin to a place much later in his gospel and much safer for Jesus’ family. Perhaps it was this very episode in Mark that motivated Luke to move to his other main source of “Q” – if you are going to interrupt the sequence what better place than a place like this? Luke also moves the story of Jesus defining his true family to a later and safer point in his story (Luke 8:19-21). It is only after having removed these parts of Mark that Luke picks up Mark’s story again with the parable of the sower. Incidentally, we should notice that Matthew also simply removes this controversial story of Jesus’ family thinking he is crazy from his gospel. So, Luke has company in being uncomfortable with Mark’s strange story – so does the whole church after Mark – there have been countless attempts to try make Mark say something else than he really says. None are successful – we are much better off just letting Mark speak! Parables played a significant role in Mark’s gospel – they were like riddles that hid more than they revealed. While Luke keeps the semblance of that usage of Mark at this point in his story, we will discover that Luke uses parables in a much different way. Later in the story we will meet the wonderful and clear parables of the Good Samaritan, the coin, the lost sheep, and the Waiting Father. All of those parables are unlike anything we hear in Mark! But for now Luke is content to relay Mark’s parable of the sower along with Mark’s purpose for it and its explanation. But Luke has significantly shortened all of it taking much of the punch out of Mark’s usage. Luke dutifully tells the parable of the lamp under a jar without changing Mark. Then, Luke drops out one of Mark’s other seed parables (Mark 4:26-29) and moves another to a later point in the story (Mark 4:30-32 = Luke 13:18-19). Luke also omits Mark’s closing comments about the parables (Mark 4:33-34) and tucks the story of Jesus true family into the sequence at the end. In the process of what he has done Luke has significantly and successfully modified Mark’s story to fit his own understanding of parables. What Mark had to share was important enough to include – but not in the same way. Following Mark and with very little modification, Luke relates the story of Jesus and his disciples crossing the sea in a boat. Jesus is asleep and a storm rises which causes frightened fishermen to wake Jesus. Did they wake him because they thought he might help them? Not necessarily – they are surprised when Jesus stills the storm. This story has functioned well for Mark to invite the question of just who Jesus is. That question is not lurking in Luke’s gospel story – we know that he is the expected Messiah longed for by Isaiah. The identity of Jesus is not in question in Luke as it is in Mark. Thus the story has less importance for Luke – but it is a story worth keeping. On the other side of the sea Jesus heals a demoniac. This story likely was more interesting for Luke since the place is obviously gentile territory and outsiders are at the forefront of the story. Luke simply takes Mark’s story over with little modification. It is one more piece of evidence about Jesus’ care for the poor and the outcast.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, February 6, 2013 Read – Luke 7:1-50 Following the “Sermon on the Plain”, Luke relates five episodes, three that are unique to Luke and two that he shares with Matthew. Mark knows none of these stories. All of them have a common theme – they highlight ministry to outsiders and the underprivileged – the very people lifted up in the sermon. In a way they are exhibits of Jesus following the very ethic he calls for in the sermon. The first episode is of a centurion who has a slave who is sick to the point of death. This is one of the stories Luke shares with Matthew (Matthew 8:5-13) – and perhaps with John who tells a story that is at least reminiscent of this story of a royal official from Capernaum who begs of Jesus to heal his sick child (John 4:46-54). The point is that the centurion is an outsider – a gentile and most likely a Roman. He would have been the enemy. Yet, in this case he has befriended the Jewish people – even built their synagogue so perhaps his is an exception to the rule. At any rate Jesus loves this enemy and ends up praising his great faith – a faith greater than is to be found in all of Israel. The story highlights the authority of Jesus. The second episode is one that only Luke tells. It is a story of a woman, a widow, who has been deprived her only source of support. Her son who would have been responsible to provide for her has died. She is indeed now numbered among the poor. The funeral procession to the graveside has begun and Jesus interrupts the proceeding to raise the son back to life and give her to his mother. The story would have been shocking in that culture mostly because Jesus came and touched the coffin thus contaminating himself. Jesus would have become ritually unclean. Jesus does not let religious convention come in the way of helping those in need. Again the content of the sermon dictates action and Jesus acts – and apparently so are his followers to do. This story is also important because it links back to two previous stories in the OT – one of Elijah raising the widow of Zarephath’s son (1 Kings 17:17-24) and the other is of Elisha raising the Shunammite woman’s son (2 Kings 4:8-37). In both cases the significant words are that the healer took the child and “gave him to his mother” just as Jesus “gave the man he raised at Nain to his mother.” Luke’s story is meant to connect us to the previous stories about Elijah and Elisha. And once again it is the poor who are helped by Jesus. This story also connects back to the very first story of Jesus’ ministry told by Luke at Nazareth where again Elijah and Elisha are lifted up of examples of the ministry of OT prophets to “outsiders” and the rejection by “insiders” (Luke 4:25-27). The third episode is one that Luke again shares with Matthew (Matthew 11:2-9). The story revolves around an important and agonizing question raised by John, the Baptist, who sends his followers to ask Jesus whether Jesus is the “one to come” – the Messiah – or if they should look for another. Why did John pose the question? Of course we are unable to answer that question for certain but Jesus’ answer does give him a chance to both support the ethic of the sermon and also to highlight once again the connection between the messianic hope expressed by Isaiah and elsewhere in the OT and the actions of Jesus. “Go and tell John what you see!” The sermon had been about hearing and doing – seeing and doing makes the same point. Jesus does what the Messiah envisioned by Isaiah and the OT was to do – the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised and the poor have good news proclaimed to them. This story also links back to the very first thing that Luke reported as he began to tell of the ministry of Jesus – Luke 4:18! The fourth episode – the last one we will look at today is unique to Luke – and more than most it highlights the contrast between insiders and outsiders. Jesus visits the home of a Pharisee for a meal. Incidentally, Luke does not picture all Pharisees in a negative light as Mark does. This Pharisee at least has the potential of being a friend – he does invite Jesus to a meal. At the meal a woman comes and begins to anoint Jesus’ feet with her tears. Simon, the Pharisee, sees the woman as the outsider she is and thinks to himself that if Jesus really was of God he would recognize that she was an outsider and thus unfit. Of course Jesus does recognize her as an outsider – but it is precisely to people like her that Jesus has come. The ethic of the “Sermon on the Plain” sees her as the one who is blessed. In a skillful exchange Jesus convicts Simon of his own error – though we are never told whether or not the experience made a lasting impression on Simon – it is the one who has been forgiven much that loves much. I mentioned that this story is unique to Luke; however, it does have another story that may well be connected to it – the story of the woman at the end of Mark’s story who anointed Jesus for his burial (Mark 14:3-9 = Matthew 26:6-13). There are significant differences between the two stories; however, it is also telling that Luke omits that story from Mark’s sequence which he is following at the time. It may well be that Luke took that story and significantly modified it to mold it into this story, once again moving material in Mark to an earlier time within Luke’s story. There is one further connection of a story of a woman anointing Jesus which connects to these stories. That story is found in John where Mary, the sister of Lazarus, anoints Jesus feet with pure nard and wipes them with her hair (John 12:1-8). There are enough similarities to suppose that one common story stands behind all of these versions.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, February 5, 2013 Read –Luke 6:17-49 Without missing a beat Luke switches sources on us! After his brilliant introduction in the first two chapters of his gospel – material that Luke shares with none of the other gospel writers and material that clearly exhibits his writing genius – Luke has essentially been following Mark’s story in Mark’s order. We have noted a few modifications that Luke made but the backbone of the story is essentially Mark’s. Now we hear words that we will not find anywhere in Mark’s gospel. However, they are words that are quite familiar to us. We know them best as the “Sermon on the Mount” from Matthew’s gospel. To be sure Luke’s version is considerably shorter and some parts of the “Sermon on the Mount” will show up elsewhere in Luke, but the main framework of the story Luke tells is very much like the sermon Matthew relates in gospel. Readers of the Bible have long asked what this means – how is it that Luke and Matthew sound so much alike? What does it mean to discover that Mark does not include any of this material? Most readers have come to the conclusion that Luke and Matthew share a common source that Mark either chose not to use or more likely was not aware of. I have written about that earlier. For convenience sake this source Luke and Matthew share has been called “Q” by scholars after the first letter of the German word for “Source.” I think this makes a great deal of sense. Luke has told us that he used sources to write his gospel (Luke 1:1-4), so we should not be troubled to discover exactly that and we should also not be troubled to suppose that Matthew also used sources though he does not tell us that he did. Luke’s introduction (Luke 1:1-4) unveils a great deal of insight into how our gospels likely came into being – they are the work of brilliant people who gathered material together to proclaim the gospel of Jesus! It’s my judgment that Mark was the first to write a gospel – but even Mark wrote his gospel from sources of material available to him – Mark is the creator of his own storyline and thus the storyline that we have come to view as the story of Jesus. Actually, John also created a storyline and it is significantly different from Mark’s! Both created the “story” we have come to view as “what really happened” to Jesus although it is highly likely that neither Mark nor John has the order exactly as it was! We simply don’t know the exact chronological order of things! And it doesn’t matter! So, Luke has picked up another of his sources, leaving Mark behind for the time being. As mentioned it is likely that Luke and Matthew share this source although such a source has never been found. Since we have Mark it is much easier to compare Mark and Luke, or Mark and Matthew for that matter since it is apparent that Matthew also used Mark. The first thing that we should notice is that while it seems apparent the Luke and Matthew are using the same source, they are much freer in their use of it. Both Luke and Matthew follow Mark much more fully and carefully than either seems to follow “Q” – the source they share apart from Mark. That may well be true because the “Q” source appears to be a collection of the sayings of Jesus and not a narrative. At any rate both Matthew and Luke seem to glean more freely from “Q” than from Mark. The setting of Matthew’s “Sermon on the Mount” is a mountain. Luke places the setting on a plain which has led many to refer to this section of Luke’s gospel as the “Sermon on the Plain.” The hearers at the beginning of Matthew’s sermon are the disciples. For Luke the hearers come from far and wide. Does this mean that Jesus gave the same sermon twice? Perhaps, however it may well be good to think of it in this way – neither the “Sermon on the Mount” nor the “Sermon on the Plain” is a verbatim recollection of an actual sermon but the combining of teaching that Jesus likely did in a variety of settings and repeatedly. So, Luke’s sermon and Matthew’s sermon are better seen as Luke’s and Matthew’s creation than Jesus’ – not that Jesus didn’t say the words but likely that Jesus did not say them necessarily in the order of either sermon. What this leads us to do is to think about what Luke is trying to say through the way he collects Jesus’ teachings and what Matthew is trying to say through the way he collects those same words. The overall message of the “Sermon on the Mount” and the “Sermon on the Plain” is quite similar – that’s why we recognize that they have the same source! However, Luke is much more concerned with the poor and the outcasts than Matthew is – for Matthew it is the “poor in spirit” who are blessed, for Luke it is those who are actually “poor.” Luke is much more confrontational in speaking to the actual economic circumstance of his world, and ours, than Matthew is! Depending on whether we are well off or not, we might like Matthew better than Luke! Both Matthew and Luke – and more importantly Jesus who actually first spoke the words – are attempting to create a new community of followers of Jesus with a new ethical code of behavior. Both Matthew and Luke, and Jesus before them, expect the followers of Jesus to hear and to do what Jesus calls for in this sermon! As we read these sermons we are likely struck by the impossibility of actually becoming the kind of community imagined in the sermon. Matthew is far more blunt in highlighting that impossibility – he raises the stakes to and extremely high level – and most of us end up simply saying that we can’t live like that. But Luke also raises a high standard – a standard that is really confrontational to people like us who live in a country as prosperous as ours. We are tempted to not take either Matthew or Luke literally – we actually like the way Matthew has “spiritualized” things in his use of the phrase “poor in spirit” rather than just poor! We are tempted to think that Jesus certainly could not have meant to interpret social justice in the way that is proclaimed in either sermon. We need to ask what would happen if we really did take Jesus seriously in our reading of these sermons. Actually, several people have taken Jesus seriously and attempted to implement the teachings of the “Sermon on the Mount” and the “Sermon on the Plain”. Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. developed their movements on the basis of the teachings of Jesus found in these parts of the Bible. Gandhi never professed to be a Christian, in fact he was said to say that he might have become a Christian if Christians had lived more like Jesus called them to live. Martin Luther King proclaimed a powerful gospel message that resonated with many and made a lasting and significant mark on the culture of our country. I think we would do well to take Jesus seriously and let the words of the “Sermon on the Mount” and the “Sermon on the Plain” inform and shape our political and social values and thinking. The themes that come together for Luke in the “Sermon on the Plain” will carry forward into the rest of his gospel – a gospel that advocates for the poor and the outcasts of every society.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, February 4, 2013 Read – Luke 5:12-6:16 For the next several stories Luke essentially follows the story that Mark has already told us. Luke changes very little of Mark’s story at least until he reaches the conclusion of these stories and speaks of the call of the Twelve. We may recall that Mark most likely selected these stories and gathered them together because they introduce the great and deadly conflict that Jesus experienced with the religious leaders. Touching and healing lepers, declaring the forgiveness of sins, calling a tax-collector to be a disciple and then eating with tax collectors and sinners, failing to observe proper fasting, and controversy about the Sabbath served Mark well to introduce that conflict and they serve Luke in the same way, although Luke has other motives for telling his story. We do not need to spend much time on these stories. Luke does add one touch to the story of the appointing of the Twelve. Mark had already told us that Jesus went up on a mountain and there selected the Twelve. Luke adds that it was only after Jesus had spent a night in prayer that he made the selection. Prayer is an important motif in Luke’s gospel! For Luke almost everything Jesus does is directed by the Holy Spirit and conveyed through prayer. We may recall that it was while Jesus was praying after he had come up out of the waters of baptism that the Spirit descended upon Jesus in the form of a dove. Luke’s list of the Twelve is very similar to Mark’s list with one exception. Luke mentions a second Judas, the son of James, in place of Thaddaeus. Why this difference no one knows – perhaps they are the same person who went by two names – perhaps Luke had two lists to choose between. The order is slightly different as well with Luke placing Peter and Andrew together since they were brothers. Luke also drops out some of Mark’s editorial comment about the disciples though both significantly include the comment about Judas Iscariot as the one who will betray Jesus. We should not be bothered much by these minor differences – Matthew’s list is slightly different from either Luke or Mark and John names others as Apostles who are not included by Mark, Luke, or Matthew. Quibbling about the names on the list can take us away from the main point which is that Jesus selected Twelve – symbolic of the Twelve tribes of Israel – which is the main point in all of it.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, February 3, 2013 Read – Luke 5:1-11 Careful readers of Luke’s gospel may have noticed that so far in Luke’s story Jesus has not called any followers. In Mark’s story, which Luke was using as his guide, the very first thing Jesus did was to call four disciples – Peter, Andrew, James and John (Mark 1:16-20). The story in Mark is remarkable because these four follow Jesus immediately even though Jesus has not done anything that would warrant becoming his disciple. Mark has done that partly to convey the message that Jesus is in control – people do not choose to become followers of Jesus, Jesus chooses them! We can’t help asking why Luke chose to tell the story in a different way. Why did he omit Mark’s wonderful story of the calling of Peter, Andrew, James and John? That story is never told in Luke’s gospel! Could it be that Luke was embarrassed that Jesus would have called disciples before he had done anything? Does the story sound so unrealistic that Luke abandons it? Likely this is not the reason for Luke’s omission. More likely is the fact that Luke had at his disposal another tidbit of tradition about a great catch of fish. Such a story shows up in the ending of John’s gospel, after the resurrection when Jesus meets his disciples again at the Sea of Galilee – disciples who have gone back to fishing in John’s story (John 21:1-14). Perhaps Matthew also knew a story of a great catch of fish although his parable is much shorter and has most of the images missing (Matthew 13:47-50). We need to remember that Luke has told us of others who have “handed on to us from the beginning the reports of eyewitnesses” (Luke 1:2). Perhaps Mark did not have this story at his disposal or maybe he chose to leave it out of his gospel. But this story is far too rich for Luke to leave behind – so he uses it in place of Mark’s briefer account. We can be thankful that Luke “saved” it and made it a part of his gospel. And the story has profound meaning and connection to the call of OT people to boot. This is not just a great story – it is a story that lifts the call of disciples to a new height. We need to recall the story of the call of Isaiah. In Isaiah 6 we hear the story of Isaiah entering the Temple and being greeted by the cherubim who sing of the Holy God. Isaiah is overwhelmed by the experience and cries out, “Woe is me! I am lost, for I am a man of unclean lips; yet my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts!” (Isaiah 6:5). Here Peter encounters Jesus in the great catch of fish and he has a similar reaction – “Go away from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man!” (Luke 5:8). The connection between Peter and Isaiah is too great to miss! In his own subtle way Luke has connected the first follower of Jesus with his favorite OT prophet! The results of the story are as amazing as they were in Mark – perhaps even more amazing. As readers we are left to imagine a boatload of “stinking fish” left to rot in the boats at the sea shore by fishermen who “left everything and followed him!” (Luke 5:11). And, by the way, James and John, the sons of Zebedee are part of the story just as they were in Mark – only Andrew is missing. We will notices as Luke’s gospel continues that, like Mark, these three – Peter, James, and John – will form an inner circle of the Twelve – perhaps that inner circle is already established in this tidbit of tradition that Peter uses. The call of these first disciples has interrupted Luke’s use of Mark’s story. Luke is ready now to return to Mark and continue the flow of that story.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, February 2, 2013 Read – Luke 4:31-44 When we last heard from Luke, Jesus had just escaped from his hometown of Nazareth where he was rejected by the religious people in the synagogue. In clear terms Luke has announced to his readers that Jesus is the Messiah Isaiah and the rest of the OT people had hoped for – “Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing!” (Luke 4:21). In a seamless construction, Luke now picks up his major source, Mark, and continues. As we noticed earlier, Luke had reached forward into Mark (Mark 6:1-6) to use the story of Jesus’ visit to and rejection by the people of his hometown. Now Luke tells us that Jesus journeyed to Capernaum. Capernaum had been the first village that Mark tells us Jesus visited to begin his ministry after he had called four disciples (Mark 1:21ff). Mark’s story is of a wonderful and amazing day in Capernaum. Actually, as we have noticed, Luke does not hide the fact that he is using and following Mark since the people of Nazareth ask Jesus to do the amazing things in Nazareth that he had done in Capernaum (Luke 4:23). The only problem is that in Luke Jesus has not yet been to Capernaum. That is of little concern to Luke. In our reading today, Luke basically follows Mark’s story of that first day in the ministry of Jesus at Capernaum – shortening Mark’s version a bit and modifying the “hunt for Jesus” the next morning by saying that it was the crowd who came looking for him rather that his disciples because in Luke there are no disciples yet. That leads us to tomorrow’s reading.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, February 1, 2013 Read – Isaiah 65 We conclude our look at the Isaiah’s prophecy of the coming Messianic Age today by reading Isaiah 65. This is a chapter that combines both words of hope and words of judgment. The chapter rises to the heights and plunges to the depths. The gospel of Luke has some of that same character to it. What a mystery it is that God’s own people often reject God! In the beginning of his gospel John wrote of Jesus, “He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become the children of God” (John 1:11-12). Luke tells his story in such a way that John’s words are illustrated by it. Luke has gone to great ends to tell us of faithful people who were looking for the coming of God – people like Zechariah and Elizabeth, Simeon and Anna, even Mary and Joseph. Luke will continue to tell us of people like that – Joseph of Arimathea who provided Jesus with a proper burial to name one. Luke’s claim is that there were those in Israel who received the Messiah! It is important for us to remember that since we are likely to just lump all those “bad Jewish people” into one lump. However, Luke also must tell us a story of the rejection of the Messiah by others. Back to Isaiah’s vision in chapter 65, we notice that Isaiah too spoke of “outsiders” who “found God” even though they were not looking for him and “insiders” to whom God had been reaching out all day long who refuse to receive him. This is Luke’s story – the “visitation of God” to his people, some of whom reject God’s visit and others who welcome it. Having listened to Isaiah we are ready to return to Luke and follow his story.