Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, February 28, 2013 Read - Lamentations 4 Devastation is not something to be taken lightly. While the author of Lamentations has provided a breath of fresh hope – he is not finished crying and grieving the destruction of the city he loved so much. Once more we are invited to let the words of Lamentation wash over us and lead us back to the city of Jerusalem, the destiny of Jesus. We will soon be ready to return for the rest of Luke’s story.

Weekly Announcements Mar 3 2013

CLICK HERE

March 2013 Echoes Newsletter

CLICK HERE

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, February 27, 2013 Read - Lamentations 3 Yesterday, we left hanging the question of whether there is any hope. Today, in the very center of this painful and passionate book we hear the author’s words of hope. We noticed that the third and central chapter is unique – each letter is used three times in successive verses. And near the very center we find these words, “The steadfast love of the LORD never ceases, his mercies never come to an end; they are new every morning; great is your faithfulness” (Lamentations 3:22-23). What powerful words from the mouth of someone who knew firsthand the devastation of Jerusalem’s fall! Luke’s story of Jesus has its pain too – yet the same faithful God is there to welcome his repentant people. Luke story is not a tragedy – it is a story of the victory of God. Incidentally, many of us will recognize a favorite hymn from the verses we read today – “Great Is Thy Faithfulness.” That hymn is filled with hope – and to think the author likely got his inspiration for the book of Lamentations.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, February 26, 2013 Read - Lamentations 2 As we listen to the book of Lamentations there appear to be some questions that lurk behind the passionate words of the author. Why did this happen? How bad was it? Is there any hope? The author answers his own questions. This happened because the people of God did not follow God’s way – we are to blame for our own destruction. It was very, very bad – even to the point of mother’s who eat their own children. Is there any hope? – that remains to be seen. Once again we are invited to let these words wash over us as we contemplate the story that Luke has been telling us – a story of the “visitation of God” to his people. As we let words wash over us we can experience even more deeply that compassion of Jesus as he lamented his arrival in Jerusalem.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, February 25, 2013 Read - Lamentations 1 We are going to leave Luke’s gospel for a few days to listen to the lament of God’s people as they experienced the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple at the hands of the Babylonians. That event happened in about 586 BC – six hundred years before the ministry of Jesus. It was not the only time Jerusalem and the Temple was destroyed – we would do well to listen to the story of Antiochus Ephiphanes and the desecration of the Temple in 168BC – an event that is told in the book of 1 Maccabees and Josephus. We would also do well to read Josephus’ account of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD by the Romans. Each of these stories helps us to feel the pain of rejection as Jerusalem is destroyed. Our OT provides us with a little known account of the first destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC so we’re going to listen to the five chapters of the book of Lamentations. Even the structure of the book of Lamentations speaks volumes. There are twenty-two verses in each chapter and each verse begins with a letter of the Hebrew alphabet in ascending order – from “A” to “Z”. We cannot get that effect in our English translation but knowing about it is helpful. The central, third chapter contains sixty-six verses with the same letter used three times in succession to add emphasis. Someone went to a great deal of trouble to create this book. And the theme is consistent – the destruction of Jerusalem is deeply lamented. There is not much more to say than to invite each one of us to slowly read and listen and let the impact of the words wash over us. And, then to think about the same destruction that was the destiny of Jerusalem following the death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. It is no wonder Jesus lamented over Jerusalem. He was in good company.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, February 24, 2013 Read - Luke 13:1-35 In our reading for today Luke is mostly striking out on his own – most of Luke 13 is material unique to Luke. Only Luke tells us the stories about the Galileans slaughtered by Pilate and of the tragic death of those upon whom the tower of Siloam fell. Of course, we have no “outside” sources to verify either story though it is likely that both reflect actual events. The picture of Pilate portrayed here matches the picture that Josephus, a Jewish writer of about the same time as Luke and Matthew, paints of him. Josephus does not tell this story but there are plenty of others that describe Pilate and a cruel brute – he did slaughter many Jewish people, often on a whim. He was offensive toward those he ruled – so offensive that the Roman Emperor finally removed him from power. So a story of Galileans being slaughtered, mixing their blood with the blood of their sacrifices, fits what we know about Pilate from the writings of Josephus. This has caused readers of the gospels to wonder about the deference given to Pilate in the crucifixion story – especially the way Matthew and John tell the story. In both of those stories, in fact in all of the gospels, it appears that Pilate is attempting to save Jesus from crucifixion and even fearful of the power he perceives in Jesus. Pilate is pictured in a charitable light. That picture does not fit well, either with the picture painted here by Luke and especially that painted by Josephus. We’ll need to think about that again when we get to the ending of Luke’s story. If the first event, the slaughter of the Galileans, is a human action; the second event is what might genuinely be called an accident. We are not told why the tower fell but the implication is that it was accidental. Perhaps the point of both stories is that the victims did not deserve what happened to them. Yet in both stories Luke calls upon his readers to respond with repentance lest a similar thing happen to them. This is puzzling. Isn’t it only the responsibility of the offenders to repent? Luke is telling all of his readers that the only proper response to the “visitation of God” is to repent. In this way Luke is much like Paul who wrote to the Romans – “None is righteous, no not one – all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God!” – (Romans 3). Luke is seeking to create a people prepared. Only Luke tells us the parable about the gardener who seeks to rescue his fig tree from destruction. Perhaps the fig tree in this story has some vague connection with the fig tree that will figure later in Mark’s gospel – the fig tree Jesus curses (Mark 11:12-14 & 20-21). Luke simply drops that part out of Mark’s story when he is telling about the cleansing of the Temple by Jesus. If there is a connection here it is extremely vague. The point of the parable is again about being prepared – and here about the mercy of God who gives time for repentance. Only Luke tells the story of the bent woman who is healed by Jesus. This story sounds a lot like two other stories about healings on the Sabbath that Luke tells. The first one we have already encountered (Luke 6:6-11). Luke shares that story with Mark. The other story about a man with dropsy who is cured by Jesus on the Sabbath is unique to Luke and we will hear that story soon when we get to Luke 14 (Luke 14:1-6). All three of these stories fit a pattern. In each the person healed is healed on a Sabbath and the religious leaders object to what Jesus is doing – accusing Jesus of violating the Sabbath. In this story Luke is playing with the word “untie” to make his point. So, Luke adds to the story some words he found in the source he shares with Matthew (Matthew 12:11-12=Luke 14:5). From that source Luke draws words of Jesus which defend healing on the Sabbath. Jesus counters the accusations of his accusers by pointing out that it is lawful to rescue an animal from a pit on the Sabbath. Here Luke’s Jesus points out that it is lawful to “untie” and animal and give it a drink on the Sabbath. Luke will use the material from his source more closely when he tells the story of the man healed from dropsy. And here is where the connection between “untying” and animal and “untying” this bent woman comes into play. Just as it is lawful to “untie” and animal to give it a drink on the Sabbath, should it not be lawful to “untie” this woman who has been bound for eighteen years by Satan? The logic shames the adversaries of Jesus. Earlier when Luke was telling the parable of the sower which he shares with Mark (Mark 4:1ff=Luke 8:3ff) we noticed that Luke dropped out some of Mark’s parables. We noticed that Luke uses parables in a different way than Mark. Here Luke picks up one of those parables he dropped out of Mark at that time – the parable of the mustard seed (Mark 4:30-33 = Luke 13:18-19). Luke has shortened Mark’s parable but the connection is clear. Luke adds another parable about how leaven mixed in meal will eventually leaven the whole. Luke found the parable of the leaven in the source he shares with Matthew (Luke 13:20-21 = Matthew 13:33). Putting the parable of the mustard seed together with the parable of the leaven reinforces the point. Though the Kingdom of God may appear to be small at its beginning it is destined to grow and eventually to encompass everything. Incidentally, Matthew also has attached the parable of the leaven to the parable of the mustard seed. Perhaps these two parables had already been attached in the source Matthew and Luke share apart from Mark. If so, this is another of those rare times when the same material is found in both Mark and “Q”. Luke now reminds his readers of the destiny of Jesus – he is on his way to Jerusalem. We are tempted to forget that Luke is writing a “travel narrative” and need to be reminded of it. Along the way Luke has been sharing ominous words, challenging words about the destiny of those who follow Jesus on the way. Following Jesus on his destiny toward the “exodus” that he is to accomplish in Jerusalem is not easy – nor will following Jesus in the time following his crucifixion and resurrection! In Luke’s story, someone from the crowd appears to be aware of the challenge and asks a question in such a way that it implies an affirmative answer – “Lord, will those who are saved by few?” (Luke 13:23). Luke finds answers to that question in the source he shares with Matthew. Luke builds an answer by joining sayings of Jesus that revolve around the word, “door.” The first saying is a call from Jesus to enter by the narrow “door” a “door” that Jesus says many will seek to enter but not be able. Luke shares this saying with Matthew who, in the “Sermon on the Mount” (Matthew 7:13-14), has a longer and more developed saying about striving to enter by the narrow “gate” because there is an easy “gate” that leads to destruction. Matthew uses a different word but the concept is the same. The answer to the question in indeed “Yes” as the questioner implied. To the saying about entering by the narrow “door” Luke adds another saying of Jesus about a householder who has shut the “door” of his house and will not open it again for those who come knocking. Matthew has a similar story which he shares in a completely different context – Matthew’s version is placed near the end of the story in that section of Matthew’s gospel regarding the coming of the end (Matthew 25:10-12). However, Matthew has also placed a part of this second saying back in the “Sermon on the Mount” (Matthew 7:22-23). The point in both Matthew and Luke is that the time will come when it is too late to enter. Next Luke adds a saying of Jesus that people will come from east and west and sit at God’s table in the Kingdom of God while those who were invited but failed to respond are left on the “outside” weeping and gnashing their teeth. Matthew knows this story too – both Matthew and Luke found it in the source they share. Matthew’s context is the middle of the story he shares with Mark about the beginning of Jesus’ ministry in Capernaum (Matthew 8:11-12). Finally, Luke sums up the discussion with some words he likely found in Mark – “the last will be first and the first will be last” (Luke 13:30 = Mark 10:31). Luke’s words are ominous and even frightening. Following Jesus is serious business! It was not easy in the days when Jesus lived out his destiny – it was not easy in the time when Luke wrote his gospel – and it is not easy now! We struggle to be a faithful follower – finally we find ourselves falling back into God’s arms of grace. This is not “cheap grace” – the goodwill of God and humanity – but the costly grace of crucifixion. Luke has told us as much – the call is to take up our cross and follow. Luke is very aware of the ominous tone he has set and the next two stories seem to reflect that awareness. The first story is one that only Luke tells us. Once again it is “friendly Pharisees” who speak. We have noticed that before – not all Pharisees are the enemy in Luke’s gospel. Luke and Mark differ markedly at this point. Luke has been telling a story of the “visitation of God” to his people – and some are faithful, waiting and welcoming and among them are religious leaders of Israel. Others will not welcome the “visitation of God”. It is important that we hear Luke at this point – Israel did receive the Messiah! The faith we share is deeply connected to the OT and to people faithful to the OT. The Christian faith is not a “new religion” but the faithful living of the old. We are in great danger when we simply abandon the people of Israel in favor of some new people of God – we belong together and Luke, better than most, cements that connection. Friendly Pharisees come to warn Jesus regarding Herod. Earlier Luke has told us that Herod knows he has beheaded John and that Herod is seeking to see Jesus (Luke 9:9). At that point Herod’s desire to see Jesus is ambiguous –we don’t know if his desire is positive or negative. Here the desire of Herod becomes very clear – his desire is to kill Jesus just as he had killed John the Baptist. We can be sure this is not the last we will hear from Herod. The occasion gives Luke one more chance to remind his readers of the destiny of Jesus. Yes, Herod will be a threat but Herod does not control the destiny of Jesus – God does. And the destiny is Jerusalem. And the outcome will mean death for Jesus – that is what Jerusalem in known for – killing the prophets. Many readers of Luke’s gospel have wondered if there is significance in the statement “today and tomorrow and the third day” when Jesus will finish his course. On the third day Jesus will rise from the dead – finishing his course. We have met a similar allusion earlier when Luke tells us of Jesus in the Temple as a twelve year old boy and his mother and father find him “on the third day” about the business of his Father (Luke 2:41-51). Of course there is no way to be sure that Luke has these thoughts in his mind – but they are instructive for us even if we are the ones who have made the connections for Luke. The point of this episode for Luke is to provide assurance that Jesus will accomplish his destiny in Jerusalem. We can place our trust in that! And now some of the most passionate words in Luke’s gospel are shared with Luke’s readers. Jesus laments over Jerusalem – the destiny of his journey. These are words that Luke shares only with Matthew – they are from “Q”. Matthew likely has them in the right place chronologically. In Matthew, Jesus laments using these words as he comes over the top of the mountain leading to Jerusalem from Jericho and sees Jerusalem for the first and only time in the synoptic tradition – Matthew, Mark, and Luke are known together as the “synoptic” gospels because the “see things together” while John’s storyline is significantly different with Jesus visiting Jerusalem on a number of occasions. If it is true that Matthew has the chronology right then Luke has pulled these words of Jesus forward in his story. In Luke, Jesus is still far from Jerusalem as he laments the rejection he knows will come when he arrives. Regardless of whether Jesus said these words while far from Jerusalem and still on the way (Luke’s version) or just as Jesus was about the enter Jerusalem for the first and only time (Matthew’s version) the same passion comes through them. These are words of one who deeply laments the obstinacy of God’s people who will not let God save them! The picture is clear and easy for us to visualize which makes it all the more powerful. And behind the picture is a powerful image from the OT, especially from the Psalms. In the OT the “wings of God” are hovering over the Ark of the Covenant. Safety is to be found in the shelter of those wings. Psalm 91 says it as well as any other. As readers of Luke’s gospel we are grasped by the passion of these words. God is still seeking to gather his people under his wings. The lament of Jesus draws us to find ourselves under those wings of God. Luke, the evangelist, is preaching now. Luke is calling us to find our place beneath the wings of God. By faith that is where we are!

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, February 23, 2013 Read – Luke 12:49-59 & Micah 7:1-7 Luke continues his section of warnings – sharing three sections with Matthew who places each of them in very different locations. Luke’s source is “Q”. The first section is the ominous declaration of Jesus that he has not come to bring peace to the earth but division. For those who have come to think of Jesus as the one who brings peace these words seem out of place. What does Jesus mean when he says he has come not to bring peace but division? As we dig deeper into these words it becomes clear that Jesus has reached back into the OT to proclaim words he found there in the book of Micah – Jesus’ words and Micah’s match nearly word for word. That is why we are invited to read Micah today. The words of Micah provide the context for understanding Jesus own words. Micah laments the corruption and unfaithfulness of the people God has sent him to prophesy to. In fact, in some ways Micah’s words are the lament of God over a wayward people. Jesus is also lamenting the reality that the people he has come to serve are corrupted – many of them do not welcome the “visitation of God” in their midst. Likely people in Luke’s time knew firsthand the division that following Jesus brought to families. Likely, though perhaps to a lesser extent, that same division may have been happening for those who followed Jesus at the time of his ministry. Travelling with Jesus may prove to be hazardous. Divisions in our world are also likely and sometimes we may know the tragedy of families divided over allegiance to Jesus. As I mention Luke shares this saying with Matthew – Matthew strategically places this warning in the instruction Jesus gives to the Twelve as he sent them on their first mission (Matthew 10:34-36). Luke knows that story too – he and Matthew received the basic story from Mark (Mark 6:6-13) – however Luke does not mention the thought of family division at that time, likely because Mark didn’t. One of Luke’s themes is the visitation of God to his people. In the second part of our reading today Jesus chastises the crowds for their inability to interpret the signs of the times. The times Jesus is talking about, of course, is that very time when Jesus has come to them. This is not some distant time in some distant future but now, in Jesus’ own time! Luke shares this saying with Matthew who puts it at a completely different place in his gospel (Matthew 16:1-4), just prior to the time when Jesus will ask his disciples who they think he is and Peter will give his correct answer. Those to whom Jesus speaks in Matthew are far different from Luke as well – Luke’s Jesus is speaking to a great crowd of people; Matthew’s Jesus is speaking to the Pharisees and Sadducees who are the enemies of Jesus. Luke’s purpose in telling the story at this point is to heighten the expectation of God’s visitation and to exhort people to be ready – Luke is focusing on being prepared. The last piece in today’s reading is a call by Luke’s Jesus to settle accounts between those who are in a dispute. In a way Luke is telling his readers to “get their house in order” because something great is coming. Luke shares this passage with Matthew. Again Matthew has placed this saying in a different location – in the “Sermon on the Mount” where Jesus is reinterpreting the OT Law (Matthew 5:25-26). It is interesting to see in these passages the different uses of Luke and Matthew. We have noted that both seem to use the source they share in common much more freely than they do Mark – their primary source. The reason for that is that Mark is a narrative – much like their own gospel – and “Q” is a gathering of sayings. It is impossible to reconstruct the order in “Q” since we do not have a copy to go by – and because we can’t determine whether Matthew or Luke is more diligent in following the original order – both seem to disregard the order. So, for both, this second source is a “goldmine” of the sayings of Jesus to be used to supplement Mark. Perhaps one of the things we can learn from all of this is to recognize that we simply do not have available to us the exact chronology of what happened and when it happened. We just don’t know the exact storyline of the ministry of Jesus as a “newspaper account”. What we have are the creations of brilliant writers who have ordered the material to proclaim a distinct message – they are evangelists after all and theologians attempting to be faithful witnesses to the truth they find in Jesus. And that is far more valuable to us than having a “correct newspaper account” of what really happened!

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, February 22, 2013 Read – Luke 12:13-48 Only Luke tells the parable of the rich fool who mistakes his prosperity as the source of security. The parable fits much of Luke’s theology. We have noticed how Luke is concerned for the poor. But at a deeper level – Luke’s true concern has to do with the threat of wealth. That is the point of this parable. This man is not to be faulted on moral grounds. He is not a wicked man and there is nothing to condemn him regarding how he has obtained his wealth. In fact he is greatly blessed! His problem is that he does not know where to place his trust. He comes to the perilous conclusion that his wealth will give him security. Wealth has the sneaking power to do that. We can learn much from this man – and from Luke. In a country that knows such prosperity as ours, we would do well to pay attention to what Luke is telling us about the dangers of wealth. It is one thing to be thankful to God for God’s abundant blessings – and to know that because they are blessings of God they are to be well managed and shared with others. It is quite another thing to become so used to be well off that we are put to sleep by our prosperity – that we begin to think that somehow we are to credit for what we have done and that if others would simply do better they would share our benefits. We have encountered a few of these passages in Luke where only Luke tells the story. They have some things in common. The Pharisee, Simon who invited Jesus to his dinner, does not see the truth that it is those who know they are dependent on God are the ones who love the more. The lawyer who seeks to justify himself is left to bear witness that the Samaritan is the true neighbor. Even in a few places where Luke shares material with Matthew the emphasis is subtly modified so that the dangers of wealth are made plain – it is true, says Luke that the ones who are blessed are the poor – because they know they are dependent on God who will supply their needs! The theme is continued in the next section of Luke’s gospel – a section he shares with Matthew (Luke 12:22-34 = Matthew 6:19-33). We might notice that Luke and Matthew tell this story in slightly different orders. Matthew begins where Luke ends. In fact, the first part of Matthew is often viewed as a separate saying . Both Matthew and Luke warn against accumulating treasure on earth as if that treasure will bring security. Both warn us that where our treasure is there will our heart be also. There is of course much wisdom in that warning – we are apt to think that if we can just get our heart right our treasure will follow. The opposite always proves to be true – what we treasure leads our heart! Like the parable of the rich fool, the point Luke is reinforcing is that worry and concern about needful things on earth comes mostly from the false belief that those things can bring peace and security. It is easy to be caught in that trap – in fact if we are honest most of us have to admit that we are caught there. We worry! Luke makes a bold claim – it is God’s good pleasure to give us the kingdom – to give us the life we need. Again, we can learn much from Luke – as we can from Matthew. In the next section Luke strikes out on his own once again – only Luke tells the parable about the waiting servants who are anticipating their master’s return from the marriage feast. There are similar parables in Mark and Matthew that we will get to later. Perhaps what Luke has done is to present a variation on one of those other similar parable he will also share later – likely he had more than one parable at his disposal in his sources and saw value in sharing all of them with his readers. In the midst of the parable Luke picks up the source he shares with Matthew – and perhaps reflects on what he finds in Mark since Luke abbreviates Mark’s warning to be ready at all times (Mark 13:32-37). It is significant to notice that Luke drops out these words of Mark when he is talking about being watchful at the end (Luke 21:34-36). Luke’s words are much closer to Matthew’s (Matthew 24:43-51 = Luke 12:39-46). Matthew is basically following Mark at this point expanding upon Mark’s warning. It is interesting to notice that Matthew takes these word in his “Q” source which he shares with Luke as being said by Jesus near the end of his life – Luke understands them to come from a much earlier time before Jesus is in grave danger. Luke sums up this warning with some words only found in his gospel. They are confusing and trouble words for many. Luke’s words about receiving a severe beating if one should have known better but failed to act properly are harsh. And his words that even those who did not know better will receive a lesser beating sound strange – why would someone be beaten who could not possibly know better? Readers of Luke have puzzled over his words at this point. However, his final words ring true – to whom much is given much is required. There is nothing ambiguous about that!

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Thursday, February 21, 2013 Read –Luke 11:37-12:12 We noticed earlier that Luke omitted a large section of Mark’s gospel (Mark 6:45 – 8:26). We have already noticed that a brief part of this section of Mark may be recalled in Luke’s discussion of the evil generation seeking a sign (Luke 11:29-32 = Mark 8:11-13). In the section of Luke that we are reading today there are more hints that Luke was aware of what Mark had written but chose to omit it since small sections of Mark seem to make their way into Luke’s story much like the seeking of the sign. It is also likely that Luke is following “Q” for the basic outline of this section of his gospel since Matthew relates much of the same material, though in various places. Having noticed that it is also clear that Luke is striking out on his own expanding his sources – Luke’s material is more developed and longer than Matthew’s. The overall point of Luke’s narrative is to proclaim a series of “woes” upon the Pharisees for their lack of understanding and lack of faith. Luke begins with a hint that he is aware of Mark’s condemnation of the religious leaders for their hypocrisy regarding the “traditions of the elders” (Mark 7:1ff). Luke mentions that the Pharisee who had invited Jesus to a meal notices that Jesus does not wash first his hands. That had been the center of dispute in Mark 7. Luke takes the discussion in a different direction than Mark did by showing the shallowness of the piety of the Pharisees. The Pharisees seem to like rules because they help set them aside from the more ordinary people – yet the following of these strict rules leads to Pharisees to neglect what is more important. That is the point of the sayings Luke brings us from “Q”. Luke may have also found a helpful support in a later part of Mark’s gospel where Mark is again denouncing the Pharisees by saying that they love to go around in long robes and choose the best places in the festivals (Mark 12:38-40). Luke will repeat what Mark says when he is following Mark at that time (Luke 20:45-47 = Mark 12:38-40). As Luke moves forward there are more hints that parts of Mark that he has omitted appear in this section. Mark had said, “For there is nothing hidden, except to be disclosed; nor is anything secret, except to come to light” (Mark 4:22). Luke had shared those words of Mark in that context when he was talking about parables. Now Luke repeats Mark’s words. In Mark, after Jesus had asked his disciples who they think he is and Peter had responded that Jesus is the Messiah, Mark goes on the talk about the cost of being a follower. That section ends with Jesus saying that Jesus will be ashamed of those who are ashamed of him (Mark 8:38). Luke followed Mark at that time with similar words which are repeated here (Luke 9:26 = Luke 12:8-9). Most telling of all is the way in which Luke uses Mark’s discussion of the “sin against the Holy Spirit” (Mark 3:28-30). We have already noticed how Luke moves this section of Mark to a much later time and separates it from any discussion of Jesus’ family (Luke 11:14-23). Matthew did something similar. However in that earlier discussion regarding Beelezebul, Luke removes Mark’s statement regarding blaspheme against the Holy Spirit – Matthew does not remove it (Matthew 12:31-32 = Mark 3:28-30). Now that part of Mark is inserted into Luke’s discussion (Luke 12:10 = Mark 3:28-30). Luke will get to saying the same things that are in his sources – though he seems to be free to say them in his own way!

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Wednesday, February 20, 2013 Read – Luke 11:27-36 Only Luke shares the brief story of the woman in the crowd declaring her blessing upon Mary, the mother of Jesus. Jesus appears to reject, or at least play down her blessing with another – “Blessed are those who hear and obey!” In the “Sermon on the Plain” Luke had emphasized hearing and doing. That emphasis is once again highlighted. Luke has been depicting a growing crowd of people who have come to listen to Jesus. Now Jesus chastises that crowd as an evil generation seeking a sign. No sign will be giving except the sign of Jonah. Luke shares this episode with Matthew – thus it was likely in his “Q” source – though Mark also mentions the Pharisees seeking a sign (Mark 8:11-13). In Mark’s short statement there is no mention of Jonah and the firm declaration that there will be no sign, period. Luke had omitted this part of Mark in that long section we noticed earlier. Matthew’s story is longer and clearer – Matthew explains the sign of Jonah by saying that just as Jonah was three days in the belly of the whale so Jesus will be in the earth (Matthew 12:38-42). Matthew also tells us it was only the Pharisees and scribes who seek the sign and are thus the evil generation – Luke’s accusation is much broader. Both Matthew and Luke add comments about the Queen of South coming to hear the wisdom of Solomon – but in Jesus something greater than Solomon is present. Both Matthew and Luke declare that the people of Nineveh, to whom Jonah had preached, will provide condemnation of the present hearers because they repented when they heard Jonah’s words – the present hearers do not repent. Though Matthew explanation of the sign of Jonah is clearer, for Luke it is really the effect of repentance generated by the proclamation of Jonah that is the sign that is given. The present hearers ought to respond like Jonah’s hearers did. One is left to wonder if they “got” the sign. Earlier in his sections on parables Mark had told a parable about how no one brings a lamp into a room only to put it under a bushel (Mark 4:21). Following Mark in the earlier part of his gospel Luke had shared the same parable in a slightly modified form (Luke 8:16-18). Now that parable comes up again in a slightly modified form and then Luke attaches words he found in “Q” to it. The words in “Q” are about the soundness of one’s eye. Matthew had shared about the soundness of one’s eye earlier in the “Sermon on the Mount” (Matthew 6:22-23). The meaning of this saying is hard for us to comprehend – it likely has to do with the idea of the “evil eye” which is a concept that is foreign to our thinking. In some ways, this section of Luke’s “travel narrative” sounds a lot like Mathew’s “Sermon on the Mount.” In a “travel narrative” we expect to be on the move toward a destination. Though Luke’s “travel narrative” will eventually get us to Jerusalem, in the meantime much teaching is taking place. Perhaps the purpose of the “travel narrative” is less to give a journal of the trip than to prepare Luke’s readers for the outcome. We have heard that Jesus is resolute in “setting his face” toward Jerusalem (Luke 9:51) but now he seems to be in no hurry to get there.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, February 19, 2013 Read – Luke 11:14-26 We noticed earlier that Luke broke off his use of Mark as a source at the very point where Mark tells the story of the accusation by the religious leaders that Jesus is doing his mighty works through the power of Beelzebul (Luke 6:16 and Mark 3:19). Mark had combined the rejection of Jesus by the religious leaders with the comment that Jesus own family had come to take him home because they thought Jesus was out of his mind (Mark 3:21). Apparently that had been too much of Luke – he totally omits it! Now, Luke picks up Mark’s story about the accusation of Jesus that he heals by the power of Beelzebul, dropping out any mention of Jesus’ family, and inserts it into his gospel. It is much safer to tell that story at this point – totally disassociated from the family of Jesus. The context of Mark’s story has been provided with a story of the healing of a mute man. Matthew shares the same context as Luke which leads to the speculation that the story about Beelzebul was shared by both Mark and “Q” – something which is unusual. But because we do not have a copy of “Q” to compare, perhaps there are more things in common between Mark and “Q” than we think. At any rate the context of Luke’s story is the healing of a mute man. And the point of the story is very similar to the point Mark had made – the religious leaders are wrong in their accusation of Jesus. Luke does add one more very distinctive piece to the story – that addition is the phrase “by the finger of God” (Luke 11:20). The phrase recalls the words of the magicians in Egypt when they are no longer able to repeat the plagues of Moses (Exodus 8:19). Once again following “Q” (Matthew 12:43-45) Luke tells of the unclean spirit who returns to his former host after wandering over waterless wastes and makes the situation even worse than before. The connection to the rejection of the religious leaders is what is important for Luke.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Monday, February 18, 2013 Read – Luke 11:1-13 Prayer is an important theme of Luke’s gospel. We have noticed that Jesus is said to be in prayer before many important events. So it is not surprising that Luke would tell us about the disciples asking Jesus to teach them to pray. The question comes as they observe that John the Baptist’s followers have been taught, apparently by John, to pray. Once again there is the subtle connection between the followers of John and the followers of Jesus. It would be interesting to have more information about that but we don’t. Luke apparently found the Lord’s Prayer in his “Q” source. Matthew also includes the prayer in his gospel – Matthew includes this prayer at the beginning of his story of the ministry, in the “Sermon on the Mount” (Matthew 6:9-13) which is Matthew’s way of beginning the story of Jesus. It is interesting to think about how each gospel writer chooses to begin. There are significant differences between Matthew’s version and Luke’s. It is impossible to determine which gospel writer has done the most editing – though it seems logical that the shorter version is more likely the original in “Q” since it is easier to explain why someone would add to the prayer than it is to explain why someone would subtract. We may remember that Luke’s version of the Beatitudes was also shorter than Matthew’s which may be explained in the same way. What is missing from Luke’s version is the petition regarding God’s will being done on earth as it is in heaven and the petition regarding the plea that God will rescue the one who is praying from the evil one. The petition regarding the giving of bread is also stated differently – Matthew asks for bread on this particular day and Luke asks for bread every day. Since the word for “sins” and “debts” is the same word in Aramaic it is likely that both concepts are implied by both gospel writers – Matthew uses only “debts” and Luke uses both “debts” and “sins”. As a way of amplifying the Lord’s Prayer Luke attaches two elements. The first is uniquely his – no other gospel writer tells the story of the neighbor’s persistence in getting bread from his friendly neighbor to fulfill the hospitality needs of an unannounced guest. Luke’s point is to be persistent in prayer knowing that God is far more certain to answer prayer than a neighbor. The story is somewhat troubling for some – does God need persuading? Actually a better translation of the word “persistent” is the word “shameless.” The man was “shameless” in his going to a friend in the middle of the night to ask for bread and risking waking up the whole neighborhood. Luke shares the second part with Matthew although Matthew separates the unit from the Lord’s Prayer in his gospel (Matthew 7:7-11). Here the point is more clear – if a parent knows how to give good things then there can be no doubt that God will give those good things quicker and more freely.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Sunday, February 17, 2013 Read – Luke 10:25-42 To set the stage for his next parable, Luke reaches far ahead in Mark’s gospel to an encounter between Jesus and a scribe. The event in Mark happens during the week of controversy after Jesus had entered Jerusalem and cleansed the Temple (Mark 12:28-34). It is interesting that when Luke is telling the same story about the controversy in Jerusalem he basically follows Mark but he does drop this story out at that point. We have noticed that Luke likes to do this – take a story from Mark and shift its location to serve his purposes. Why might Luke have shifted this story from Mark to this place in his gospel? Luke had just been reflecting on the relationship between Jesus and the Father – he was probing the mystery of God – how do you understand God? And he has come very close to claiming that Jesus is God. The Holy Spirit has even gotten into the mix since Luke tells us Jesus was “rejoicing in the Holy Spirit” (Luke 10:21). Is Luke getting on dangerous ground? Luke’s Jewish theology would have informed him of one of the chief tenets of his faith – God is one! Every good Jew would confess that and Luke means to do that too! The story of the question of the scribe – who Luke identifies as a lawyer which is essentially the same thing – provides Luke with an opportunity to bring his readers to the great passage in Deuteronomy where the confession that God is one is most clear. In Deuteronomy 6:4 it says, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD is our God, the LORD alone!” Nothing can be clearer than that. And then it goes on to say, “You shall love the LORD you God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might.” In Mark, the scribes question had been what is the greatest commandment? Luke changes that slightly with the lawyer asking what he must do the inherit eternal life. In Mark it is Jesus who provides the answer from the book of Deuteronomy. In Luke the lawyer speaks the words. The outcome is essentially the same. For Mark the story places Jesus squarely in the center of the Jewish faith – Jesus is a faithful Jew! None the less Jesus will be killed by the religious leaders. For Luke the story is more about placing Luke squarely in the center of the Jewish faith! He has just reflected what may have sounded to some to be startling words about the relationship between Jesus and the Father. Luke does not want to be misunderstood – there is something special between Jesus and the Father to be sure, but Luke still wants to remind his readers that God is one and the Jewish confession still holds. And then the story takes a turn. As in Mark the command to love God is connected with the love of one’s neighbor. That command is found in the OT in the book of Leviticus – (Leviticus 19:18). The two commandments had been brought together prior to the time of Jesus and stood well as a summary of the whole Law. The lawyer is not satisfied with Jesus’ answer and presses the issue – who is my neighbor? Only Luke tells us the parable of the Good Samaritan. Was it already in his “Q” source that he shares with Matthew? If it was why would Matthew drop it out? Of course we cannot give a definitive answer to that question – but if I had to guess I’d guess that it was not in “Q”. I mentioned earlier that Luke uses parables in a far different way than Mark did. For Mark parables were more like riddles that conceal instead of reveal. Luke parables reveal! And this parable could not be more revealing. Who is my neighbor? Jesus tells a story – a startling story because the “hero” is an outsider and someone who would have been despised by most of those who heard the parable. Actually all six characters in the parable probably would have been offensive to the lawyer and most Pharisees. The Pharisees and lawyers were no friend of the priests and Levites who belonged to the Sadducee party – a party that collaborated with Rome to maintain power. He would obviously have been no friend to the robbers. And he probably had little sympathy for the man who was robbed since he likely was a travelling merchant and would not have observed the rules so important to Pharisees and their lawyers. Even the innkeeper would have been despises. All good people had kin to stay with when they journeyed – inns were unclean places. And, of course, the Samaritan was the one most “outside” the boundaries. Jesus choice of characters was brilliant! And the parable winds up convicting the lawyer – the question cuts deep, “Who proved to be the neighbor?” The lawyer had no choice – it had to be the Samaritan! And then Jesus drops the clincher – “Go and do likewise!” We don’t know how the lawyer responded to the parable. But we do know how Luke wants his readers to respond. Once again the words of Simeon echo in our ears – Jesus will be cause the rise and fall of many in Israel. And the words of Mary’s song echo in our ears too – “He has brought down the powerful from their thrones, and lifted up the lowly; he has filled the hungry with good things, and sent the rich away empty” (Luke 1:52-53).

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Saturday, February 16, 2013 Read – Luke 10:21-24 Luke now dips back into the source he shares with Matthew (Matthew 11:25-27). In his source, “Q”, he found a saying about Jesus rejoicing that God has revealed himself to the lowly and hidden himself from the wise of this world. The connection with the rejoicing of the seventy following their successful mission is obvious – only this rejoicing of Jesus is pictured more as an aside, as something that is private between Jesus and his Father. At best Luke pictures this as the disciples overhearing Jesus in prayer. In many ways these words connect more with the style of writing found in the gospel of John – especially John 3:35, 6:65, 10:15, 13:3, 14:7-13, and 17:25 – and almost sound “out of place” in Luke’s gospel. They are hugely theological in nature – reflecting Luke’s pondering of the relationship between Jesus and the Father. Later on the church would develop the theory of the Trinity to help explain how Christians are to understand God – and passages like this one were helpful in that process. Our most diligent conversations and ponderings cannot finally explain God – God is bigger than our minds! Luke’s point is simply to remind his readers that being on the “inside” and “knowing the truth about God” is certainly not a human achievement – it is a gift from God! As we have seen Luke has a far more positive view of the followers of Jesus than Mark did – actually Mark’s view may reflect more his attempt to focus the identity of Jesus on the cross as the crucified Messiah at the expense of the disciples than his actual opinion of them. Here, Luke is reminding those followers that they are blessed because of what God has done for them – not because they are so great. We would do well to remember that too.

Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Friday, February 15, 2013 Read – Luke 10:1-20 Once again Luke strikes out on his own by telling us the story of the mission of the seventy. No other gospel writer knows of this mission and most of the content of this story is found only in Luke. Having said that it may well be true that Luke has built this story on a previous story that he found in Mark (Mark 6:1-13 and 30) and related to us earlier in his gospel (Luke 9:1-6). Mark’s story was about the mission of the Twelve. Some of the same concerns are expressed in Luke’s story of the mission of the seventy but others are added. One of the new elements that Luke adds is a saying by Jesus that the “harvest is plentiful but the laborers are few, therefore ask the lord of the harvest to send out laborers into the harvest” (Luke 10:2). In one of his summary passages, Matthew uses this same saying of Jesus, “the harvest is plentiful but the laborers are few, therefore ask the lord of the harvest to send out laborers into the harvest” (Matthew 9:37-38). The context in Matthew is different but the words are the same. Another very similar saying of Jesus can also be found in the gospel of John. It comes in John’s story about Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman at the well. As John’s story is coming to a close Jesus says, “I tell you look around you and see that the fields are ripe for harvesting” (John 4:34-38). Likely Jesus used these words and Matthew, Luke and John had the image of the harvest available to them. Each places the words in a different context. Luke’s concern seems mostly about the behavior and care of those sent on the mission. They will encounter hardship and rejection – but they will also receive a welcome and what they need for the mission. Again we are reminded of Simeon’s words about the fall and rising of many. Could it be that Luke has constructed this story more for the people of his own time than to reflect what happened in Jesus time? Into the midst of this story about the mission of the seventy Luke inserts a brief section that he found in his “Q” resource. Matthew tells the same story in a completely different setting (Matthew 11:20-24). In words that remind us of Jesus’ protest at Nazareth that Elijah needed to find a widow of Zarephath to help him because he was not welcome in Israel and that Elisha could heal only the foreign leper, Naaman, Jesus speaks harshly about the cities of Chorazin and Bethsaida and Capernaum. We have not heard much if anything about the first two cities but Capernaum has figured prominently in the story so far. Is this one more hint that the journey of Jesus to Jerusalem did not begin well? Luke reports the return of the Twelve. What a mission it must have been! “Lord, in your name even the demons submit to us!” To that response Jesus makes one of the most confusing responses we will hear in Luke’s gospel – “I saw Satan fall from heaven like a flash of lightning.” Nothing Luke has told us could prepare us for that saying. As the church developed its theology many have seen in this passage the reality of the pre-existence of Christ and the full-blown Christology of later Christian faith. But could Luke have already shared that Christology? Where might this saying come from? In the book of Isaiah, Isaiah speaks of the coming fall of Babylon with the words, “How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, Son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground who laid the nations low!” (Isaiah 14:12). In other writings from the time just before and after Jesus these words of Isaiah had been expanded to speak of the destruction of Satan – who was sometimes spoken of at the Day Star, the Son of Dawn, Lucifer – the angel of light. This concept finds its way into the book of Revelation as well (Revelation12:9). It may well be that Luke is reflecting this idea in what he says. As far as the claim that followers of Jesus “have been given authority to tread on snakes and scorpions” Luke may likely be reflecting Psalm 91- “You will tread on the lion and the adder, the young lion and the serpent you will trample underfoot” (Psalm 91:13). There may also be an allusion in Luke to Genesis 3:15 where it is said of the ancient serpent in the garden, “He will strike you head, and you will strike his heel.” Noticing these connections is helpful in dealing with what is otherwise a confusing image. And having said all that, the point Jesus makes is that one is not to rejoice over the marvelous powers one might have over evil but rather that one’s name is written in heaven.

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.