Arrest of Jesus – Read Luke 22:37-53
The story of the arrest of Jesus in Luke is based on the account given by Mark but there are some differences in detail among the Gospels. Judas arrives at Gethsemane to betray Jesus but only in Luke do the disciples ask Jesus to use their swords and only in Luke does Jesus heal the slave whose ear was cut off. In the synoptic Gospels Jesus is betrayed by a kiss from Judas, but in John Jesus identifies himself to the soldiers. Also in John, Peter is identified as the one who cuts off the ear of a slave named Malchus. In the synoptics Jesus reminds the priests who came to get him that they must do so under cover of darkness and that they could have arrested him in daylight at the temple court if their accusations were just (see Luke 20:19-20). Matthew and Mark both report that after the arrest the disciples all fled.
Peter’s Denial – Luke 22:54-62
After his arrest on the Mount of Olives, Jesus is taken to the house of the high priest for questioning and Peter follows at a distance, hiding in the shadows. Peter advances into the courtyard where a fire is lit and he is confronted by three witnesses who place him in the company of Jesus. In each case Peter denies knowing Jesus and at the third denial only Luke reports that Jesus turns to look at Peter from inside the house. The cock then crows, fulfilling the prediction Jesus had made earlier.
This is arguably the absolute low point of Christianity. Jesus is now in the hands of the authorities, intending to have him executed. One of the disciples has betrayed Jesus, the other disciples argued at supper, pointlessly, about who among them was greatest. Jesus was sweating blood in Gethsemane and yet the disciples could not even stay awake as Jesus waited for arrest. When Jesus was taken they put up a comical defense, then scattered as soon Jesus was led away. Now Peter, who claimed - only hours before - that he would follow Jesus “to prison and to death” has just denied even knowing Jesus three times. What could possibly become of such a movement? As we read Acts and follow the subsequent actions of the disciples it is useful keep this scene in mind.
Jesus before the Sanhedrin – Luke 22:63-71
After his arrest Jesus is taken for questioning by the religious authorities. The sequence of events varies somewhat between the Gospel accounts. Matthew identifies the high priest as Caiaphas. In John’s Gospel, Jesus is first taken for questioning to Annas, father in law of Caiaphas, before being sent on to Caiaphas. There is more detail of the interrogation in Matthew and Mark - Luke simply states that Jesus was held at the house of the high priest until morning where he was questioned about his claims as a Messiah. Jesus is elusive in his answer but when asked if he is the Son of God, Jesus answers “You say that I am.” This statement seems to the priests to be a confession of blasphemy sufficient to warrant death, so Jesus is sent to Pilate, the Roman governor who must judge all capital cases. In Matthew the reaction of the priests to the blasphemy voiced by Jesus is much more dramatic: they tear their clothes in the traditional sign of outrage.
Jesus Before Pilate – Luke 23:1-25
The first charge against Jesus that is laid before Pilate by the priests - according to Luke - was that Jesus opposed payment of taxes to Rome. From the previous story of Jesus in the temple court (Luke 20:20-26), this charge is obviously false and Luke undoubtedly means to demonstrate the innocence of Jesus here. Jesus gives no direct answer to Pilate’s question “Are you king of the Jews?” so Pilate announces to the crowd that Jesus is innocent of any capital offense.
But the crowd persists and only in Luke does Pilate now see a way out because of a technicality: Jesus is a Galilean, he must be handed over to Herod, the local authority with jurisdiction over Galilee, who just happens to be in town for the Passover. This had the additional advantage for Pilate of doing a bit of political fence-mending – Herod had not been especially cooperative and this was becoming a concern for the Roman governor. Herod was pleased to be shown such deference by Pilate and Luke records “That day Herod and Pilate became friends…”
Herod was curious about Jesus and asked many questions, but Jesus was not at all cooperative. Even after Herod’s soldiers mocked him and the priests accused him, Jesus “gave him no answer” according to Luke. Jesus was returned to Pilate dressed in a robe, mocking his supposed kingship. Pilate decides that he has seen nothing to warrant the death penalty and is prepared to release Jesus after a suitable punishment.
At this point Luke returns to the narrative from Mark and the crowd intervenes again calling for the release of Barabbas, another prisoner being held by the Romans. Mark, Matthew and John record that the release of one prisoner during the Passover is a local custom, but Luke does not mention this. Three times, according to Luke, does Pilate announce to the crowd that Jesus is innocent and should be released. But each time the crowds shout “crucify him”. In Matthew Pilate famously washes his hands of the sentence against Jesus and releases Barabbas. Barabbas was charged with participating in an actual armed rebellion, so this must have been a difficult moment for Pilate – the Gospel of John describes Pilate as being in fear of the crowd when he finally agreed to crucify Jesus. But in Luke Pilate seems to be more in control of events and in both Luke and John Pilate is firmly on record as stating the Jesus is innocent.
Jesus Crucified and Buried – Read Luke 23:26-56
Luke follows the account in Mark closely, but offers some unique details about the crucifixion. On the way to Golgotha Jesus turns to the women following, giving a short speech ending in a quote from Hosea 10:8 (Luke 23:28-31). Later only Luke records in 23:34 Jesus as saying “Father forgive them, they know not what they do.” Luke records the dialogue between Jesus and the two thieves on the cross in 23:39-43; this is mentioned - but not quoted - in Matthew and Mark. Luke also is alone in recording the last words of Jesus as “Father into thy hands I commit my spirit” instead of “It is finished!” as found in John and the Aramaic quote from Psalm 22 given in Matthew and Mark. There is no mention in Luke of the soldier’s spear described in John. Luke alone quotes the Centurion “Certainly this man was innocent” where Matthew and Mark quote “Truly this man was the Son of God.”
Luke follows the narrative in Mark describing the burial of Jesus. There is no mention in Luke of a Roman guard (Matt 27:62-66), but all the Gospels mention the large stone blocking the entrance to the tomb.
Links of Interest
A good comparison of the arrest and trial of Jesus as described in all of the Gospel accounts by Millar Burrows is here: http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1622&C=1556
Study/Discussion Questions
1. Why was it necessary for Judas to identify Jesus?
2. At the Last Supper (Luke 22:36-38) Jesus seems to deliberately ask the disciples to be armed. In the arrest (22:49-50) one of the disciples uses a sword, yet Jesus clearly intended no violence. Can you explain why swords were necessary?
3. What does Peter’s denial mean for you?
4. Luke seems to skip much of the dialogue reported by Mark and Matthew during the trial of Jesus. Why do you think this is so?
5. All of the Gospel accounts of the trial of Jesus tend to exonerate Pilate to some degree. Why? Where does Luke’s account fit in this spectrum?
6. What is the significance of the sign on the cross “This is the King of the Jews?”
7. What does the tearing of the temple curtain (23:45) signify?
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Saturday, February 16, 2008
The Last Supper, the Betrayal and Arrest of Jesus
All four Gospels give an account of the events leading up to the arrest, trial and crucifixion of Jesus. The synoptic Gospels tend to be in better agreement on timing and sequence – John offers a very different perspective. A good summary of this is given by Dr. Felix Just, SJ, here: http://www.catholic-resources.org/Bible/Passion.htm
Judas Agrees to Betray Jesus – Read Luke 22:1-6
Luke closely follows the account in Mark on the betrayal of Jesus by Judas. Note that Judas meets with the priests before the Passover meal.
The Last Supper – Read Luke 22:7-38
The four Gospels do not agree on the day of the Last Supper. While the synoptic Gospels regard the Last Supper as a Jewish Seder held on the day of Passover, John’s Gospel clearly states the meal was held “before”. There is not enough evidence in all four accounts to determine the actual timing for certain, but the symbolism of the Seder would have been unmistakable and intentional by Jesus.
Luke provides several unique observations to the events of the Last Supper. In Luke 22:14-16 Jesus actually identifies the meal as a Passover Seder, but there is some debate among scholars as to whether Jesus participated in the meal. At no time in Luke is Jesus described as eating or drinking; in fact Jesus states he will not eat or drink again until “the kingdom of God comes.” Only in Luke does Jesus bless the wine twice: 22:17 and 22:20, giving further evidence that this is, in fact, a Passover Seder where four cups of wine are part of the complete ceremony.
The betrayal is discussed at the table, as in Matthew, Mark and John, but only Luke records in 22:24 that a sudden dispute arises among the disciples about who among them is greatest. Jesus replies with a story commending them to service (22:25-30) and Luke includes several verses from the “Q” material (22:28-30). Only in John does Jesus wash the feet of the disciples, but Luke includes more dialogue at the table than do the other Gospels.
Jesus predicts Peter’s denial starting at 22:31-34 following Mark’s account, but adding independently-sourced material in 22:35-38. Even so, Peter declares that he is prepared to follow Jesus to prison and even death.
Jesus Prays at the Mount of Olives - Read Luke 22:39-46
Luke’s account follows Mark very closely here, but Luke adds two independently-sourced verses at 22:43-44. Luke places Jesus on the Mount of Olives (with the other synoptics) while Matthew and Mark further identify the place as Gethsemane. The Gospel of John simply states that it was a garden near the Kidron brook. There is less discussion between Jesus and the disciples recorded in Luke and only in Luke does Jesus sweat drops of blood while praying prior to his arrest.
Links of Interest
An interesting commentary on the Last Supper as described in Luke, by Donald Senior, is here: http://www.cptryon.org/xpipassio/passio/luke/1supc.html
A comparison of the four Gospel accounts of the Last Supper here: http://gwydir.demon.co.uk/jo/gospels/block11.htm
A scholarly account of the Last Supper by Millar Burroughs is given here: http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1622&C=1555
An explanation of the Last Supper as a Jewish Seder here: http://jewsforjesus.org/publications/issues/3_2/passover
Study/Discussion Questions
Jesus instructed two of his disciples to go into the city and look for a man carrying a jar of water. How do you think they were they expected to find this person among the crowds of people and pilgrims?
Why the secrecy about holding the Passover meal?
Jesus says “This is my body, given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” And, in the same way after the supper “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you…” in Luke 22:19-20. Discuss the significance of this with respect to the symbolism in the Jewish Seder.
Compare the account of the Last Supper in Luke with the earliest description we have of communion in I Cor 11:23-34. What is similar and what are the differences?
How do Christians commemorate the Last Supper today? What does the “New Covenant in my blood” to mean to Christians?
Luther pointed to the Last Supper as described in Matthew as evidence that the communion cup should be offered to the laity. (The Roman church of Luther’s day offered only the bread to the congregation, reserving both bread and wine for the priests.) What did Luther see in the account by Matthew that is not as obvious in Luke?
Why does Luke think it is important to record the dispute among the disciples during the Last Supper?
How would you characterize Jesus’ understanding of the gravity of his situation from the events and dialogue on the Mount of Olives?
Judas Agrees to Betray Jesus – Read Luke 22:1-6
Luke closely follows the account in Mark on the betrayal of Jesus by Judas. Note that Judas meets with the priests before the Passover meal.
The Last Supper – Read Luke 22:7-38
The four Gospels do not agree on the day of the Last Supper. While the synoptic Gospels regard the Last Supper as a Jewish Seder held on the day of Passover, John’s Gospel clearly states the meal was held “before”. There is not enough evidence in all four accounts to determine the actual timing for certain, but the symbolism of the Seder would have been unmistakable and intentional by Jesus.
Luke provides several unique observations to the events of the Last Supper. In Luke 22:14-16 Jesus actually identifies the meal as a Passover Seder, but there is some debate among scholars as to whether Jesus participated in the meal. At no time in Luke is Jesus described as eating or drinking; in fact Jesus states he will not eat or drink again until “the kingdom of God comes.” Only in Luke does Jesus bless the wine twice: 22:17 and 22:20, giving further evidence that this is, in fact, a Passover Seder where four cups of wine are part of the complete ceremony.
The betrayal is discussed at the table, as in Matthew, Mark and John, but only Luke records in 22:24 that a sudden dispute arises among the disciples about who among them is greatest. Jesus replies with a story commending them to service (22:25-30) and Luke includes several verses from the “Q” material (22:28-30). Only in John does Jesus wash the feet of the disciples, but Luke includes more dialogue at the table than do the other Gospels.
Jesus predicts Peter’s denial starting at 22:31-34 following Mark’s account, but adding independently-sourced material in 22:35-38. Even so, Peter declares that he is prepared to follow Jesus to prison and even death.
Jesus Prays at the Mount of Olives - Read Luke 22:39-46
Luke’s account follows Mark very closely here, but Luke adds two independently-sourced verses at 22:43-44. Luke places Jesus on the Mount of Olives (with the other synoptics) while Matthew and Mark further identify the place as Gethsemane. The Gospel of John simply states that it was a garden near the Kidron brook. There is less discussion between Jesus and the disciples recorded in Luke and only in Luke does Jesus sweat drops of blood while praying prior to his arrest.
Links of Interest
An interesting commentary on the Last Supper as described in Luke, by Donald Senior, is here: http://www.cptryon.org/xpipassio/passio/luke/1supc.html
A comparison of the four Gospel accounts of the Last Supper here: http://gwydir.demon.co.uk/jo/gospels/block11.htm
A scholarly account of the Last Supper by Millar Burroughs is given here: http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1622&C=1555
An explanation of the Last Supper as a Jewish Seder here: http://jewsforjesus.org/publications/issues/3_2/passover
Study/Discussion Questions
Jesus instructed two of his disciples to go into the city and look for a man carrying a jar of water. How do you think they were they expected to find this person among the crowds of people and pilgrims?
Why the secrecy about holding the Passover meal?
Jesus says “This is my body, given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” And, in the same way after the supper “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you…” in Luke 22:19-20. Discuss the significance of this with respect to the symbolism in the Jewish Seder.
Compare the account of the Last Supper in Luke with the earliest description we have of communion in I Cor 11:23-34. What is similar and what are the differences?
How do Christians commemorate the Last Supper today? What does the “New Covenant in my blood” to mean to Christians?
Luther pointed to the Last Supper as described in Matthew as evidence that the communion cup should be offered to the laity. (The Roman church of Luther’s day offered only the bread to the congregation, reserving both bread and wine for the priests.) What did Luther see in the account by Matthew that is not as obvious in Luke?
Why does Luke think it is important to record the dispute among the disciples during the Last Supper?
How would you characterize Jesus’ understanding of the gravity of his situation from the events and dialogue on the Mount of Olives?
Thursday, February 7, 2008
"He went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem"
Luke Chapters 19, 20 and 21
Why start at chapter 19 verse 28 in Luke for a Bible study about Acts? The answer is that the Passion story is closely related in time to the events described at the beginning of Acts and Luke intended that his Gospel and Acts be read sequentially as two volumes of a single work. We study Luke’s account of the Passion story to get a sense of what pressures the disciples were under during and after the events of Holy Week.
In his version of the Passion story Luke follows the account given by Mark very closely. Only one verse in this part of Luke can be traced to the “Q” material – Luke 20:18. Look through chapters 19, 20 and 21 in the color-coded Luke here http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/jdtabor/luke.html
to get a sense of Luke’s use of his sources. Note the three sections of verses that comprise material appearing only in Luke: 19:39-44, 21:24 and 21:34-38. Read them two or three times to get a sense of why Luke feels these are important enough to include in his Gospel. (For additional information, see the lesson on “Who Wrote Luke and Acts”.)
Background to the Passion Story
Why did Jesus go up to Jerusalem? Some clues are given in Luke 2 with the presentation of the baby Jesus at the temple for circumcision. Also in 2:41 we read “every year his parents went to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Passover.” And we have the childhood story starting at Luke 2:42 where as a boy Jesus was lost and then found by his parents in the temple courts amazing the teachers with his knowledge of Hebrew scripture. For Jesus to go to Jerusalem for the Passover, and specifically to the temple, would be a perfectly natural event in keeping with his upbringing as an educated and observant Jew.
But Luke gives us a greater insight into why Jesus intended to go to Jerusalem in 13:33: “In any case, I must keep going today and tomorrow and the next day—for surely no prophet can die outside Jerusalem!” So there is never any doubt in Luke as to the purpose Jesus had in entering Jerusalem.
This lesson deals with three important stories that occur prior to the Last Supper: The Triumphal Entry, the Cleansing of the Temple and Jesus Teaching at the Temple.
The Triumphal Entry – Read Luke19:28-44
The Passover holidays were a particularly tense time for the local authorities in Jerusalem. Only at the temple could the appropriate sacrifices be made and the crowds poured in from the surrounding countryside such that the city’s population would double with pilgrims. The Passover story - with its context of the deliverance from slavery - would have been of particular concern for the Roman officials, ever sensitive to the possibility of rebellion by their Jewish subjects. Pilate, the Roman governor who normally resided on the coast, would have made it a point to be in the city with extra military reinforcements to keep trouble from starting or getting out of control. (See also “Politics of Roman Palestine.”)
In Luke 19:28–44, the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem is characterized as an extremely provocative act. The crowd of pilgrims flocking to the city would have heard Jesus preach in the countryside, and they formed a natural political constituency for him. Read Zechariah 9:9 – 10 and Psalm 118 for background to the symbolism in this story. Only in Luke’s Gospel do the Pharisees challenge the dramatic entry of Jesus and ask him to disavow the cheers of the crowd (19:39). Jesus then quotes Habakkuk 2:11 in reply and continues on, giving an emotional speech in 19:41-44 before entering the city proper.
The Cleansing of the Temple – Read Luke 19:45-48
Upon his arrival into the city Jesus goes to the temple court and, in the only violent act of his ministry, overturns the tables of the money-changers, driving them out of business. (See the lesson on “The Second Temple” for further information.) Here was something that would definitely attract the attention of the authorities. It was little wonder that, as Luke states in 19:47 “...the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the leaders among the people were trying to kill him.”
Jesus Teaches at the Temple – Read Luke Chapters 20, 21
In chapter 20 Luke describes the various attempts of the priests and Pharisees to trick Jesus into public blasphemy. In the first case, Luke 20:1-19, Jesus evades their question and replies with a stinging parable that ends with a famous quote from Psalm 118. Note that Luke also adds the quote from Q here to give emphasis. In Luke 20:20-26 they next try to trap Jesus into sedition by cleverly questioning him about the payment of taxes to the Roman government, but again he gives the perfect answer. Finally the Sadducees try to trick him on a point of Jewish marriage law and the resurrection of the dead, but once more he eludes their trap. Jesus then recites part of Psalm 110 to further clarify his status, and again rebukes the Pharisees.
Chapter 21 begins with the story of the Widow’s Mite – Jesus at the temple reflecting on the injustice of the collection of offerings. Starting at verse 5 Jesus offers his observations on the Signs of the End of the Age – a remarkable prophesy that fills up the rest of this chapter. Interestingly, Luke breaks the continuity of the account he is using from Mark to insert independently-sourced material at 21:24 and 21:34-38.
Links of Interest
A handy timeline for the life of Jesus is here:
http://www.biblenet.net/library/study/timeline.html
A useful study of the Triumphal Entry from a Catholic perspective is given here:
http://www.thecrossreference.blogspot.com/2006/02/bible-study-synoptics-15-triumphal.html
Study/Discussion Questions
1. From your reading of Zechariah and Psalm 118, what is Jesus declaring about himself by riding the foal of a donkey? Why must the donkey be one that has never been ridden before? What is the crowd saying by their actions?
2. Why do the Pharisees in Luke 19:39 ask Jesus to disavow the crowd? Why does Luke feel that this is important enough to break the narrative he is using from Mark to insert this?
3. From Luke 19:40-44, do you think Jesus feels “triumphant”?
4. What were money-changers doing in the temple court?
5. After the cleansing of the temple, why didn’t the priests simply have Jesus arrested? Why should they want to kill Jesus?
6. Why does Luke include independently-sourced material (21:24) in the “Signs of the End of the Age” prophesy when it seems to overlap that in the account already taken from Mark?
7. How many times and in how many ways does Jesus announce himself as a king or the Son of God?
8. We have focused on the political and social context of the actions of Jesus. How do you think God is using the situation at this place and time in history?
Why start at chapter 19 verse 28 in Luke for a Bible study about Acts? The answer is that the Passion story is closely related in time to the events described at the beginning of Acts and Luke intended that his Gospel and Acts be read sequentially as two volumes of a single work. We study Luke’s account of the Passion story to get a sense of what pressures the disciples were under during and after the events of Holy Week.
In his version of the Passion story Luke follows the account given by Mark very closely. Only one verse in this part of Luke can be traced to the “Q” material – Luke 20:18. Look through chapters 19, 20 and 21 in the color-coded Luke here http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/jdtabor/luke.html
to get a sense of Luke’s use of his sources. Note the three sections of verses that comprise material appearing only in Luke: 19:39-44, 21:24 and 21:34-38. Read them two or three times to get a sense of why Luke feels these are important enough to include in his Gospel. (For additional information, see the lesson on “Who Wrote Luke and Acts”.)
Background to the Passion Story
Why did Jesus go up to Jerusalem? Some clues are given in Luke 2 with the presentation of the baby Jesus at the temple for circumcision. Also in 2:41 we read “every year his parents went to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Passover.” And we have the childhood story starting at Luke 2:42 where as a boy Jesus was lost and then found by his parents in the temple courts amazing the teachers with his knowledge of Hebrew scripture. For Jesus to go to Jerusalem for the Passover, and specifically to the temple, would be a perfectly natural event in keeping with his upbringing as an educated and observant Jew.
But Luke gives us a greater insight into why Jesus intended to go to Jerusalem in 13:33: “In any case, I must keep going today and tomorrow and the next day—for surely no prophet can die outside Jerusalem!” So there is never any doubt in Luke as to the purpose Jesus had in entering Jerusalem.
This lesson deals with three important stories that occur prior to the Last Supper: The Triumphal Entry, the Cleansing of the Temple and Jesus Teaching at the Temple.
The Triumphal Entry – Read Luke19:28-44
The Passover holidays were a particularly tense time for the local authorities in Jerusalem. Only at the temple could the appropriate sacrifices be made and the crowds poured in from the surrounding countryside such that the city’s population would double with pilgrims. The Passover story - with its context of the deliverance from slavery - would have been of particular concern for the Roman officials, ever sensitive to the possibility of rebellion by their Jewish subjects. Pilate, the Roman governor who normally resided on the coast, would have made it a point to be in the city with extra military reinforcements to keep trouble from starting or getting out of control. (See also “Politics of Roman Palestine.”)
In Luke 19:28–44, the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem is characterized as an extremely provocative act. The crowd of pilgrims flocking to the city would have heard Jesus preach in the countryside, and they formed a natural political constituency for him. Read Zechariah 9:9 – 10 and Psalm 118 for background to the symbolism in this story. Only in Luke’s Gospel do the Pharisees challenge the dramatic entry of Jesus and ask him to disavow the cheers of the crowd (19:39). Jesus then quotes Habakkuk 2:11 in reply and continues on, giving an emotional speech in 19:41-44 before entering the city proper.
The Cleansing of the Temple – Read Luke 19:45-48
Upon his arrival into the city Jesus goes to the temple court and, in the only violent act of his ministry, overturns the tables of the money-changers, driving them out of business. (See the lesson on “The Second Temple” for further information.) Here was something that would definitely attract the attention of the authorities. It was little wonder that, as Luke states in 19:47 “...the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the leaders among the people were trying to kill him.”
Jesus Teaches at the Temple – Read Luke Chapters 20, 21
In chapter 20 Luke describes the various attempts of the priests and Pharisees to trick Jesus into public blasphemy. In the first case, Luke 20:1-19, Jesus evades their question and replies with a stinging parable that ends with a famous quote from Psalm 118. Note that Luke also adds the quote from Q here to give emphasis. In Luke 20:20-26 they next try to trap Jesus into sedition by cleverly questioning him about the payment of taxes to the Roman government, but again he gives the perfect answer. Finally the Sadducees try to trick him on a point of Jewish marriage law and the resurrection of the dead, but once more he eludes their trap. Jesus then recites part of Psalm 110 to further clarify his status, and again rebukes the Pharisees.
Chapter 21 begins with the story of the Widow’s Mite – Jesus at the temple reflecting on the injustice of the collection of offerings. Starting at verse 5 Jesus offers his observations on the Signs of the End of the Age – a remarkable prophesy that fills up the rest of this chapter. Interestingly, Luke breaks the continuity of the account he is using from Mark to insert independently-sourced material at 21:24 and 21:34-38.
Links of Interest
A handy timeline for the life of Jesus is here:
http://www.biblenet.net/library/study/timeline.html
A useful study of the Triumphal Entry from a Catholic perspective is given here:
http://www.thecrossreference.blogspot.com/2006/02/bible-study-synoptics-15-triumphal.html
Study/Discussion Questions
1. From your reading of Zechariah and Psalm 118, what is Jesus declaring about himself by riding the foal of a donkey? Why must the donkey be one that has never been ridden before? What is the crowd saying by their actions?
2. Why do the Pharisees in Luke 19:39 ask Jesus to disavow the crowd? Why does Luke feel that this is important enough to break the narrative he is using from Mark to insert this?
3. From Luke 19:40-44, do you think Jesus feels “triumphant”?
4. What were money-changers doing in the temple court?
5. After the cleansing of the temple, why didn’t the priests simply have Jesus arrested? Why should they want to kill Jesus?
6. Why does Luke include independently-sourced material (21:24) in the “Signs of the End of the Age” prophesy when it seems to overlap that in the account already taken from Mark?
7. How many times and in how many ways does Jesus announce himself as a king or the Son of God?
8. We have focused on the political and social context of the actions of Jesus. How do you think God is using the situation at this place and time in history?
Sunday, February 3, 2008
The Second Temple in Jerusalem
The temple figures prominently in the last chapters of Luke and the first parts of Acts. This was the focal point of Jewish ritual and authority in Palestine and was considered sacred space. Jesus taught in the temple before his arrest and the apostles taught there also after the ascension. As noted in the previous post the temple was enlarged and restored as a public works project by Herod the Great. This was partly to keep the restless Jews busy and partly to win their loyalty by creating a more magnificent structure than that built by Solomon. Herod started the temple but it took some 46 years to complete.
The temple succeeded brilliantly as an architectural piece and would have been very impressive to visitors. The temple complex covered 35 acres on a hilltop in Jerusalem and the main access was by a series of stairways that brought visitors up the hillside and suddenly into the main temple court. The effect would be something like going to Dodger Stadium – you walk up a series of stairs, enter, and suddenly the entire field is before you.
The temple complex consisted of a series of concentric courts. The outer Court of Gentiles was the largest and a very public place - anyone could visit this part of the temple. The Beautiful Gate leads from there to the Court of Women, reserved as a place for Jewish women to place their offerings - Luke’s account of the story of the Widow’s Mite took place here. Another gate leads from this space to the Court of Israel – restricted to male Jews. The sacrificial altar was located in the inner Court of Priests, restricted to the Sadducees who were in charge of the temple. Finally, there was an inner room containing the Holy of Holies – a large curtain behind which a single high priest and God would converse on the Day of Atonement. This curtain is specifically mentioned in Luke’s Passion narrative.
Jesus and the apostles would probably have done their preaching in the Court of Gentiles as this was the least restrictive and most public part of the temple complex. This was also a sort of marketplace with stalls and vendors, especially during the high holy days and feasts. It was here that Jesus overturned the tables of the money changers who were charging people exorbitant rates for the right to buy sacrificial animals during Passover.
In 70 AD the temple was destroyed by the Romans as retribution for the Jewish revolt. The only visible remains are parts of the retaining wall foundation and this is known today as the Wailing Wall.
The temple was an important symbolic place in Jerusalem and the actions of Jesus and the apostles here take on a special significance, as we shall see in our study.
Links of Interest
A general description of Herod’s temple appears here: http://www.cptryon.org/xpipassio/passio/arch/2templ.html
A more detailed description of the temple is given here: http://www.bible-history.com/jewishtemple/
Study/Discussion Questions
1. Herod’s temple is not unique in its architectural plan of concentric, ever more restrictive spaces. Can you name other examples?
2. In what ways would our Trinity campus be similar or different from the temple plan?
3. Read Luke 19:45 – 48.
Where does this incident occur? Why do you think the priests would want to kill Jesus?
4. Read Luke 23:44 - 46
What is the significance of the tearing of the temple curtain?
5. Read Acts 3:1 – 16.
Using the links above, can you identify the location of this story inside the temple complex?
The temple succeeded brilliantly as an architectural piece and would have been very impressive to visitors. The temple complex covered 35 acres on a hilltop in Jerusalem and the main access was by a series of stairways that brought visitors up the hillside and suddenly into the main temple court. The effect would be something like going to Dodger Stadium – you walk up a series of stairs, enter, and suddenly the entire field is before you.
The temple complex consisted of a series of concentric courts. The outer Court of Gentiles was the largest and a very public place - anyone could visit this part of the temple. The Beautiful Gate leads from there to the Court of Women, reserved as a place for Jewish women to place their offerings - Luke’s account of the story of the Widow’s Mite took place here. Another gate leads from this space to the Court of Israel – restricted to male Jews. The sacrificial altar was located in the inner Court of Priests, restricted to the Sadducees who were in charge of the temple. Finally, there was an inner room containing the Holy of Holies – a large curtain behind which a single high priest and God would converse on the Day of Atonement. This curtain is specifically mentioned in Luke’s Passion narrative.
Jesus and the apostles would probably have done their preaching in the Court of Gentiles as this was the least restrictive and most public part of the temple complex. This was also a sort of marketplace with stalls and vendors, especially during the high holy days and feasts. It was here that Jesus overturned the tables of the money changers who were charging people exorbitant rates for the right to buy sacrificial animals during Passover.
In 70 AD the temple was destroyed by the Romans as retribution for the Jewish revolt. The only visible remains are parts of the retaining wall foundation and this is known today as the Wailing Wall.
The temple was an important symbolic place in Jerusalem and the actions of Jesus and the apostles here take on a special significance, as we shall see in our study.
Links of Interest
A general description of Herod’s temple appears here: http://www.cptryon.org/xpipassio/passio/arch/2templ.html
A more detailed description of the temple is given here: http://www.bible-history.com/jewishtemple/
Study/Discussion Questions
1. Herod’s temple is not unique in its architectural plan of concentric, ever more restrictive spaces. Can you name other examples?
2. In what ways would our Trinity campus be similar or different from the temple plan?
3. Read Luke 19:45 – 48.
Where does this incident occur? Why do you think the priests would want to kill Jesus?
4. Read Luke 23:44 - 46
What is the significance of the tearing of the temple curtain?
5. Read Acts 3:1 – 16.
Using the links above, can you identify the location of this story inside the temple complex?
The Political, Social and Religious Situation in Palestine, AD 33
An appreciation of the social, political and religious situation in 1st century Palestine is essential to the understanding of Jesus’ ministry and of the history of the early church. In what sort of culture did Jesus operate? What were the main political and religious issues? How was Jesus seen by the various factions? These questions are key to understanding the last few chapters of Luke and the book of Acts.
Palestine in New Testament times contained a diverse society, if predominantly Jewish, that had enjoyed independence prior to being conquered by Rome in 63 BCE. The Romans preferred to administer their conquered territories using local customs and puppet rulers that they could control behind the scenes. In Palestine this meant allowing the practice of traditional Jewish Law and backing a series of kings all (confusingly for us) named Herod.
At the time of Jesus’ birth, Herod the Great initiated a series of large public works projects – ports, aqueducts, roads, fortresses – that are the hallmark of Roman rule. Herod also began work on the refurbishment of the temple in the center of Jerusalem. This was a stroke of brilliance by the Romans: what better way to earn the gratitude of their devout – and restive - Jewish subjects than to build up a great temple, more impressive than anything seen before?
The memory of their independent past, the onerous Roman taxation and the undeniable benefits conferred by Herod’s projects all gave rise to a decidedly mixed opinion of the Roman occupation among the Jewish populace. The Essenes withdrew to the desert to form a monastic community dedicated to the study of Hebrew scripture. The Zealots, a small but fanatical group agitated for armed rebellion. The more conservative and aristocratic elements of society – the Sadducees – saw Roman occupation as an advantage and readily collaborated. Others such as the everyday laborers, merchants, and the Pharisees who administered local laws, were somewhere in between.
All this had a tremendous impact on the local religious scene. As the priestly class, the Sadducees were in control of the new temple. This great edifice was the natural focal point of Judaism and revived the sacrificial aspects of Mosaic Law in a new and grander way than in times past. A sacrifice could only be made at the temple altar by a priest, and the fees and revenues from this were a huge source of income for the Jewish elite. To many ordinary Jews it must have seemed that the requirements of their religion were being used to finance their subjugation.
The Sanhedrin – the high court of the Jewish law – was also composed of Sadducees but they ultimately reported to the Roman governor. This amplified the influence of the Sadducees but they were seen as collaborators and to some extent Herod’s temple came to symbolize the Roman domination of Palestine.
The Pharisees had jurisdiction in the many synagogues that served the majority of the Jewish populace. They acted as teachers and arbitrators of the law, settling routine conflicts and disagreements using both oral and written traditions. The Sadducees, by contrast, held that only written law had true authority and this difference in interpretation of the extent of the law was a source of tension between the two groups. Another difference was that the Sadducees found no scriptural basis for the resurrection of the dead whereas the Pharisees allowed for this. (This will be an important point in the later chapters of Acts).
At the time of Jesus’ ministry, everyday Jewish law was being worked out in this politically charged context. The Pharisees wanted, naturally, to enhance their authority and were busy codifying the laws of oral tradition that were tolerated so easily by the Roman doctrine of rule by local custom. The complexity of these laws and their variance with the true intent Hebrew scripture was the basis for Jesus’ criticism of the Pharisees. This gave the ministry of Jesus a sort of anti-establishment spin that eventually attracted the attention of the authorities.
This is why the final entry of Jesus into Jerusalem had such dramatic overtones, and why the early church was periodically persecuted. How this played out will be a big part of our study.
Links of Interest
A good general introduction to life in Roman Palestine is here:
http://www.jesuscentral.com/ji/historical-jesus/jesus-firstcenturycontext.php
A useful description of the political and cultural state of 1st century Palestine is here: http://www.paulonpaul.org/booth/jewish_background.htm
Here is a chart of the various political leaders in Palestine during the first century:
http://www.crivoice.org/romanrul.html
Study/Discussion Questions
1. In the United States we have separation of church and state and we have freedom of religion. Contrast this with the situation in Roman Palestine of the 1st century.
2. Do you think there are people like the Pharisees and the Sadducees in our society today?
3. Read Matt 3:1 – 10, Matt 23:1 – 39, Luke 20:45 - 47
Characterize the opinion of John the Baptist and Jesus with respect to the Pharisees.
4. Read Acts15:5
Why do you think Pharisees are joining the Christian church?
5. Using the Bible Gateway link for the NIV Bible, enter the word “Pharisee” into the search box and count how many occurrences appear in the Gospel of Luke.
6. It is said that Jesus taught in the Pharisaic tradition. Do you agree or disagree?
Palestine in New Testament times contained a diverse society, if predominantly Jewish, that had enjoyed independence prior to being conquered by Rome in 63 BCE. The Romans preferred to administer their conquered territories using local customs and puppet rulers that they could control behind the scenes. In Palestine this meant allowing the practice of traditional Jewish Law and backing a series of kings all (confusingly for us) named Herod.
At the time of Jesus’ birth, Herod the Great initiated a series of large public works projects – ports, aqueducts, roads, fortresses – that are the hallmark of Roman rule. Herod also began work on the refurbishment of the temple in the center of Jerusalem. This was a stroke of brilliance by the Romans: what better way to earn the gratitude of their devout – and restive - Jewish subjects than to build up a great temple, more impressive than anything seen before?
The memory of their independent past, the onerous Roman taxation and the undeniable benefits conferred by Herod’s projects all gave rise to a decidedly mixed opinion of the Roman occupation among the Jewish populace. The Essenes withdrew to the desert to form a monastic community dedicated to the study of Hebrew scripture. The Zealots, a small but fanatical group agitated for armed rebellion. The more conservative and aristocratic elements of society – the Sadducees – saw Roman occupation as an advantage and readily collaborated. Others such as the everyday laborers, merchants, and the Pharisees who administered local laws, were somewhere in between.
All this had a tremendous impact on the local religious scene. As the priestly class, the Sadducees were in control of the new temple. This great edifice was the natural focal point of Judaism and revived the sacrificial aspects of Mosaic Law in a new and grander way than in times past. A sacrifice could only be made at the temple altar by a priest, and the fees and revenues from this were a huge source of income for the Jewish elite. To many ordinary Jews it must have seemed that the requirements of their religion were being used to finance their subjugation.
The Sanhedrin – the high court of the Jewish law – was also composed of Sadducees but they ultimately reported to the Roman governor. This amplified the influence of the Sadducees but they were seen as collaborators and to some extent Herod’s temple came to symbolize the Roman domination of Palestine.
The Pharisees had jurisdiction in the many synagogues that served the majority of the Jewish populace. They acted as teachers and arbitrators of the law, settling routine conflicts and disagreements using both oral and written traditions. The Sadducees, by contrast, held that only written law had true authority and this difference in interpretation of the extent of the law was a source of tension between the two groups. Another difference was that the Sadducees found no scriptural basis for the resurrection of the dead whereas the Pharisees allowed for this. (This will be an important point in the later chapters of Acts).
At the time of Jesus’ ministry, everyday Jewish law was being worked out in this politically charged context. The Pharisees wanted, naturally, to enhance their authority and were busy codifying the laws of oral tradition that were tolerated so easily by the Roman doctrine of rule by local custom. The complexity of these laws and their variance with the true intent Hebrew scripture was the basis for Jesus’ criticism of the Pharisees. This gave the ministry of Jesus a sort of anti-establishment spin that eventually attracted the attention of the authorities.
This is why the final entry of Jesus into Jerusalem had such dramatic overtones, and why the early church was periodically persecuted. How this played out will be a big part of our study.
Links of Interest
A good general introduction to life in Roman Palestine is here:
http://www.jesuscentral.com/ji/historical-jesus/jesus-firstcenturycontext.php
A useful description of the political and cultural state of 1st century Palestine is here: http://www.paulonpaul.org/booth/jewish_background.htm
Here is a chart of the various political leaders in Palestine during the first century:
http://www.crivoice.org/romanrul.html
Study/Discussion Questions
1. In the United States we have separation of church and state and we have freedom of religion. Contrast this with the situation in Roman Palestine of the 1st century.
2. Do you think there are people like the Pharisees and the Sadducees in our society today?
3. Read Matt 3:1 – 10, Matt 23:1 – 39, Luke 20:45 - 47
Characterize the opinion of John the Baptist and Jesus with respect to the Pharisees.
4. Read Acts15:5
Why do you think Pharisees are joining the Christian church?
5. Using the Bible Gateway link for the NIV Bible, enter the word “Pharisee” into the search box and count how many occurrences appear in the Gospel of Luke.
6. It is said that Jesus taught in the Pharisaic tradition. Do you agree or disagree?
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Who Wrote Luke and Acts?
The subject of how the New Testament was written and compiled is a study in itself and has occupied scholars for many years. But before we begin reading Luke and Acts in detail we ought to have at least a little background on Luke as an author, the date of his writing and his intended audience.
It is important to understand that the books of the New Testament were not written in order they appear in our Bible, and they were written a good number of years after the events they describe. The oldest writing in the New Testament is I Thessalonians, written by Paul about AD 51. The first written Gospel was Mark, compiled about AD 60. The other Gospels came later with the last, John, being written in the mid-90s. Thus the first Christian writings came about 15 years after the ministry of Jesus was complete and the last Gospel was finally written down some 60 years after the events it described!
Why was this so? The early church was a community united in the expectation of the imminent return of Jesus Christ. Stories of Jesus were passed along by word of mouth and the idea of writing a formal account of His life and works was simply not a priority for the post-resurrection church. Even as Paul wrote his letters to the early congregations these were advisory or theological in nature and not an attempt at organized history.
Most scholars agree that Mark’s Gospel was the first written account of the ministry of Jesus and that this represents the eyewitness recollections of Peter. Matthew and Luke were written about 20 years later and make extensive use of the material in Mark, generally telling the story of Jesus in the same sequence. For that reason, Matthew, Mark and Luke are called the synoptic (with the same view) Gospels. In the 19th century German scholars studying the synoptic Gospels realized that there is separate material common to Luke and Matthew, but not present in Mark. They named this the “Q” source because the actual document has been lost to us.
Luke probably wrote his Gospel and Acts sometime in the mid-80s. There is evidence that Luke was an eyewitness to some of the events described in Acts, but it is also clear that Luke considered himself an historian who wanted to compile a comprehensive account that took in material from Mark, Q and perhaps other sources. The writing style and literary similarities of Luke and Acts confirm that both books were written by the same person.
Who was Luke? Tradition and some direct Biblical evidence tell us that Luke was a physician and traveling companion of Paul. Luke was a culturally Greek Christian - his literary style and theological agenda point to this very clearly. Luke wrote his Gospel and Acts to be read as two consecutive volumes. His audience was ostensibly a man named “Theophilus” but this was perhaps a literary device; Luke was probably addressing his educated countrymen who were interested in the Christian story.
At the time Luke was writing – the mid 80s – the Christians had been persecuted as a Jewish sect. Peter and Paul had been executed by Nero in the mid 60s and the political situation in Palestine had become so critical that by AD 70 the Romans sacked Jerusalem, destroying the great temple. In his writings Luke was, at some level, attempting to distinguish the Christians from the rebellious Jews.
But above all, Luke sets out to chronicle the activities of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is mentioned 70 times in Acts – something like one fifth of all the occurrences in the entire New Testament. This is the great contribution that Luke makes to our Bible. In many ways what we will be studying can be accurately described as the Acts of the Holy Spirit!
Links of Interest
Here is the Gospel of Luke color-coded: Red for material coming from Mark, Blue for Q and Orange for other material unique to Luke. http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/jdtabor/luke.html
An interesting introduction to the writings of Luke by Edgar Goodspeed is given here: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/goodspeed/ch12.html
A detailed discussion of the priority of Mark is given here:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/mark-prior.html
Study/Discussion Questions
1. What do you hope to get out of a study of Luke and Acts?
2. Read Luke 1:1 – 4 and Acts 1:1
What can you deduce about the sources Luke is using for his writings?
In Acts 1:1, what is “the first book” that Luke refers to?
3. Read Acts 13:1 – 52, Acts 16:10 – 17, Acts 21:1 – 17
For which of the above do you think Luke was an eyewitness? Why?
4. Read Acts 15:1 - 35 and Paul's account of the same issue in Gal 2:1 – 21
Do you think Luke was an eyewitness to the events described in Acts 15? Why or why not?
5. Read Col 4:7 – 18, 2 Tim 4:9 – 13 and Philemon
Do you think this is strong evidence for Luke traveling with Paul?
6. Read Luke 10:25 – 37, Luke 11:1 - 4 and Luke 6:20 – 23
Using the parallel gospels link on the right-hand margin of this blog, see if you can determine which material comes from Mark and which from “Q”.
It is important to understand that the books of the New Testament were not written in order they appear in our Bible, and they were written a good number of years after the events they describe. The oldest writing in the New Testament is I Thessalonians, written by Paul about AD 51. The first written Gospel was Mark, compiled about AD 60. The other Gospels came later with the last, John, being written in the mid-90s. Thus the first Christian writings came about 15 years after the ministry of Jesus was complete and the last Gospel was finally written down some 60 years after the events it described!
Why was this so? The early church was a community united in the expectation of the imminent return of Jesus Christ. Stories of Jesus were passed along by word of mouth and the idea of writing a formal account of His life and works was simply not a priority for the post-resurrection church. Even as Paul wrote his letters to the early congregations these were advisory or theological in nature and not an attempt at organized history.
Most scholars agree that Mark’s Gospel was the first written account of the ministry of Jesus and that this represents the eyewitness recollections of Peter. Matthew and Luke were written about 20 years later and make extensive use of the material in Mark, generally telling the story of Jesus in the same sequence. For that reason, Matthew, Mark and Luke are called the synoptic (with the same view) Gospels. In the 19th century German scholars studying the synoptic Gospels realized that there is separate material common to Luke and Matthew, but not present in Mark. They named this the “Q” source because the actual document has been lost to us.
Luke probably wrote his Gospel and Acts sometime in the mid-80s. There is evidence that Luke was an eyewitness to some of the events described in Acts, but it is also clear that Luke considered himself an historian who wanted to compile a comprehensive account that took in material from Mark, Q and perhaps other sources. The writing style and literary similarities of Luke and Acts confirm that both books were written by the same person.
Who was Luke? Tradition and some direct Biblical evidence tell us that Luke was a physician and traveling companion of Paul. Luke was a culturally Greek Christian - his literary style and theological agenda point to this very clearly. Luke wrote his Gospel and Acts to be read as two consecutive volumes. His audience was ostensibly a man named “Theophilus” but this was perhaps a literary device; Luke was probably addressing his educated countrymen who were interested in the Christian story.
At the time Luke was writing – the mid 80s – the Christians had been persecuted as a Jewish sect. Peter and Paul had been executed by Nero in the mid 60s and the political situation in Palestine had become so critical that by AD 70 the Romans sacked Jerusalem, destroying the great temple. In his writings Luke was, at some level, attempting to distinguish the Christians from the rebellious Jews.
But above all, Luke sets out to chronicle the activities of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is mentioned 70 times in Acts – something like one fifth of all the occurrences in the entire New Testament. This is the great contribution that Luke makes to our Bible. In many ways what we will be studying can be accurately described as the Acts of the Holy Spirit!
Links of Interest
Here is the Gospel of Luke color-coded: Red for material coming from Mark, Blue for Q and Orange for other material unique to Luke. http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/jdtabor/luke.html
An interesting introduction to the writings of Luke by Edgar Goodspeed is given here: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/goodspeed/ch12.html
A detailed discussion of the priority of Mark is given here:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/mark-prior.html
Study/Discussion Questions
1. What do you hope to get out of a study of Luke and Acts?
2. Read Luke 1:1 – 4 and Acts 1:1
What can you deduce about the sources Luke is using for his writings?
In Acts 1:1, what is “the first book” that Luke refers to?
3. Read Acts 13:1 – 52, Acts 16:10 – 17, Acts 21:1 – 17
For which of the above do you think Luke was an eyewitness? Why?
4. Read Acts 15:1 - 35 and Paul's account of the same issue in Gal 2:1 – 21
Do you think Luke was an eyewitness to the events described in Acts 15? Why or why not?
5. Read Col 4:7 – 18, 2 Tim 4:9 – 13 and Philemon
Do you think this is strong evidence for Luke traveling with Paul?
6. Read Luke 10:25 – 37, Luke 11:1 - 4 and Luke 6:20 – 23
Using the parallel gospels link on the right-hand margin of this blog, see if you can determine which material comes from Mark and which from “Q”.
Introduction
Why Study Acts?
A study of Acts can seem daunting at first – Luke and Acts, taken together, make up something like 25% of the New Testament and describe many different people, places and events. But Acts is the best bridge we have between the ministry of Jesus and the history of the early church. It was not until I took a class on Acts that I realized that you could connect the actual events described in the missionary journeys of Paul to the founding of the churches to whom he later wrote his letters. We should study Acts if only because it is the vital connecting point of the Pauline epistles that figure so prominently in Lutheran theology.
Another reason to study Acts is that the story it tells is a compelling one. In the night Jesus was arrested, his disciples scattered in fear, and the movement seemed permanently broken – even Peter denied knowing Jesus three times. The frightened followers of Jesus were country people - far out of their element in Jerusalem - yet Acts tells us that they stayed on in the city and continued to preach the Word. How could this be? How did the church continue to grow despite persecution? What challenges did the early church face and how were these challenges addressed? What are the lessons in Acts for our contemporary church? I hope we can all understand the answers to these questions by the end of the study.
We will begin with the Passion narrative of Luke’s Gospel to give a sense of continuity between the conclusion of the ministry of Jesus and the events described in Acts. Luke and Acts were written by the same author and were intended to be read sequentially. This will also provide a good review as we enter the Lenten and Easter seasons. Each week we will study 3 to 5 chapters, so be prepared to read!
Anyone with access to the Internet can participate in this study and perhaps you have distant relatives who might be interested in following along . With any luck we might attract some new people from across the country, or even further!
How the Study Works
Each week a new posting on this blog will introduce a section of scripture to read. A list of study questions will follow. You are invited to respond with your answers by commenting. Simply click on the “comments” link at the bottom of the post and a box will appear for you to write in your thoughts.
You can comment on as many or as few of the questions as you like, and you can make more than one comment on a topic. You can comment anonymously, with a pseudonym or you can use your own name. Hopefully we can generate some interesting discussions.
You can join the study at any time – or catch up if you fall behind. The postings and comments will always be available.
Etiquette
Everyone is encouraged to add to the discussion with comments, but please remember that we should act like we are all part of the same family. It is sometimes easy to get carried away with our rhetoric, but we don’t want to insult anyone even if we strongly disagree with what they may have written. Don’t be shy, but don’t be rude!
Comments will be reviewed before they appear – this is a precaution so that the blog is not defaced or vandalized by passers-by. (The Internet can still be a bit crude at times.) I will not edit any comments but I may ask you by e-mail to revise a questionable comment before it is posted.
I can be reached by e-mail at ulx@linuxmail.org if you spot an error, something that needs correction or you just want to communicate without using a comment.
I hope this on-line study proves successful so that we may continue to offer adult education at Trinity in as many ways to as many people as possible.
A study of Acts can seem daunting at first – Luke and Acts, taken together, make up something like 25% of the New Testament and describe many different people, places and events. But Acts is the best bridge we have between the ministry of Jesus and the history of the early church. It was not until I took a class on Acts that I realized that you could connect the actual events described in the missionary journeys of Paul to the founding of the churches to whom he later wrote his letters. We should study Acts if only because it is the vital connecting point of the Pauline epistles that figure so prominently in Lutheran theology.
Another reason to study Acts is that the story it tells is a compelling one. In the night Jesus was arrested, his disciples scattered in fear, and the movement seemed permanently broken – even Peter denied knowing Jesus three times. The frightened followers of Jesus were country people - far out of their element in Jerusalem - yet Acts tells us that they stayed on in the city and continued to preach the Word. How could this be? How did the church continue to grow despite persecution? What challenges did the early church face and how were these challenges addressed? What are the lessons in Acts for our contemporary church? I hope we can all understand the answers to these questions by the end of the study.
We will begin with the Passion narrative of Luke’s Gospel to give a sense of continuity between the conclusion of the ministry of Jesus and the events described in Acts. Luke and Acts were written by the same author and were intended to be read sequentially. This will also provide a good review as we enter the Lenten and Easter seasons. Each week we will study 3 to 5 chapters, so be prepared to read!
Anyone with access to the Internet can participate in this study and perhaps you have distant relatives who might be interested in following along . With any luck we might attract some new people from across the country, or even further!
How the Study Works
Each week a new posting on this blog will introduce a section of scripture to read. A list of study questions will follow. You are invited to respond with your answers by commenting. Simply click on the “comments” link at the bottom of the post and a box will appear for you to write in your thoughts.
You can comment on as many or as few of the questions as you like, and you can make more than one comment on a topic. You can comment anonymously, with a pseudonym or you can use your own name. Hopefully we can generate some interesting discussions.
You can join the study at any time – or catch up if you fall behind. The postings and comments will always be available.
Etiquette
Everyone is encouraged to add to the discussion with comments, but please remember that we should act like we are all part of the same family. It is sometimes easy to get carried away with our rhetoric, but we don’t want to insult anyone even if we strongly disagree with what they may have written. Don’t be shy, but don’t be rude!
Comments will be reviewed before they appear – this is a precaution so that the blog is not defaced or vandalized by passers-by. (The Internet can still be a bit crude at times.) I will not edit any comments but I may ask you by e-mail to revise a questionable comment before it is posted.
I can be reached by e-mail at ulx@linuxmail.org if you spot an error, something that needs correction or you just want to communicate without using a comment.
I hope this on-line study proves successful so that we may continue to offer adult education at Trinity in as many ways to as many people as possible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
