Another look at Luke: What's unique?

[Redbaron]

I'm reminded (speaking of poetry) of something I read about William Temple, one time Archbishop of Canterbury. He told his missionaries to India never to read the Magnificat in public, in case the natives got ideas. All that stuff about throwing down the mighty, and lifting up the humble... filling the hungry and sending the rich away empty... that's the stuff of revolution.

 

[Waterfall]

I'm reminded (speaking of poetry) of something I read about William Temple, one time Archbishop of Canterbury. He told his missionaries to India never to read the Magnificat in public, in case the natives got ideas. All that stuff about throwing down the mighty, and lifting up the humble... filling the hungry and sending the rich away empty... that's the stuff of revolution.

Yes especially for the hierarchy of the church.
Here we are, still watching and waiting for the RC church and some others to rectify this problem and allow woman to take a rightful part in church life.

 

[unsafe]

So for me these verses stand out -----


59 On the eighth day they came to circumcise the child, and they were going to name him after his father Zechariah, 60 but his mother spoke up and said, “No! He is to be called John.”

61 They said to her, “There is no one among your relatives who has that name.”

62 Then they made signs to his father, to find out what he would like to name the child. 63 He asked for a writing tablet, and to everyone’s astonishment he wrote, “His name is John.” 64 Immediately his mouth was opened and his tongue set free, and he began to speak, praising God.

My view -----
So we see here Zechariah is still speechless -----until he agrees that the baby's name is John ---which is the name given to him by the angel who he questioned about this being possible because of his age ----and then his tongue is set free from the curse of his unbelief -----

So God waited till the very last minute to release the curse on Zechariah -----we see here his unbelief turned into belief and trust in God as He right away after speaking was praising God and being Filled with the Holy Spirit and started Prophesying in a song ------

This shows us that no human can or will stop God's Plan from happening ------His Will --Will be done -----God will do what He has to ---to bring about all good for those who believe and trust in Him ---and He gives the Faithful
the filling of the Holy Spirit which brings about Spiritual Gifts like Prophecy ---Discernment ---Tongues ----etc as seen in 1 Corinthians 12


Todays verse For reflection:

Because of our God's tender mercy, the dawn will break upon us from on high; (Luke 1: 78 NET)


My view on this -----is that we have to know what the words ender ---mercy --dawn and high ---means here in this scripture -----

Strong's Concordance here

So the Greek word for Tender in this verse ---- splagchnon: the inward parts (heart, liver, lungs, etc.), fig. the emotions-----a heart in which mercy resides (heart of mercy), Luke 1:78;

And Mercy here in this verse means ----1656 éleos , "covenant-loyalty, covenant-love" in the OT-LXX over 170 times) – properly, "mercy" as it is defined by loyalty to God's covenant.

And the Word Dawn in this scripture according to Strong's --- a light rising ἐξ ὕψους, Luke 1:78.

And High here in this scripture according to Strong's is ----- of place heaven (A. V. on high), Ephesians 4:8 (from Psalm 67:19 ()); Luke 1:78;

My view on the reflection verse ---- for me this verse is saying---- Because of God's heart of mercy the Glory of the Lord will rise upon those who are loyal to His Covenant from heaven -----

 

[Waterfall]

So for me these verses stand out -----


59 On the eighth day they came to circumcise the child, and they were going to name him after his father Zechariah, 60 but his mother spoke up and said, “No! He is to be called John.”

61 They said to her, “There is no one among your relatives who has that name.”

62 Then they made signs to his father, to find out what he would like to name the child. 63 He asked for a writing tablet, and to everyone’s astonishment he wrote, “His name is John.” 64 Immediately his mouth was opened and his tongue set free, and he began to speak, praising God.

My view -----
So we see here Zechariah is still speechless -----until he agrees that the baby's name is John ---which is the name given to him by the angel who he questioned about this being possible because of his age ----and then his tongue is set free from the curse of his unbelief -----

So God waited till the very last minute to release the curse on Zechariah -----we see here his unbelief turned into belief and trust in God as He right away after speaking was praising God and being Filled with the Holy Spirit and started Prophesying in a song ------

This shows us that no human can or will stop God's Plan from happening ------His Will --Will be done -----God will do what He has to ---to bring about all good for those who believe and trust in Him ---and He gives the Faithful
the filling of the Holy Spirit which brings about Spiritual Gifts like Prophecy ---Discernment ---Tongues ----etc as seen in 1 Corinthians 12


Todays verse For reflection:

Because of our God's tender mercy, the dawn will break upon us from on high; (Luke 1: 78 NET)


My view on this -----is that we have to know what the words ender ---mercy --dawn and high ---means here in this scripture -----

Strong's Concordance here

So the Greek word for Tender in this verse ---- splagchnon: the inward parts (heart, liver, lungs, etc.), fig. the emotions-----a heart in which mercy resides (heart of mercy), Luke 1:78;

And Mercy here in this verse means ----1656 éleos , "covenant-loyalty, covenant-love" in the OT-LXX over 170 times) – properly, "mercy" as it is defined by loyalty to God's covenant.

And the Word Dawn in this scripture according to Strong's --- a light rising ἐξ ὕψους, Luke 1:78.

And High here in this scripture according to Strong's is ----- of place heaven (A. V. on high), Ephesians 4:8 (from Psalm 67:19 ()); Luke 1:78;

My view on the reflection verse ---- for me this verse is saying---- Because of God's heart of mercy the Glory of the Lord will rise upon those who are loyal to His Covenant from heaven -----

So what's the significance for God wanting his name to be John?

 

[unsafe]

Waterfall ----what a great Question ?

Found This -----read all here
https://bible.org/seriespage/why-john-was-not-named-little-zach-luke-157-80

Why was the naming of the child so important, and so emotional? And why was naming the child John such a bone of contention? The naming of the son after his father implied that this child would “walk in the steps of his father,” that he would carry on the father’s name, and thus his work as well. Had John been named “Little Zach,” he would have been expected to grow up as a priest, just like his father. He would thus have gone about with his father as he carried out his priestly duties, learning how to do things, just like his daddy did them.

To be named by any other name would have implied just the opposite. John would not follow in his father’s steps. He would not learn to do what his father did. He would not be a priest. This, of course, was precisely the case, and thus the reason for the name John. It isn’t the meaning of the name “John” which is so important, then, but the message implied by having any name other than Zacharias which is such an emotional issue. If many of those gathered at the circumcision ceremony were relatives, Elizabeth’s insistence that the boy be named John was to renounce the family, its work, and its perpetuation through the next generation.

 

[paradox3]

The naming of these babies announced by Gabriel seems to be an important detail. We see that others wanted John to be named after his father, but Elizabeth and Zechariah willingly complied with the command of the angel.

There is no argument with the name of Jesus at his circumcision. (Luke 2:21)

These names traditionally mean:

John = God is gracious
Jesus = God is salvation

Interesting in Matthew's gospel, Mary is told by the angel to call her son Emmanuel, meaning "God with us".

 

[JRT]

Yes especially for the hierarchy of the church.
Here we are, still watching and waiting for the RC church and some others to rectify this problem and allow woman to take a rightful part in church life.

Any organization, religious or secular and including marriage, that fails to include women in leadership roles right up to the very top is guilty of several evils. First, it is the insult to the women themselves by viewing them as less worthy. Second, it is the insult to God by denigrating half of God’s creation. If we continue to treat women in this way, then the human race is condemned to stand on one foot, see with one eye, hear with one ear and think with one half the human mind ---- and it shows.

 

[unsafe]

paradox 3 ---I would like to answer what Waterfall and JRT has said in post #87 but this is off Thread topic I think so Just checking about answering ----

 

[paradox3]

paradox 3 ---I would like to answer what Waterfall and JRT has said in post #87 but this is off Thread topic I think so Just checking about answering ----

If we are heading for a discussion about the role of women in the Catholic church, we are probably off topic.

OTOH, the influence and interpretation of Mary's role in the narrative could be an important factor, and today's text says a lot about her. Ditto for Luke 2. Go for it, unsafe.

 

[unsafe]

JRT ---you said ------ Any organization, religious or secular and including marriage, that fails to include women in leadership roles right up to the very top is guilty of several evils

I say --Well I agree with what you say here I think we have to look at where this came from ----

God never intended for women to feel inferior to men or for men to feel superior to women -----God used many women to bring about His plan ----Mary and Elizabeth were 2 that were held in very high esteem by God and who had major leadership roles in His plan of Salvation --------

Man created Religion and took God's word and twisted it to say women could not be in leadership roles --Any person man or woman who today has received Jesus as their Lord and Saviour and has the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in God's eyes is a Minister and can and should be leaders and preachers today --Mary Magdalene was the first commissioned woman to carry the message of Jesus Resurrection to the Disciples ------Man made Religions are the culprits of several evils today in my view ---- they are holding women back because of misinterpretations of God's word ----

 

[paradox3]

Luke 2: 1 - 40 The Birth of Jesus and Presentation at the Temple

Luke's birth narrative is a familiar one! It is often read in church and we have heard many sermons inspired by it. The story was read word for word in the Peanuts special, Charlie Brown's Christmas. "And that's what Christmas is all about," says Linus.

After the shepherds return home, the tale continues. The child is circumcised on the eighth day and named Jesus.

The time comes for Jesus, (first born male) to be purified in the temple. Mary and Joseph offer the required sacrifices.

Praises are sung to Jesus by Simeon (with the Holy Spirit upon him) and by the prophet Anna. Both are of advanced age.

Mary, Joseph and Jesus return to Nazareth. The child grows and becomes strong, filled with wisdom. He has the favor of God.

For reflection, the Song of Simeon:

Now, according to your word, Sovereign Lord, permit your servant to depart in peace,
For my eyes have seen your salvation that you have prepared in the presence of all peoples,
A light for revelation to the Gentiles,
And for glory to your people Israel. (Luke 2: 29-32 NET)

 

[paradox3]

Interesting that both Zechariah and Simeon use the metaphor of light to describe Jesus.

God used many women to bring about His plan ----Mary and Elizabeth were 2 that were held in very high esteem by God and who had major leadership roles in His plan of Salvation --------

Simeon blessed Mary & Joseph and spoke privately to Mary about Jesus' destiny. He tells her that a sword will pierce her own soul. I wonder why he didn't give the message to both parents. Does this speak to Mary's special status?

The prophet Anna echoes Simeon in his praise, perhaps balancing out the male and female aspects of the story. Earlier, before Jesus was born, both Mary and Zechariah raised their voices in His honor.

Anna is very old, having been married for 7 years and widowed for 84 years. Could the numbers be significant?

Anna never leaves the temple, worshiping with prayer and fasting both day and night. She approaches Mary and Joseph after their encounter with Simeon and gives thanks to God. She speaks about the child who has been awaited to bring about the redemption of Jerusalem.

My study bible suggests Anna is the same name as Hannah, meaning "gracious". Anna praises God for the child Jesus just as Hannah praised God for Samuel.

It is possible that Anna was allowed to live in the temple and she may have had some duties there.

Other female prophets were: Miriam, Deborah, Huldah and the daughters of Philip.

 

[paradox3]

Here's another thought.

We often hear that Gentiles are the target audience for Luke's gospel. Why, then, does he take such care to establish continuity with the Hebrew scriptures? The echoes of Hannah and Samuel, for example?

By giving us the two circumcision stories, he is clearly establishing that John and Jesus are both Jewish.

 

[unsafe]

This verse in Luke 2 stands out for me today ------GWT here

6 While they were in Bethlehem, the time came for Mary to have her child. 7 She gave birth to her firstborn son. She wrapped him in strips of cloth and laid him in a manger because there wasn’t any room for them in the inn.


I say ----This sentence is very significant as it is used as a sign for the shepherds to recognize their Messiah ----


11 Today your Savior, Christ the Lord, was born in David’s city. 12 This is how you will recognize him: You will find an infant wrapped in strips of cloth and lying in a manger.


I say ------So we see here that the Shepherds were told that how to recognize the baby ------he was wrapped in strips of cloth and he was in a manger ------

Questions
Why is this important information for the Shepherds ?-----it had to mean something as the angel was taking time to point this out to them ---

-Would it make it easier for them to believe the angel ?---

Would it have given them a clue as to where the baby was laid ?

 

[paradox3]

Why is this important information for the Shepherds ?-----it had to mean something as the angel was taking time to point this out to them ---

-Would it make it easier for them to believe the angel ?---

Would it have given them a clue as to where the baby was laid ?

Good questions.

Some have speculated that the babe's wrappings foreshadow Christ's burial. Jumping ahead to Luke's account of this (Luke 27: 53), Joseph of Arimathea takes the body down from the cross, wraps it in linen cloth and places it in a tomb where no one has ever been buried.

Could the manger represent the tomb? Presumably no other human infant would ever have been placed in the animals' manger.

But I am just guessing.

 

[unsafe]

paradox3 ----good suggestions and ones that make sense for sure -----


This was for me when I was researching some time ago was a an epiphany moment regarding the strips of cloths --it hit me like a ton of bricks -----and I immediately started to praise God for this revelation as it became so clear to me and made such sense -----


The Shepherds use to wrap their Baby Lambs that were being used for Blood Sacrifices in strips of cloth so they were not bruised or damaged in any way ----they keep them in as perfect condition as they could -----So for the Shepherd being told that there was a Baby wrapped in strips of Cloth they would have immediately been aware that their Messiah their Sacrificial Lamb was born

my view on the manger
The manger as we know was an animal feeding trough and for me this is significant because the trough provided them a place to feed from -----Jesus is our bread of Life in this physical realm and Spiritual realm and our nourishment comes from eating and digesting the Word Who is Jesus -----so for me Him being laid in a feeding trough was very significant ---So for me this was no accident --this was meant to happen -----

Also the Shepherds would have known right where to find the baby as they would have been very familiar with the area of where the feeding troughs were kept in a house -----

 

[JRT]

Anna is very old, having been married for 7 years and widowed for 84 years. Could the numbers be significant?

Hmmm. 7 + 84 = 91 plus maybe 15 at marriage makes her 106. So, yes, very old. In fact unlikely old for that time and place. I agree that it is likely that the ages are symbolic.

 

[paradox3]

Let's see. 7 is associated with the days of creation.

Half of 84 is 42. So maybe this is a stretch.

But we had some discussion about the properties of 42 on the recent Mark thread.
It is a number of interest to mathematicians.
There are 42 generations in the genealogies of Matthew and Luke.

Who can know?

84= 7 X 12

Maybe this means something. We know there were 12 tribes of Israel and 12 apostles.

 

[Waterfall]

It can get complicated:

Gematria - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Mendalla]

Luke's birth narrative is a familiar one! It is often read in church and we have heard many sermons inspired by it. The story was read word for word in the Peanuts special, Charlie Brown's Christmas. "And that's what Christmas is all about," says Linus.

It's my favorite of the two and, yeah, I've read it in church a few times. Not sure how much that preference is shaped by Linus' wonderful reading in Charlie Brown but I'm sure it's a factor. I think the whole thing feels a bit more "real", too. The whole wise men thing always seems a bit more over-the-top in its symbolism than the local shepherds and their supernatural encounter. Which bring me to a thought.

I'm curious about what people think about the wise men in Matthew vs. the shepherds here. In one you have these educated, well-heeled foreigners greeting Jesus with lavish gifts. In the other, it's rough and ready local boys with only worship to offer. Do these reflect some kind of difference between the two Gospels in how they are viewing the event? Does the difference in visitors/worshippers change the meaning, or just spin it differently?