Bible Study Thread: Luke

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thoughts on Luke 7:39-40...

The host was disgusted. The thought of Jesus' being touched by such a character made him shudder. And so he felt that Jesus couldn't be a prophet.

☆ The same smugness' found in modern Pharisees. They draw aside, even when they're told that a former sinner has left sin's path, not knowing that they're filled with conceit. ☆

Jesus knew the Pharisee's thoughts, and he gave him evidence that he was a prophet who knew people's hearts. He determined to give this Pharisee a lesson, to convince and gain him.

The host acquiesced when Jesus asked him whether he might tell him a matter, lay a case before him.
 
Thoughts on Luke 7:41-46...

Two debtors owed someone money; a bit of stress for the sake of the parable's application: Simon and the woman, both debtors to Jesus.

In the one case the debt was large, 500 denarii, almost 95,000 ₩; in the other small, only 10% of that sum. Both were unable to pay, both were excused from paying the debt.

Now the question was: which of the two debtors was under the greater obligation to Jesus, and whose love would so be the greater?

The answer was clear, although the Pharisee answered to avoid problems that such was his view.

Now came the lesson. For the first time Jesus turned to the woman and also asks Simon to look at her whom he had hated. For the Pharisee could learn a lesson from society's outcast.

Jesus draws a parallel between Simon's behavior and this woman's.

☆ Simon gave no water, the woman gave tears. He gave no welcome kiss, she gave many kisses. He gave no oil, she gave precious ointment. ☆

Simon hadn't even observed the courtesies extended to a guest.

When a guest came to a Jew's house, he was greeted with a kiss. Then the servants rinsed off the feet. And then followed anointing with oil, of which drops were poured on the guest's head.

Jesus' words were an effective reproof.
 
OMG Jae -----your quote -----Actually unsafe, it is our deeds that are as filthy rags. "And all we be made as an unclean man; all our rightfulnesses be as the cloth of a woman in menstruation, or unclean blood; and all we fell down as a leaf, and our wickednesses, as wind, have taken away us." - Isaiah 64:6 (WYC). And the verse says nothing about Jesus.

Jae ----Jesus is God ---If we are not with God we are away from God ----------you should read the chapter there Jae -----I am posting commentary so you get it -----you can read all if you wish----

Study Guide for Isaiah 64 by David Guzik

2. (Isa 64:5-7) The obstacle to God's great works: our great sinfulness.

You meet him who rejoices and does righteousness, who remembers You in Your ways. You are indeed angry, for we have sinned; in these ways we continue; and we need to be saved. But we are all like an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags; we all fade as a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. And there is no one who calls on Your name, who stirs himself up to take hold of You; for You have hidden Your face from us, and have consumed us because of our iniquities.

a. You meet him who rejoices and does righteousness: The praying one asks the question, "What kind of man does the LORD answer in prayer?" In Isaiah 64:4, he noted that it was the one who waits for the LORD. Now the praying one expands the idea, and notes that the LORD will answer the prayer (meet) the one who rejoices and does righteousness. The LORD will answer the prayer of the one who remembers the LORD in his ways.

b. Knowing that, there is a problem: For we have sinned - in these ways we continue; and we need to be saved. The praying remnant knows that God only answers the prayers of the righteous man, yet it isn't the righteous man who needs to be saved from the disaster he has brought on himself. And we need to be saved is translated well by the NIV here as, How then can we be saved? The praying one then goes on to eloquently describe our state of sin.

i. First, our sin makes us like an unclean thing; it makes us unacceptable and unworthy before God. "Under the Jewish law you know that when a person was unclean he could not go up to the house of the Lord. He could offer no sacrifice. God could accept nothing at his hands; he was an outcast and an alien so long as he remained unclean." (Spurgeon)

ii. Even all our righteousness are like filthy rags. The good we may try to do is unacceptable and unclean before the LORD. Because we are all like an unclean thing, even the good we do is polluted. "Brethren, if our righteousnesses are so bad, what must our unrighteousnesses be?
 
unsafe said:
OMG Jae -----your quote -----Actually unsafe, it is our deeds that are as filthy rags. "And all we be made as an unclean man; all our rightfulnesses be as the cloth of a woman in menstruation, or unclean blood; and all we fell down as a leaf, and our wickednesses, as wind, have taken away us." - Isaiah 64:6 (WYC). And the verse says nothing about Jesus.

Jae ----Jesus is God ---If we are not with God we are away from God ----------you should read the chapter there Jae -----I am posting commentary so you get it -----you can read all if you wish----

Study Guide for Isaiah 64 by David Guzik

2. (Isa 64:5-7) The obstacle to God's great works: our great sinfulness.

You meet him who rejoices and does righteousness, who remembers You in Your ways. You are indeed angry, for we have sinned; in these ways we continue; and we need to be saved. But we are all like an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags; we all fade as a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. And there is no one who calls on Your name, who stirs himself up to take hold of You; for You have hidden Your face from us, and have consumed us because of our iniquities.

a. You meet him who rejoices and does righteousness: The praying one asks the question, "What kind of man does the LORD answer in prayer?" In Isaiah 64:4, he noted that it was the one who waits for the LORD. Now the praying one expands the idea, and notes that the LORD will answer the prayer (meet) the one who rejoices and does righteousness. The LORD will answer the prayer of the one who remembers the LORD in his ways.

b. Knowing that, there is a problem: For we have sinned - in these ways we continue; and we need to be saved. The praying remnant knows that God only answers the prayers of the righteous man, yet it isn't the righteous man who needs to be saved from the disaster he has brought on himself. And we need to be saved is translated well by the NIV here as, How then can we be saved? The praying one then goes on to eloquently describe our state of sin.

i. First, our sin makes us like an unclean thing; it makes us unacceptable and unworthy before God. "Under the Jewish law you know that when a person was unclean he could not go up to the house of the Lord. He could offer no sacrifice. God could accept nothing at his hands; he was an outcast and an alien so long as he remained unclean." (Spurgeon)

ii. Even all our righteousness are like filthy rags. The good we may try to do is unacceptable and unclean before the LORD. Because we are all like an unclean thing, even the good we do is polluted. "Brethren, if our righteousnesses are so bad, what must our unrighteousnesses be?
Click to expand...

That the commentary says we are like an unclean thing does not change that the Scripture says that our deeds are like filthy rags.
 
Thoughts on Luke 7:47-50...

Jesus tells Simon: "She's forgiven, for she loved much."

That her many sins had been forgiven filled her with love, which she showed by her behavior. The love followed and flowed out of the forgiveness.

There's no partial forgiveness. A sinner to whom certain sins are forgiven has forgiveness of them all.

Simon's lack of love proved that he had no forgiveness. He cared nothing about forgiveness in his self-righteous mind.

To the woman Jesus now said, "You're forgiven." This word from Jesus was her forgiveness' seal and surety. It was the word which inflamed her faith's glow into a rich fire.

Jesus continued in his assurance to the woman. Her faith, which she'd proved by her love, had saved her. Through her faith she had accepted Jesus' redemption, she was salvation's child.
 
Grasping at straws again Jae ---if the deeds are filthy rags the person is unclean which means apart from God -----the deeds don't happen by themselves there Jae ---can't separate the deeds from the person ----

Hebrew word here
Strong's Concordance
ed: filthy
Brown-Driver-Briggs
[עִדָּה] noun feminine menstruation, so Vrss (properly time, period); — plural absolute בֶּגֶד עִדִּים Isaiah 64:5 i.e. stained garment (figurative of best deeds of guilty people; "
 
Jae said:
That her many sins had been forgiven filled her with love, which she showed by her behavior. The love followed and flowed out of the forgiveness.
Click to expand...
The interplay of forgiveness, love and behavior is truly something to contemplate here.
 
Summary: Luke 3: 1 - 3

Soon afterwards, Jesus went on through the cities and villages, bringing the good news of the kingdom of God.

The twelve were with him, as well as some women who had been cured of evil spirits and illnesses.

There was Mary, called Magdalene, from whom 7 demons had gone out.

There was Joanna (the wife of Herod's steward Chuza), Susanna and many others.

The women provided for Jesus and the disciples out of their resources.
 
Reflection: Luke 3: 1 - 3

Immediately following the story of the woman with the alabaster jar of ointment, we have this text about the many women accompanying Jesus and the disciples. Both stories are unique to Luke.

Mary Magdalene and the others seem to be women of means since they are able to provide for the company of men out of their resources. Having been cured of evil spirits and infirmities, they are responsive and supportive to Jesus.

Here we have Jesus surrounded by women, a view we do not often see in the gospels. What does this tell us about Jesus? Are we seeing a more human Jesus here?

What does it tell us about the writer of Luke's gospel and how he wished to portray Him?
 
paradox3 said:
Summary: Luke 3: 1 - 3

Soon afterwards, Jesus went on through the cities and villages, bringing the good news of the kingdom of God.

The twelve were with him, as well as some women who had been cured of evil spirits and illnesses.

There was Mary, called Magdalene, from whom 7 demons had gone out.

There was Joanna (the wife of Herod's steward Chuza), Susanna and many others.

The women provided for Jesus and the disciples out of their resources.
Click to expand...

Er... maybe you mean Luke 8.
 
By the time Luke's Gospel was written, the names of the apostles were likely already established and known. Seems to me that the author of Luke goes to some lengths to remind the reader that some (indeed, maybe most) of Jesus' financial and moral support came from unnamed women; starting with the woman with the jar of ointment, and continuing in ch. 8 with a few of the names of the many women who were with him.
 
Thoughts on Luke 8:1-3...

Dr. Luke isn't concerned about the sequence of events that happened at the same time, in this case during Jesus' Galilean ministry.

While Jesus was in Galilee, he made a tour of the places of that part of Palestine. His work's again brought into the foreground, proclaiming God's kingdom, preaching the good news of humanity's salvation.

The 12 were with Jesus on this tour; they were the theological students, receiving training in Jesus' school.

There were also with certain women whom Dr. Luke mentions by name. These were bound to Jesus by gratitude, and they were glad to serve him.

Missional women have always counted it an honor to serve Jesus. We see here the beginning of women's service in the Church, and triumph of the evangelical spirit over Jewish rabbinism's limitation.
 
Funny I never think of Joanna and Susanna as biblical names.

According to my concordance, this is the only mention of Susanna. Joanna and Mary Magdalene will reappear later.
 
Redbaron said:
By the time Luke's Gospel was written, the names of the apostles were likely already established and known. Seems to me that the author of Luke goes to some lengths to remind the reader that some (indeed, maybe most) of Jesus' financial and moral support came from unnamed women; starting with the woman with the jar of ointment, and continuing in ch. 8 with a few of the names of the many women who were with him.
Click to expand...
I agree with this interesting comment re the representation of women in Luke's gospel. I looked a little further and discovered this article too which articulates that thought well, IMO at least. No doubt jae & unsafe will view it differently. I accept that difference of perception & really don't want to debate which view is "correct" or "right" or "true", as that's a subject that's been beaten to death here so many times.
Male-Female: Equality in the Gospel of Luke - The Junia Project
 
Carolla said:
I agree with this interesting comment re the representation of women in Luke's gospel. I looked a little further and discovered this article too which articulates that thought well, IMO at least. No doubt jae & unsafe will view it differently. I accept that difference of perception & really don't want to debate which view is "correct" or "right" or "true", as that's a subject that's been beaten to death here so many times.
Male-Female: Equality in the Gospel of Luke - The Junia Project
Click to expand...

To be clear, complementarianism does not argue that men and women are unequal. Rather, it posits that men and women are most certainly equal but have different, complementary roles to play. Men and women are equal, but men are not women and women are not men.
 
Um, before this goes in a bad way, can we keep the complementarianism debate in the other thread? No use derailing two threads with it (though I'm not clear if it's really a derail in the other one since I wasn't clear on Ritafee's intentions for that one).

And I am serious on that. If anyone responds to Jae with anything other than a discussion of complementarianism in Luke, I'm hitting Report.
 
Mendalla said:
Um, before this goes in a bad way, can we keep the complementarianism debate in the other thread? No use derailing two threads with it (though I'm not clear if it's really a derail in the other one since I wasn't clear on Ritafee's intentions for that one).

And I am serious on that. If anyone responds to Jae with anything other than a discussion of complementarianism in Luke, I'm hitting Report.
Click to expand...

It's actually a complementarianism/egalitarianism debate Mendalla. Not quite fair to peg it on just complementarianism or on me either. It was @Carolla who posted the link to "Male-Female: Equality..." here. That said, yes, best to keep it to one thread. I'm not clear on what @Ritafee's initial point was either.
 
Jae said:
It's actually a complementarianism/egalitarianism debate Mendalla. Not quite fair to peg it on just complementarianism or on me either. It was @Carolla who posted the link to "Male-Female: Equality..." here. That said, yes, best to keep it to one thread. I'm not clear on what @Ritafee's initial point was either.
Click to expand...

I never pointed a finger at you, just asked that it stop there or be related back to Luke.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top