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.
s
Redbaron said:
John's Gospel and Luke's Gospel are two different documents.
Click to expand...

they are not different documents, they are, however , documents of the Same account, thats why all 4 accounts are given one term

The Gospels

Right now we are studying Luke's Gospel, which does NOT contain events from John's first chapter. It is the conflation of the stories that confuses things. We've had a few discussions of conflation already in this thread. Kindly avoid doing it. Please and thank you.
Click to expand...

hmmmm, sorry no I will not stop, I do not consider it conflation when there are not 1 But 4 witness of THE SAME accounts , and also in Luke 16:14, its Jesus who brings up John.

Please and Thank you :)
 
Whether you consider it so or not, it is conflation. We have had this discussion before. The 4 canonical gospel; are different documents. They may be written about the same person, but they are four DIFFERENT accounts. To conflate them continues to add confusion to the stories, and diminishes understanding of the Story. Kindly cease from confusing and conflating the 4 different stories of the one person.
 
Redbaron said:
Whether you consider it so or not, it is conflation. We have had this discussion before. The 4 canonical gospel; are different documents. They may be written about the same person, but they are four DIFFERENT accounts. To conflate them continues to add confusion to the stories, and diminishes understanding of the Story. Kindly cease from confusing and conflating the 4 different stories of the one person.
Click to expand...

I have already discussed this way up thread, and we came to an agreement, furthermore, conflation most times gives errors or misunderstandings, understand the 4 gospels give correction and proper understanding, not of Different account but of the ,,,,,,same account!

so since I disagree with you, Kindly I will not stop
 
And by the way, the author of Luke's gospel wasn't an eye witness to the events he wrote about.
 
blackbelt1961 said:
Luke 16:14, its Jesus who brings up John.
Click to expand...
I have always thought Jesus was referring to John the Baptist in Luke 16:14. It was this John who came proclaiming the Kingdom of God, was it not?

As for the authorship of the gospel of John, some believe it was written by the disciple John, son of Zebedee and brother of James. Others dispute this, of course, but it seems to be a common tradition.
 
paradox3 said:
I have always thought Jesus was referring to John the Baptist in Luke 16:14. It was this John who came proclaiming the Kingdom of God, was it not?
Click to expand...
Yes , in John 1 its John the Baptist

John 1 29 Behold the Lamb of God

I guess I could have been more clear , John the Baptist as written by John the Apostle

As for the authorship of the gospel of John, some believe it was written by the disciple John, son of Zebedee and brother of James. Others dispute this, of course, but it seems to be a common tradition.
Click to expand...
Indeed
 
Last edited:
paradox3 said:
I have always thought Jesus was referring to John the Baptist in Luke 16:14. It was this John who came proclaiming the Kingdom of God, was it not?

As for the authorship of the gospel of John, some believe it was written by the disciple John, son of Zebedee and brother of James. Others dispute this, of course, but it seems to be a common tradition.
Click to expand...
Discussing who wrote John is probably a discussion we should save until we are talking about that Gospel.

Certainly in this Passage Luke (and Jesus) is referring to JtB. Of course the way John proclaimed the Kingdom and the way Jesus proclaimed the Kingdom are not quite the same.
 
Carolla said:
This to me asks us to reflect at bit on our preoccupations with 'the law' - our rules, expectations, assumptions that we are often so reluctant to relinquish. These can be conscious or unconscious - and influence choices. Change is hard - is that also an aspect of this? To relinquish just 'one stroke' seems impossible at times.
Click to expand...
It is difficult for me to decipher what Jesus is getting at here when he mentions the law. The law and the prophets were in effect until John proclaimed the Kingdom of God, that much seems clear. Beyond this, I think His words can be interpreted in a few different ways.

Luke 16 is quite the chapter to ponder!
 
paradox3 said:
It is difficult for me to decipher what Jesus is getting at here when he mentions the law. The law and the prophets were in effect until John proclaimed the Kingdom of God, that much seems clear. Beyond this, I think His words can be interpreted in a few different ways.

Luke 16 is quite the chapter to ponder!
Click to expand...
Didn't Jesus say he came to incease rhe law?
 
Waterfall said:
Didn't Jesus say he came to incease rhe law?
Click to expand...
Luke 16 has Jesus saying, "But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the law to be dropped."

To me, this is ambiguous.

Compare with Matthew 5:17

"Do not think I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished."

Do Matthew and Luke have Jesus making the same point or saying something different? I am not sure.
 
paradox3 said:
Luke 16 has Jesus saying, "But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the law to be dropped."

To me, this is ambiguous.

Compare with Matthew 5:17

"Do not think I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished."

Do Matthew and Luke have Jesus making the same point or saying something different? I am not sure.
Click to expand...
Sounds the same ro me but Im open if anyone else thinks otherwise with reason.
 
Interesting that in Matthew 5 Jesus goes on to say that one's righteousness must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees in order to see the kingdom of heaven. In Luke 16 he goes on to talk about divorce and adultery, suggesting a higher level of morality than the law demanded.

Similar but not identical message.
 
paradox3 said:
Interesting that in Matthew 5 Jesus goes on to say that one's righteousness must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees in order to see the kingdom of heaven. In Luke 16 he goes on to talk about divorce and adultery, suggesting a higher level of morality than the law demanded.

Similar but not identical message.
Click to expand...
Keeps us on our toes!
 
Summary: Luke 16: 19 - 31

There was a rich man who feasted every day and wore fine clothes. At his gate, there was a poor man named Lazarus who longed to eat what fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs would come and lick his sores.

The poor man died and was carried away by the angels to be with Abraham. The rich man died and was buried. He was tormented in Hades, where he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus at his side. He begged Abraham to send Lazarus with a little water for his tongue.

Abraham told him to remember that he received good things during his lifetime and Lazarus received evil things. Now Lazarus is being comforted and the rich man is in agony.

But there is a chasm between them that cannot be crossed. The rich man begged Abraham to send Lazarus to his father's house, that he might warn his five brothers and allow them to avoid the place of torment.

But Abraham replied, "They have Moses and the prophets. They should listen to them."

The rich man protested, "No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent."

Abraham answered, "If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead."
 
Reflection: Luke 16: 19 - 31

Why was the rich man being tormented in Hades? Is it because he ignored the poor soul who was right there at his gate?

This seems to be another teaching from Jesus which emphasizes the poor and lowly. It likely would have surprised some of his listeners that the poor man got to reside with Abraham.

There is a message here that the Law and the Prophets are still in effect and need to be heeded.

Jesus also seems to be saying that repentance has to happen on this side of death.
 
When I read this I'm reminded of Jesus saying in Luke 9:60, "Let the dead bury the dead"
It does seem Jesus wants the word of Gods Kingdom spread before death occurs.
I am also intrigued by the gnostic teaching that resurrection must take place before you die. Jesus was baptized by the Holy spirit through John and was transfigured before his death....what does God require us to do before we die? Is it just to repent?
 
Waterfall said:
what does God require us to do before we die? Is it just to repent?
Click to expand...
Today's parable only addresses this obliquely. But I think it is suggesting that living our lives righteously (i.e listening to the law and the prophets) is important. Particularly when it comes to our treatment of the poor.

By the way, a quick search this morning shows me that not everyone considers this story a parable. There is a school of thought that it might represent an actual event.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top