Gospels

I’m studying Luke 20:1-18 at the moment.

Peter Leithart (introduction of House for my Name) gives head-crushing as an example of a theme-symbol in the OT. The serpent will have its head crushed in Genesis 3, which makes it significant that the enemies of God frequently have their heads crushed – Goliath, Abimelech etc.

James Jordan (chapter on rocks in Through New Eyes) points out the theme of stones as objects of judgement. The proscribed OT death penalty was for stoning, Daniel 2, Isaiah 8 etc.

We can put these together. Both Abimelech and Goliath are not only killed by having their heads crushed. Their heads are crushed with stones. So when Jesus says that the tenants will have the stone fall on them and crush them, all those allusions – including Genesis 3 – are evoked. The startling thing, of course, in Luke 20 is who the tenants are. Suddenly the people of Jerusalem, primarily but not exclusively their leaders, are being alluded to the serpent, Abimelech, Goliath, Nebuchadnezzar side of the equation. Ouch!

I’ve got so tired of hearing people, who find irresistible appeal in Open Theism, citing Mark 7:24-30 that it’s time to say something. The appeal is made without consideration to: (i) the Chalcedonian need not to confuse Christ’s two natures, and (ii) the dynamics of human relationships that are playing out. The claim is: Here is an example of God changing his mind.

While Shepherds Watched is a great hymn.

Bear in mind that Matthew loves OT allusions.
Bear in mind that the magi are Gentile worshippers of Jesus.

He deliberately reports (2:1) that they came from the east.

From the land East of Eden. From Sodom and Gomorrah. From the way into the tabernacle and temple. They came from the east to Jerusalem.

Are we supposed to learn that the birth of this child is access back into the presence of God. Not just for Jewish exiles (1:17), but for Gentiles too?

There’s some good news. Happy Christmas everyone!

OK, it doesn’t fit the tune, but it does fit the sentiment.

Joel Green, NICNT Luke, page 137:

In the light of the cosmic scope of the Isaianic Messianic hope Luke keeps alluding to in chapter 2, and in the light of the references to Gentiles we’ve already had this far in Luke:

This means that the expression ‘those whom he favors’ cannot be limited in application to Israel only. Rather, shalom for Israel is tied up with shalom for the cosmos. Hence, although ‘whom he favors’ is an affirmation of gracious election on God’s part, that graciousness extends to humanity. It should not be read in an exclusive sense – that is, not peace only to a select group whom he favors – but in an inclusive way: In the birth of this child, God’s mercy has fallen on the world.

Thanks to Joel Green, commentary on Luke page 136, for this one

Isaiah 1:3

The ox knows its owner,
and the donkey its master’s crib,
but Israel does not know,
my people do not understand.

Picking up, again on this CHN article. The Bible is quite clear that it’s a fair question. Jesus did die for the sins of the whole world. John 3:16 says, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life”.Just a small exegetical observation.

Many thanks to Peter Davies, vicar at Audley for his permission to reproduce this morning’s sermon here. Very helpful, I thought, for how clearly he put things. Echoes of Rich Lusk at one point – which certainly is not a criticism!

I have to say that this familiar passage is such a shock to the system.

Re-reading Mark 14 is interesting. In Gethsemane, the disciples were urged to stay awake, watch and pray so that they might not fall into temptation. Jesus himself stayed awake and prayed – presumably including prayer to remain faithful under the forthcoming trial.

A sobering statement on human nature. The disciples could see Jesus, the Son of God incarnate, praying to his father that he might not yield to temptation. Yet they thought (implicitly or explicitly, it doesn’t matter) that they could endure without the Father’s help. Astounding – and sobering.

That also gives a point of contact between chapters 13 and 14. The concluding exhortation in chapter 13 is “stay awake”, the same thing Jesus has to tell the disciples in chapter 14. Could this be one key to working out Mark’s intent in these chapters?

Just noticed an inclusio here. Jesus appoints apostles (3:13-19) before being rejected by his immeediate family (3:20-35).

Later, Jesus is rejected at Nazareth, his home town (6:1-6), and then sends the apostles out (6:7-13).

Could it be (kite-flying time!) that the intervening section concerns why even those closest to Jesus can reject him?

Answer 1: Because the same word attracts different responses. God is not obliged to open people's eyes (chapter 4).
Answer 2: Because evil is so powerful - but Jesus is more so (5:1-20)
Answer 3: Because Jesus needs to raise the dead (5:21-43)