|
Post by Josh on Apr 23, 2008 17:11:37 GMT -8
Post your comments, questions, and discussion starters on any part of Luke 1-2 as replies here.
Your thoughts can help shape the teaching and serve as a springboard for further discussion and reflection.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Apr 25, 2008 10:02:51 GMT -8
Any thoughts, folks? Give me some input to expand on!
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Apr 25, 2008 18:16:43 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by michelle on Apr 25, 2008 18:38:29 GMT -8
I would gather from this that we should thoroughly investigate the claims of our faith before trying to convince others that we should be listened to. The more we know, the stronger we will stand against questions and criticism.
|
|
|
Post by michelle on Apr 25, 2008 19:00:32 GMT -8
There were a few things that stood out to me about this section:
1) I love the irony (?) that Zechariah, being a priest, has the same reaction as Abraham when he is told that he is going to become a father...my wife and I are too old. I love Gabriel's response to Zechariah's question "How can I be sure of this?" "I AM GABRIEL." Funny stuff.
2) I found it interesting that Luke, who was so detail oriented, would first write about John being put in prison, then immediately after follow up with Jesus being baptised...and even mention John.
3) The thing that I found the most interesting is a couple of things Luke wrote about Mary. In 2:19 he writes, "But Mary treasured up all these things and pondered them in her heart" and in v 51b "But his mother treasured all these things in her heart." Knowing something like this would require either intimate knowledge of someone or Mary would have to have been sharing these stories with people. Did Mary become close to Paul? Would James have told Paul these stories and Paul told Luke? How would Luke have been privy to this kind of information. Also, it's interesting to me that Luke is a doctor and historian, but that he puts phrases like that in his book. That is so personal and intimate. Not what one might think about a doctor/historian.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Apr 25, 2008 19:47:02 GMT -8
1) Good old Zechariah. I'm going to focus in on him big time on Sunday.
2) Did you mean "doesn't" even mention John. He kind of does in that he's referring back to John's baptism from a few verses earlier. But I think he doesn't say John again because he already flash-forwarded to his arrest.
3) There is a great novel on Paul's life which follows Acts very closely and fills in the gaps with very plausable historical details entitled "The Apostle" by John Pollock. I'd highly recommend it as a way of making sense of the book of Acts. And I found it hard to put down at one point in my spiritual journey. Anyone can borrow it from me if interested. Anyway, in it Pollock notes how during Paul's two year imprisonment in Caesaria (59-60 AD)(before he was carted off to Rome), Luke was free as his attendant, and would have had plenty of time to visit the sites of the Gospel stories. He would also have been able to interview scores of eye-witnesses. This is probably where/ when he gathers all of his unique material.
I can just picture Luke sitting down with a 65-year old Mary and hearing the stories in detail.
The other option might be that Mary accompanied "the beloved disciple" to Ephesus (one fairly early tradition, if I remember correctly) and Luke/ Paul may have met her there.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Apr 25, 2008 20:35:01 GMT -8
OK, here are some questions to ponder in prep for the Sunday study (perhaps you'll get a hint of where I'm going with this):
1. Would you describe yourself as dutiful? If so, in what ways? 2. Would you say that you are dutiful in the way you practice your faith? 3. In what ways is being dutiful beneficial? 4. Have you ever felt any emptiness in duty, like you were merely going through the motions? 5. Have you ever done your duty with your heart in the wrong place? 6. Has God ever shown up in some unexpected way while you were being dutiful? How did you respond? 7. Has God ever shown up is some unexpected way when you weren’t ready for it? How did you respond?
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Apr 28, 2008 16:59:25 GMT -8
So, a recap of my lesson from yesterday.
I compared and contrasted Zachariah (Luke 1:5-25) with Simeon and Anna (Luke 2:21-38).
All of these folks were dutiful Jews who adhered faithfully to the Mosaic law. They were deeply rooted in the traditions of the chosen people of God, which turned out to put them in a place where God would visit them in a special way.
Zachariah was dutiful but he wasn't quite ready for what would happen to him. Simeon and Anna were more than ready.
Zachariah, though he had prayed for God to grant him his heart's desire to have a child, had by the time of the angel Gabriel's vision already given up on himself as past his prime, old and worn out, having missed the boat.
Simeon and Anna, on the other hand, were the kind of believers whose hope and faith was not going to be dampened by what is seen or by any concern that they had missed the boat. They remained expectant that God would fulifll his words to them- that God could show up in a powerful way at any moment, though their lives were nearing their end.
Simeon was apparently familiar with responding to the Holy Spirit's call, as he seems to have done that important day when Jesus first entered the Temple. Anna was accustomed to prayer as she had poured out her life in service to God alone for her 60+ years after losing her husband.
Anna and Simeon were, like Zachariah, dutiful. But Anna and Simeon were something even more important- they were ready to respond to God. When God spoke they didn't hesitate or temporarily fight back in disbelief- they acted in accordance with His will.
They didn't demand that God show up in a particular way or at a particular time. They trusted that He knew what He was doing and went along with it.
Zachariah experienced the grace and joy of God despite his initial resistance. God is merciful like that.
But our aspiration should be to know what it is to live lives such as the example provided to us by Anna and Simeon, servants of God who were alert and making the most of every opportunity, just as Paul would later exhort us to be.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Apr 28, 2008 17:07:17 GMT -8
Also, I played this song from Terry Taylor's surf-metaphor album, in honor of all the "Anna"s out there. If you've met one, you know what he's talking about.
Sister Mariana Trench
from the album "Surfonic Water Revival" Words and Music by Terry Taylor Performed by Silage © 1998 Broken Songs (ASCAP)
Sister Mariana Trench has got the faith that moves mountains You can find her after church on a bench by the fountain And if you wanna just believe you'll perceive her devotion And if you wanna see faith at a fever pitch Mariana Trench;
the deepest part of the ocean
Sister Mariana Trench she'll be praying and fasting She's got a Bible in her hand She's got the Life Everlasting You might find you've fallen in her depths of holy emotion If you're trading doubt for faith, she can make that switch Mariana Trench;
the deepest part of the ocean
She's got the love of God so deep it will make you weep with a word, inspire And above her head you'd swear there's a halo there In her eyes burns a holy fire
Sister Mariana Trench she's old, but she's able to look into your soul and put your cards on the table (She's) no good at mincing words She's got the Book and it's open If you're neither hot or cold she'll kick you off the fence Mariana Trench;
the deepest part of the ocean the deepest part of the ocean the deepest part of the ocean...
|
|
|
Post by apollos on May 7, 2009 20:52:32 GMT -8
3) There is a great novel on Paul's life which follows Acts very closely and fills in the gaps with very plausable historical details entitled "The Apostle" by John Pollock. I'd highly recommend it as a way of making sense of the book of Acts. And I found it hard to put down at one point in my spiritual journey. Anyone can borrow it from me if interested. Anyway, in it Pollock notes how during Paul's two year imprisonment in Caesaria (59-60 AD)(before he was carted off to Rome), Luke was free as his attendant, and would have had plenty of time to visit the sites of the Gospel stories. He would also have been able to interview scores of eye-witnesses. This is probably where/ when he gathers all of his unique material. I can just picture Luke sitting down with a 65-year old Mary and hearing the stories in detail. The other option might be that Mary accompanied "the beloved disciple" to Ephesus (one fairly early tradition, if I remember correctly) and Luke/ Paul may have met her there. Paul's life and the Gospel sources are two of my favorite subjects. But I don't think this scenario holds up. The dating of the changeover from Festus to Felix has been fixed by micrographic evidence to 56 ad. But Paul's leaving Ephesus can be fixed to spring 55. The 'two years' must therefore be the expiration of Festus' office - I tried to find a way around this but was unable to: Dates proposed for the succession of Festus to Felix run … from A.D. 55 (Knox, p. 66) to 60 (Armstrong, ISBE [1929], I, 649). Paul's leaving Ephesus can be fixed by his reference to the 'deputies', which fits the time after the murder of the proconsul after the accession of Nero. In 59, Mary would have been 71 at the very youngest. The earliest traditions appear to place her death in Jerusalem, and state that the Beloved Disciple moved from Jerusalem after this. Besides, Luke, according to tradition, penned his Gospel c. 53/54 in Greece. He must have had another source.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 8, 2009 16:55:42 GMT -8
Ok, I'm mostly following you here, but can you expand this sentence:
So what's your explanation of the "two years", then, exactly?
True. I accidentally ascribed to her the age that Jesus would have been (roughly), rather than Mary.
|
|
|
Post by apollos on May 8, 2009 19:11:02 GMT -8
So what's your explanation of the "two years", then, exactly? Well I take it that Felix's term of office was renewed in 54 for two more years, upon the accession of Nero. If this micrographic evidence is correct, then I don't see any other option.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 8, 2009 19:20:10 GMT -8
Was there a missing word there? Did you mean to say after the expiration of Festus' office?
|
|
|
Post by apollos on May 8, 2009 19:24:04 GMT -8
oops I meant that I think the two years refers to the end of Felix's office - not Festus'. I got them backwards
|
|