Luke 3:21

     Luke reports little about the baptism of Jesus. He doesn’t say specifically that John was the one who baptized him, but simply indicates that when the others were being baptized, Jesus was also. Mark and Matthew tell the story more fully, although Matthew, in particular, may have been especially uncomfortable with the fact that Jesus was baptized by John (instead of the other way around).
     Since there was some rivalry between the followers of John and those following Jesus, the fact that Jesus went to John for baptism would be puzzling. It would also be difficult to explain. Matthew adds the detail that John felt himself unworthy to do the baptism, but the response Jesus made seems somewhat cryptic. He told John to do it because it was proper to fulfill all righteousness. Neither Luke nor John report this part of the story (and the Gospel of John doesn’t tell anything about the baptism).
     It is important to note that the story of the baptism was told by all three synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke.) Aside from the content of the story, the reporting of it may tell us certain things. One is the fact that they were honest. Although the story may have been hard for them to understand, they still recorded it. This might indicate that it was known to others and the followers of John may have been telling it as part of the rivalry referred to in last week’s study. If so, it would have been tempting to the Gospel writers to leave it out, but they didn’t. It seems possible that Jesus himself might have spoken of the baptism and his followers knew it had been important to him.
     If Jesus did speak of his baptism, the gospel writers didn’t tell us what he thought about it. The story of God speaking of Jesus as beloved Son has given rise to various theologies. One suggests that Jesus became aware of his special calling at that time. Another is the ‘adoption’ theology, which says Jesus became God’s chosen one at that time. Luke, however, sees Jesus’ identity from the time of his conception and birth, so it seems unlikely that he was presenting such a thought.
     One of the things people have puzzled over concerning the baptism is that John was preaching a baptism of repentance. We have generally believed that Jesus would have had nothing to repent. The scriptures say he was tempted in every way as the rest of us are, but without sin. At the same time, we affirm the fact that he was as human as any one of us, with the same fears, pain, hopes, dreams and longings as we might have. He expressed grief, anger, friendship, even a sense of abandonment by God when he was upon the cross.
     In each of us, our “humanness” also meets the soul which was created in God’s image. How might this be understood in the case of the baptism of Jesus?
     If Jesus was without sin, what might have his baptism meant to him? Could it have been a ritual for him as he embarked upon a new path?
     When you consider your own baptism, either by memory or the knowledge of it as a child, what does it mean to you to know that Jesus also was baptized?



    

Luke 3:15-20

     John excited the crowds. There was a wind of something important in the air. Between that and the yearning for something to change in their circumstances, a natural question to occur to these first century Israelites was whether John might be the Messiah.
      Christians refer to the Messiah as a title for Jesus (and enjoy a tremendous piece of music by that title), but it may not have deep significance for everyone. It was a powerful expectation of Judaism. Once the church became primarily Gentile in population, the Christians had to learn and adopt the concept.
     There is no way to determine a systematic theory/theology of the Messiah from the various sources in the scriptures and there is extensive commentary on it. A few brief comments:  The Messiah was to be one appointed king by God, possibly at the end of time. It literally means the “anointed one.” The kings of Israel were also known as anointed ones.  The Messiah was frequently seen as a conqueror who will destroy hostile world powers. Some did not seem to expect the Messiah at the end of time, but to address current problems (such as, perhaps, the Roman Empire). There was some thought that the messianic era was delayed by sin and impenitence, while other thinkers said it had no effect.
     One idea that was not prominent (some scholars say it was completely absent) is the concept of the Messiah as one who suffers and dies for all humanity. This was the Christian understanding of Jesus as Messiah or Christ. (Christ means the anointed one.) Although Christians have not adopted the specific ideas of ancient Judaism regarding the Messiah, followers of Jesus have seen in him as the fulfillment of God’s promise.
     Given the varieties of ideas about what the Messiah was to be and when the Messiah was to come, it may not be surprising that first century Israelites would ask whether John or other individuals might possibly be the anointed one of God. Luke does not record John’s answer to them as a simple yes or no. Instead, John said that he baptized with water, the more powerful one who is coming will baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire. John said further that he would not be worthy to untie the sandal of the one who was coming. The images he uses for the Messiah separating good from bad reflect traditional ideas of the Messiah.
     Scholars point out that the followers of John were powerful and even competitive with the followers of Jesus for many years. 
     For all the fact that John was rebuking people right and left, thundering about repentance and issuing exhortations, his message is described by Luke as a proclamation of good news. Herod, the tetrarch, however, did not receive it as good. John disapproved of his marriage* and other unsavory activities. So Herod locked him up in prison.

     *Herod the Great's son, Aristobulus married Bernice, a cousin. One of their children was Herodias. Herodias was first married to her half uncle. They had a daughter named Salome who later married a great uncle. Herod Antipas was the half-brother of the husband of Herodias. Herod Antipas became smitten with his brother's wife and wooed her away to marry him. But first he divorced his wife to make room for Herodias.

     John was an important figure in his world. His arrest alone tells us this. Many people probably muttered and criticized Herod for his marriage, but John was too prominent for Herod to ignore. Mark says that people from all over the Judean countryside and all the people of Jerusalem were coming out to be baptized by him. The drama of the way he lived and dressed and shouted his message certainly had some draw, Perhaps some came first to see the show, but the clarity of his call to repentance must have changed lives.


What made the words of John “good news”?

Is the concept of “Messiah” meaningful to you, and if so, how?


What words or images of Jesus mean the most to you?


What words, concepts or images of Jesus might be most powerful to explain the good news of his coming to the world of today?

Luke 3:10-14

     John was in the wilderness preaching. As noted last week, he wouldn’t let his people get by on a comfortable sense of entitlement. They’d better repent!
     The crowds asked him, “What should we do?” They wanted something a little more specific – understandable. Most of us need something concrete, something comprehensible to start working upon. And John gave them a specific answer. If someone is fortunate enough to have two coats, share one with someone who has none. The same with food.
     Tax collectors were among the crowds. They must have felt they were in a special category—and they were set apart in the society. Tax collectors were considered collaborators with the Roman occupying forces. They had tremendous power since they could collect the tax and then collect whatever more they wanted as their pay. This “administrative fee” could be quite exorbitant. The tax collectors were despised by fellow Israelites. If they were to do what John asked, must they give up being tax collectors? Could they earn a living any other way at this point? What should they do? John told them to collect no more than was appointed to them.
     Soldiers also came an asked the same specific question: What should they do? Now Jews were generally not conscripted into the Roman army, so it is often assumed that these were not Roman soldiers. It is not impossible that there could have been a few among the soldiers who came to hear John preach. With the missionary thrust of Hellenistic Judaism, there were a number of God-fearers among the Gentiles. God-fearers were Gentiles who were attracted to the spiritual and moral nature of Israel’s God and embraced the worship of Yahweh. But they couldn’t be considered Jewish because they didn’t practice circumcision or practice the ritual laws such as those having to do with food. If there were God-fearers among the Roman soldiers (and we know there were a few—the book of Acts tells us about at least one of them), then an off-duty soldier could have come out to hear John speak. Other than these, there were Israelites who served as soldiers for Herod. There would have been opportunities for pad their incomes through intimidation. All soldiers of faith wanted John to speak to their situation. He told them to rob no one by intimidation or false accusation, and to be content with their wages.
     It seems notable that John’s advice is not radical. It may be uncomfortable to those who have something when there are people in the world who have nothing. But it is not new. Teachings throughout Israelite history had spoken of the call to help others as a responsibility of faith. The book of Proverbs even said specifically that one who gives to the poor lends to the Lord. Later, Jesus would personalize this saying that helping someone is the same as doing it for him.
     John doesn't tell soldiers and tax collectors to leave their jobs, just do them without graft or violence. Be content with their wages. Don’t take advantage of their positions to take from others. Perhaps this can be expanded upon to anyone with power. The temptations of power are extreme. It’s not for nothing that Jesus turned them down. It could be noted that everyone has some kind of power that can be abused, even if it’s just to step on a harmless bug or be unpleasant to the people around them. Most people have considerably more power than that.


What kind of power do you have in your personal and individual sphere of life?

What do you think John might say to us in our individual situations?

Luke 3:1-9

     We shift from the pleasant story of Jesus as a boy in the temple. Suddenly we are about eighteen years in the future. John the Baptist is out in the wilderness Luke sets the stage by giving dates. It is the fifteen year in the reign of Tiberius. Pontius Pilate is the Roman governor of Judea. Rome allowed Herod (son of Herod) some status as ruler of Galilee. Herod’s brother, Philip, had the same status over Iturea and Trachonitus. Lysanias ruled Abilene. On the local front, Annas and Caiaphas were High Priests in Jerusalem. These are mostly players on the stage of the story to be told. Only Lysanias is little known and Philip is . Tiberius is a presence because he represents the authority of Rome, and Jesus would be crucified by Roman authority mediated through Pontius Pilate. Luke’s dating is not as precise as it might seem because it is unclear whether the fifteenth year it he reign of Tiberius is from the time he succeeded Augustus (A.d. 14) or from the time Tiberius became joint emperor with Augustus in a.d. 11-12. So John the Baptist began his ministry some time in 26-27 a.d. or about 29 a.d.
     The Cambridge scholar, E.J. Tinsley points out that Luke’s presentation of John the Baptist is more as a prophet, rather than a second Elijah (the emphasis of Mark and Matthew). The popularity and importance of John is unmistakable. He came proclaiming God’s word, using the words of Isaiah about preparing the way of the Lord. He baptized people as a symbol or token of repentance.
     We see in John no trace of encouraging self-pity on the basis of being an oppressed people. John is not a liberation theologian, but an equal opportunity haranguer of sin. Isn’t this empowering? This is not the powerful pointing at the powerless and say ‘you have to repent.’ It is a man among the oppressed crying out, “We have to repent.”
     John’s message, harsh as it was, was surprisingly popular. Crowds came to be baptized and were met by more berating. He may have recognized a tendency to pat themselves on the back and think that they were descendants of Abraham and therefore secure. John points out that God could children for Abraham out of stones. It sounds almost as if the people had some vague sense that God needed them, or was dependent upon them because of their heritage from Abraham. (‘what’s God going to do, start all over?’) The situation is familiar in other aspects in the world today. Many of us suffer from a sense of entitlement. John told the people that feeling of entitlement was just an illusion. Instead they needed to demonstrate repentance by the fruits or behavior of repentance.
     Repentance is different than simply being penitent or just saying, ‘I’m sorry.” Repentance includes these, but calls upon the penitent to change direction and begin behaving in a different way. In the same fashion a boy kept bugging his sister, then when she cried, would say he was sorry to get her to stop from alerting their mother. After one episode, she cried again, and he said he was sorry and didn’t she believe he was really sorry. She said what she wanted to know was when he was sorry enough to quit. John was asking the same kind of question. “Are you sorry enough to quit?


John’s message is harsh. Why do you suppose people came in such large numbers to hear him and seek baptism?


In what way might Christians in the church today suffer from an illusion of entitlement?


As Lent begins next Wednesday, what do we need to repent?


In what ways are we called to prepare for Jesus?

Luke 2:41-52

     As noted in a previous week’s study, it seems possible that Luke may have met Mary and heard some stories about Jesus. This story is the kind of anecdote a mother might share. The family has traveled up to Jerusalem for the Passover. Every Jew dreamt of doing this at least once in their life. But Mary and Joseph evidently felt it was important to go every year. This couldn’t have been easy. It took money and time away from the carpentry shop. Passover was eight days long, so with travel time this was a significant time away from home. There was also the uncertainties of travel, although this last was lessened by traveling in a large group. (It is tempting to speculate whether the friendship with Martha and Mary’s family in Bethany went back to the childhood of Jesus, having met on these annual trips to the holy city.)
     At twelve, Jesus would have had a level of independence. He may have explored the city on his own and visited the temple to listen to the scholars discussing theology. Mary and Joseph don’t seem to have known all his movements but trusted him to be on his own. But, as with many adolescent boys, he may have lost track of time and become focused on his interests, forgetting what his family was doing.
     At the end of Passover, Mary and Joseph and the younger children started back with group they had traveled with. It must have been a large party and they likely assumed Jesus was simply spending time with friends. But three days of not seeing him must have been unusual, so after surely searching carefully, they rushed back to Jerusalem. As loving parents, they must have been quite frightened. Passover was a time of unrest in Israel as the people remembered a time of liberation in their history. The parents’ imagination must have gone wild. Could he have been arrested by the Romans? Caught up in violence and hurt? Was he sick?
     After searching, Mary and Joseph found Jesus in the temple. Those who were experts in the laws and traditions of Judaism were clearly impressed with the boy. But Mary and Joseph were filled with the anxiety of the search and scolded him for having made them worry. He asked why they’d searched (referring to combing the city instead of going straight to the temple?) for couldn’t they have known he’d be in his Father’s house. He is often pictured as though a mature adult simply responding as though his parents were a bit foolish. But realistically, he was an adolescent boy. It would be natural if there was a bit of childish bravado and embarrassment mixed in with his words. After all, he was being scolded in front of respected men of Israel. And, he had caused his parents a great deal of worry, trouble and expense. Luke reports that he returned home and was obedient to his parents.
     Joseph and Mary did not entirely understand the event. But Mary kept these memories and treasured them. If she was sharing anecdotes with Luke, we can well imagine her tone of voice as she told of the little boy she’d loved as a mother long before others came to love him as Lord and Savior.
     Luke concludes the story by saying that Jesus grew up, gaining favor with both God and his human community.
    

Other gospels were written following the death of Jesus. Some purported to tell stories of his childhood as well. One is charming – the little boy making clay birds and bringing them alive. Others are less so, such as him getting angry at some other children and his words causing their death. These gospels were not deemed by the church to be authoritative or helpful accounts of the good news of Jesus. (It should be noted, however, that they contain some information that is also found in the four gospels of the Bible.)

     Scholars, such as that of the Interpreter’s Bible Dictionary, point out that the stories of the childhood of Jesus are similar or parallel to that of Samuel in the Old Testament, raising questions for some whether Luke fashioned the story to show this parallel. It might, of course, be equally pointed out that two precocious young boys with a special calling from God might inevitably have parallel experiences in growing up. Luke, as a literary master, might have recognized this. Nonetheless, there are significant differences between the childhood of Samuel and that of Jesus. Samuel was raised by an irascible old man, having been brought to him by his parents at the age of five. On the other hand, Jesus had a more “normal” childhood, growing up with two loving parents. Mary and Joseph were devout in both outward religious practice and in heartfelt spirituality. If we take seriously the fact that Jesus was fully human, (the incarnation) then these influenced him.


What do you feel about the idea of Jesus being a normal adolescent boy?

Can you think of places in Jesus’ teaching where he may have been remembering his childhood home?

Martha and Mary were clearly very good friends of Jesus.  What do you think about the possibility that this friendship began when they were all children?

Luke 2:39-40

     Luke makes no mention of the flight to Egypt.  He merely states that Mary and Joseph did everything that was required in the law and then returned to Nazareth, in the region of Galilee.  He follows this with a statement that, basically, Jesus grew up and was a particularly promising child.
     Although Luke may have been writing more specifically to a Gentile audience, he doesn't forget where Jesus began.  Mary and Joseph were Jewish peasants.  (There was once a Christmas card with Mary on it, labeling her the world's favorite Jewish mother.)  
     Joseph and Mary seem to have been careful in their following of the law, giving the appropriate sacrifices, making their proper trip to Jerusalem, as every Israelite was expected to do.  In fact, as the next scripture will indicate, they did even more.  Mary and Joseph came every year to Jerusalem for the Passover, something that could not have been easy to accomplish.  Neither would Jesus later scorn traditional aspects of religious observance.  He simply made clear the message that they were to be practiced for the right reasons.  
     When they had accomplished the rituals and sacrifices, the family returned home to Galilee.  Perhaps for the Gentile readers, this would have had less emotional impact than for Jews living in Israel.  Galilee was considered back country and the Galileans had accents other Israelites disliked.  Nazareth had such little respect in the popular opinion that people asked, disparagingly whether it was even possible for anything good to come from there.  It is significant that ancient, non-Christian references don't mention it.  In other words, Luke sets Jesus squarely into a town that was unknown to the Gentile world and considered unimportant and lacking promise in the Jewish opinion.  Yet, there, growing up in that quiet backwater, was this child who would eventually shake the foundations of the world.  

    There is an old story that a Jewish teacher was once asked why on earth God would bother talking to Moses from a lowly thorn bush.  The teacher's answer?  Perhaps to teach us that God is everywhere, including lowly thorn bushes!

In what quiet places of the world might God be working today to change the world?

In what quiet places of your own heart and soul might God be active to change your life?

In what way can the individual and the church grow with wisdom?



 

Luke 2:21-38

     After eight days, Jesus was circumcised. 
     Circumcision was unusual in the ancient world.  Outside of Judaism, the practice was viewed with some abhorrence.  For the Israelites who lived in a more Hellenistic society outside Israel, some young men even made some attempts to hide the signs of circumcision when they participated in sports, etc.  There has been some suggestion that even a primitive sort of plastic surgery was attempted.  Circumcision was not a big controversy for Jesus, although association with Gentiles (which included uncircumcised indivudals) was an issue.  As the early church became more and more Gentile, it became extremely important.  Would the new Christians be required to practice circumcision, the dietary laws, etc. Some factions of the church pushed yes, others, including the Apostle Paul pushed no.  The latter group won the argument. 
     By the law of Moses, after birth, a woman was required to practice certain purifications.  Also, the first born male was to be designated as holy to the Holy.  Because Mary and Joseph were poor, they gave the sacrifice allowed to the poor, which was a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons.  
     There were two devout individuals known to the people who frequented the temple.  One was an elderly man named Simeon.  He'd been promsed by the spirit that he would not die before he had seen the Lord's annointed.  When he saw Jesus, he praised God and proclaimed to all that he could now die for he had seen  God's salvation.  This child would be light for revelation to the Gentile world and a glory to the  people of Israel.  Anna, an elderly widow also praised God for this child. 
     Luke tells that Mary and Joseph were amazed by what was said of Jesus.  One would think that after all that had happened they would have simply expected such things.  And that seems part of the push-pull nature of Jesus' family.  They knew he was sent by God, yet faced with the daily realities of life, they seemed to forget it.  Perhaps part of the amazement was the mention of the Gentiles--most of the orthodox citizens of Israel had problems wrapping their heads around the idea of God caring so much for the pagans...this despite the fact that some of the prophets had also pointed in that direction.  Of course, they were under Roman domination and this made it more difficult to see pagans in such a light. 
     Simeon continued after his public words and said something painful to Mary, that a sword would pierce her soul as well.  Perhaps he saw what is so difficult to fathom in moments of joy, that goodness is not always accepted by the world and the fate of Jesus would be an agony for a loving mother to endure. 
    
The struggle of the Israelite people against assimilation into the cultures around them was protected through customs like circumcision and the dietary laws.  In what ways can Christians live in but not of the world?

Luke clearly had a special interest in telling the stories of how Jesus would impact people in the Gentile world.  If Theophilus, to whom the book was officially written, was not a Christian, how do you think he understood and interpreted the words of Simeon?