We're back in the gospel of Luke after an excursion into Matthew the past two weeks. Today's text was the sending out of the 70. We noted in class that there was a change in the message. Up to this point the message has been one of repentance and forgiveness. "Repent for the kingdom of God has drawn near." Now the message is prepare to receive the coming of the promised one, Jesus. The group of 70 seems to just appear in the story and after they return to report their good news, they disappear. Several observations were made.
Do the 70 represent the 70 nations that encompassed the whole world at that time? Certainly, Luke’s understanding of the gospel is universal. Is this a foretaste of what will happen in Acts? Do the 70 represent the elders appointed by Moses?
The 70, or rather the 35 pairs, seem to give the towns one shot to receive Jesus before they move on to the next town. Was this the feeling of urgency in the early church the result of their feeling that Jesus was coming in the near future and there wasn't time to linger? In the places that did not receive Jesus, was there the surprising reversal found elsewhere in the gospel where the faith is stronger outside the people of Israel? Is Luke making a point that would have people who believe they are on the inside take a closer look at themselves? What does that have to say to us as the churchgoing people who can come to believe that we are on the inside?
The words of taking back the peace that is given and brushing off the dust if the community is not willing to receive Jesus seem harsh. Is Luke being descriptive of what literally happened before the gospel was written or is Luke anticipating what would happen in the future? Jesus makes the statement that he would come again before this generation passed away. Does that mean that he was wrong about the timetable? Does his being wrong take away from his being the Messiah? Does his being wrong take away from our own understanding of Jesus?
There are passages that do not sit easily with us, particularly passages of judgment. What do we do with such passages? Certainly there is judgment that we need to hear. The promises of the gospel always start in the truth of our lives. I own that I am a sinner and this becomes the occasion of my being graced. Beyond needing to hear the truth, are some passages not reconcilable with the gospel of Jesus Christ? In the Old Testament, God is given credit for leading the armies of Israel to victory. Does God lead armies or did the people of Israel, at that time, simply give God credit as an expression of their understanding of God who has not been completely revealed? Does the cross change that understanding? An example we discussed was when someone survives a terrible event like 9/11 and gives thanks to God for saving them. Without taking away from their experience of gratitude, what does it say about those who did not survive? Did God choose not to act to save the rest? What does the cross say to that situation? Somehow, who God is and how God acts lies beyond our ability to put into words. Our efforts always fall short. Does the Bible, at times, fail to capture all that God is and all that God does? Luther spoke of the Bible as being uneven. The Gospel of Jesus Christ shone more brightly in some places than in others. How does that understanding help us as we read the Bible?
These are some of the observations made and questions asked this week. Again, I invite others to join the conversation. Please feel free to make a comment or join us on Wednesday at noon at the CEB. A similar experience is also taking place at the Adult Forum on Sunday during Sunday School at the CEB. Until next week, keep reading the Bible.
Peace,
Pastor Summer
2 comments:
A lot of questions in Pastor's blog - they reflect the tone of this week's Book of Faith. This passage wasn't a lesson we couldn't understand or needed to "wrap our heads around." Although there are some applications for evangelists today (going out in pairs, not playing hosts against each other)we thought the passage was centered on the culture of the time (homogeneous towns, the middle eastern concept of hospitality).
Link to the lesson: http://shar.es/bZJuR
This was actually the first lesson we read in Book of Faith maybe 10 months ago, before we decided to go back to the beginning of Luke and read it sequentially. Since we're definitely taking our time getting through Luke, I feel like we're really wrestling with each verse and getting everything out of it before moving on. Well, sure enough, reading this passage again, we're finding there's more to discover!
One of the main points we've kept in mind as we're reading through the gospel is that there are some parts that are frankly more important than others, and that the gospel is written with the end in mind - we get the most detail on events that lead towards Easter, and other parts we're left wondering what really happened. This is one of those cases where we're left wondering what happened.
At the risk of sounding like Jerry Seinfeld, What’s the deal with the 70 (or 72)? What’s the deal with Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum? Did a pair of disciples enter each town, knock on a random door, and depending on the reception they got, consider the entire town either a success or failure? After all the warnings of the expected trouble in certain towns, the (70 or 72) returned with joy. Does that mean all of the towns accepted them? Or did the lambs encounter wolves, knock dust off their shoes and move on and keep trying different towns until they got a “win” and came home happy? How much time did this all take? What happened to the “woe” towns?
Reading this lesson made me want to run out and buy a map of the Holy Land…
Post a Comment