It takes one to know one right? In that sense, the very well educated author of Luke being a gentile convert himself does a very good job of portraying Jesus as the Perfect Man, the Perfect Sacrifice for all of human kinds’ sin in order to have his good news be inclusive to all while having a greater outlook to the Greco-Roman world. He eliminates all traces of doubt about Jesus by his mother and siblings in order to eliminate the “bad” from Mark’s narrative that would harm the image of Jesus. When Jesus does or says something in Luke, it leaves the reader in awe and amazement of how he handles the situation with his care, love and compassion. When Jesus is anointed by the sinful woman in Lk 7:36-50 he asks the questioning Pharisee the perfect question, “41 Two people owed money to a certain moneylender. One owed him five hundred denarii,and the other fifty. 42 Neither of them had the money to pay him back, so he forgave the debts of both. Now which of them will love him more?”. When this is thought of critically it becomes much easier to understand why the woman cried, wiped and kissed his feet. She had the biggest burden, the greater debt, whereas the Pharisee did not.
Forgiveness and acceptance. That’s what Jesus offer. This idea is found all throughout Luke in Jesus’ many parables such as the Prodigal Son which comes later on in Lk 15:11-32. It’s important to understand the separate audiences that Luke addresses, one is the physical person Theophilus in which he states in his prologue, but then there’s the audience that he addresses through Jesus’ ways and teachings. His main concern is addressing those who need Jesus but not excluding those who have him in order to emphasize salvation for all; sick and healthy, rich and poor, Jew and Gentile, sinner and saint. The weaker of each set (with exception to Gentile only because they’re not primarily addressed in the faith prior to the time due to the divide with Judaism but included now with Christianity) have the biggest burden, so for the sake of Luke it’s important to address and include such audience. When looking at Mk 14:3-9 an Lks expansion of Lk 36-50, the stark contrast is that the author of Mk doesn’t label the woman as sinner whereas Lk does. Lks view of discipleship isn’t someone who’s perfect already, but by having the potential to be perfect. Luke adds his material of having the woman be sinful to broaden Jesus’ inclusiveness of those deserving for his love, that even those at the very bottom who wouldn’t otherwise have a chance can now rest at peace knowing that their savior is forgiving and loving of all.
Author Archives: cim
Team 6: Question 2
Before the two panels are examined I think that it’s important to note Luke’s prologue which addresses his writing to Theophilus as an account concerning the truth after Luke’s careful investigation of oral tradition. L material of the intertwined birth stories that Luke implements to Mark’s plot begins with the annunciations of John the Baptist’s and Jesus’ birth. John’s annunciation happens at the beginning of Luke when an angel of the Lord appeared to Zechariah in the sanctuary, telling him that his prayer has been heard and that his wife Elizabeth will bear him a son and he will name him John. That even before his birth he will be filled with the Holy Spirit and thus imposing his divinity. Luke goes directly to Jesus’ annunciation when Gabriel, an angel from God goes to Nazareth but in this case appears to the mother, Mary. Gabriel tells her that she has found favor with the Lord, that she will conceive and bear a son, that he will be named Jesus. He continues and tells her Jesus’ importance, how he will be called “Son of the Most High(God)” and will give him the throne of his ancestor David. Both of these stories come full circle when Mary goes to visit Elizabeth and John “leaped” in her womb, expressing how even John felt Jesus’ presence, so it’d be pretty safe to say that he’s the real deal. Luke continues on into the actual births, illustrating Jesus’ birth more but both John and Jesus are circumcised on the 8th day. White makes the comparison in 251 and tells how Jewish scripture shapes the narratives with the relationship of Jesus and John, and that of Isaac’s (Gen 18.1-15) and Samuel’s birth (1 Sam 1.1-2.10).
The background information at the beginning of Luke is used to make sense of John’s role but putting him side by side with Jesus, but eliminates any implications that may have arisen in thinking that John the Baptist was the Messiah as in some cases many people favored John over Jesus. But it is clear that even before birth, John knew from the womb knew his purpose and that he would only prepare the world and its people for Jesus’ mission. This is a way of implicitly stating how the book of Mark starts, when John the Baptist is at the river baptizing and says “After me comes he who is mightier than I, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie. I have baptized you with water; but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.” (Mark 1.7-1.8)
Luke’s material doesn’t necessarily have to be true, but the purpose of it is to make his story sound better than Marks, to appeal better to a reader at the time and fill in the blanks that Mark left with the birth story and genealogy. These two components are key of an aretalogy and the narrative could even be compared to the ancient aretalogy of Apollonius of Tyana. Being and honest and truthful didn’t necessarily make a good writer, making it sound good and as close to perfect is what made a story sound good. Luke follows the outline of an aretalogy to make his story near perfect for whom he’s addressing it to in the name of Theophilus. Luke implies from the beginning that his version is the true version, so why not make the true version sound great and add elements that would make it a great piece?
Team 6, Question 3
John’s Logos Hymn is a prologue that introduces the reader to who Jesus is in relation to God by implicitly describing Jesus rather than naming him. “The Logos” or “Word” in John were favored as masculine synonyms to “Sophia” which is a personification of Wisdom. (John 1:2) says, “He was in the beginning with God” which emphasizes the divinity and trueness of the Word. As White talks about the later Jewish tradition he makes the relation to Genesis in saying, “Wisdom was the other ‘person’ present at creation when God said ‘Let us make human kind in our own image’ (Gen 1:26)”. (White 43) The Word, became flesh and lived amongst the people, The Word was in the world and the world did not know him, nor did they accept him. But for those who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God. John the Baptist was sent before Jesus, many people confused John to be their savior but he himself was not the light, rather as a witness to testify to the light. Johns influence amongst the people was crucial in helping them understand that the Law did come through Moses, but grace and truth came through The Word, Jesus Christ.
In the Greek moral tale of the “choice of Hercules”, Hercules comes across a fork in the road. On one side, the latter offers to show him a smooth and easy path to happiness. Whereas on the other side, the former promised only a rough and difficult road to noble deeds. Hercules path is the path of virtue. (White 43). Whereas in Proverbs 7 there is a similar situation, only that the young man follows the latter, and goes like an ox to the slaughter. The young man would be the second of God’s creations, one that can be molded like clay and corrupted. Philo makes an interpretation of Genesis with two interpretations of mankind. The first, is Sophia in the heavenly logos for she comes from God and is true. See personification of Sophia. (White 45) The second of course, is the creation of the physical human creature of earth. Physical humans are patterned in the image of the first, the first is also The Word, and of course The Word being Jesus. This is how many people attribute Jesus to being the only perfect being to walk the earth and how all humans were made in his image.
As a 1st century ready of John, depending on if my ideals were based on a Jewish Law or Greco-Roman way of life I would understand Jesus to be the light. I would better comprehend that the way to get to God would be through Sophia, which would lead me to be foolish and believe in the cross only if I desired the purpose of it. I would understand the personification of wisdom and would associate it with King Solomon’s ideas of wanting to love and marry Sophia. I wouldn’t have any expectations of the rest of the bible as I can’t avoid my own bias of knowing the good news from The Word.