The Gospel of Luke: Comments and Observations, Part II

Last week I posted my first entry on the Gospel of Luke.  You can find it here.  Allow me to continue.  Susan commented that many of the historians date the three Gospels after 70 AD, after the destruction of the temple.  But that has not always been the understanding, and Susan mentions how theologian Brad Pitre thinks otherwise.  I agreed with her and Pitre.

Manny Comment:

I completely agree Susan. The whole argument of the Gospels being written as late as recent scholars claim is solely based on the belief that they had to have been written after the temple's destruction. (1) Of course if Christ is God He could predict it. I can understand secular scholars relying on that argument, but you get the same nonsense from believing Catholic scholars. They have all bought into that argument. Before recent times, the Catholic Church did not support this argument, as I posted during the Gospel of Mark discussion last year. Thank God for a new generation of scholars like Pitre challenging the conventional wisdom. I think in time, sanity will prevail. (2) If you look at the actual Gospel readings, Jesus isn't even specific in what is being destroyed. He's talking about a general destruction of Jerusalem, an apocalyptic vision. Here are the passages side by side.  

Yes, the Temple is included in the destruction but frankly he's talking almost about an end of times scenario, or perhaps more of an end of the current status quo. If this was written in hindsight as a prophecy, the Gospel writers would have had him be way more specific.

⁑

Manny Comment:

I could highlight so many things in these first eight chapters. But they are probably things you might get from a homily at Mass. Here's something interesting that caught my eye for the first time. In chapter seven, Jesus is speaking about John the Baptist.

24 When the messengers of John had left, Jesus began to speak to the crowds about John. "What did you go out to the desert to see-a reed swayed by the wind?

25 Then what did you go out to see? Someone dressed in fine garments? Those who dress luxuriously and live sumptuously are found in royal palaces.

26 Then what did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet.

27 This is the one about whom scripture says: 'Behold, I am sending my messenger ahead of you, he will prepare your way before you.'

28 I tell you, among those born of women, no one is greater than John; yet the least in the kingdom of God is greater than he."

29 l (All the people who listened, including the tax collectors, and who were baptized with the baptism of John, acknowledged the righteousness of God;

30 but the Pharisees and scholars of the law, who were not baptized by him, rejected the plan of God for themselves.)

31 "Then to what shall I compare the people of this generation? What are they like?

32 They are like children who sit in the marketplace and call to one another, 'We played the flute for you, but you did not dance. We sang a dirge, but you did not weep.'

33 For John the Baptist came neither eating food nor drinking wine, and you said, 'He is possessed by a demon.'

34 The Son of Man came eating and drinking and you said, 'Look, he is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.'

35 But wisdom is vindicated by all her children."

It's interesting that John the Baptist doesn't eat bread nor drink wine, while Jesus does. Some Christian denominations make the claim you're not supposed to drink alcohol, and if you went strictly by John the Baptist, I could understand. But Jesus does eat and drink. Of course bread and wine become extremely important as Christ transforms them into His body and blood. But why does John refrain from them all? I don't have a good answer, other than to say that in preparation for Christ, John represents the strict asceticism as a preparation to holiness.

One other thing, I really like how Christ ends it with saying, "But wisdom is vindicated by all her children." Meaning that wisdom requires asceticism and enjoyment as a achieving the fullness of life. There is a time and place for both.

⁑

Manny Comment:

It's quite amazing how many scenes are in each of Luke's chapters.  Chapter Nine contains (1) Sending the Apostles out to preach and heal, (2) Herod being perplexed about Jesus, (3) the feeding of the five thousand, (4) Peter declaring that Jesus is the Christ, (5) Jesus stating that to follow Him requires denying oneself, (6) the Transfiguration scene, (7) Jesus heals a boy with a demon, (8) Jesus predicts His death, (9) Jesus resolves who is great, (10) Jesus rebukes John for forbidding a man for casting out demons in Jesus' name, (11) a Samaritan village rejects Jesus, (12) Jesus rebukes several men who make excuses about following Him.  A montage of twelve scenes in one chapter, and this is typical of the other chapters.  I put forth this again: does this not appear to be a collation of scenes that were individually documented and dispersed among the Christian communities?  No one puts narrative together in this way from his own understanding of a story, especially not a skilled writer such as Luke.

The transfiguration scene is worth looking at.  Luke's version is probably the most cursory of the three but Luke too chooses to repeat a key bit of language.

34 While he was speaking, a cloud appeared and covered them, and they were afraid as they entered the cloud. 35 A voice came from the cloud, saying, "This is my Son, whom I have chosen; listen to him."

Now turn back to the Annunciation scene (Chapter 1) and let me repeat this:

35 And the angel said to her in reply, "The holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.

"A cloud appeared and covered them" and "The power of the Most High will overshadow you."  Cloud covering and overshadowing are nearly the same thing.  I put to you Mary is undergoing her own transfiguration.  Now where does this notion of shadow and cloud covering come from?  Turn to Exodus Chapter 40.  In this chapter the Lord instructs Moses to create a tabernacle.  Once Moses follows the instructions, God enters the tabernacle.

34 Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle.

35Moses could not enter the tent of meeting, because the cloud settled down upon it and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle.

36 Whenever the cloud rose from the tabernacle, the Israelites would set out on their journey.

37 But if the cloud did not lift, they would not go forward; only when it lifted did they go forward.

38 The cloud of the LORD was over the tabernacle by day, and fire in the cloud at night, in the sight of the whole house of Israel in all the stages of their journey.

Remember, the tabernacle is the Holiest of Holies.  Only the holiest priest could enter and under the pain of death if he did not maintain his holiness.  Mary is overshadowed just like at the tabernacle because the Blessed Mother is the new tabernacle, the holiest of holies, which will house Christ.  Is there a distinction between cloud and shadow?  Yes, the cloud causes the shadow.  The cloud is associated with God, and it has cast its shadow over the Blessed Virgin.