Facelifted from Rev. Dyan Iverson Dietz, pastor of Bonham First UMC: Bishop Michael McKee has challenged the people of the North Texas Conference to spend 2015 journeying together through the “Gospel of Luke” and the “Acts of the Apostles” reading one chapter per week. The Bishop’s challenge is an invitation for all of us to connect with one another by participating jointly in a Conference-wide study of the Biblical text. While most Christians spend time reading the Bible as a spiritual discipline and as part of their personal walk of faith, many do not take the time to study the biblical texts they read. The reading we do as part of our faith walk generally seeks to answer the question ‘what is this saying to me at this point in my life?’ The reading we do as a ‘student’ who studies the text seeks answers to questions that are deeper and more complex. One of the first things I learned in seminary was that what we see in the text depends on the questions we are asking of it. The Bible is our sacred text. It is rich with meaning and has a beauty that can only be discovered by allowing it to answer our most heartfelt questions. This collaborative study of Luke and Acts offers us a unique opportunity to share our questions, perspectives, thoughts, knowledge, and insights with one another. It is an opportunity for all of us to grow together in our understanding of these two books of the Bible that comprise over a quarter of the New Testament. In an effort to encourage members of my church, my colleagues in ministry, my family and friends, and anyone else who wishes to join in this endeavor for the coming year, I will be making weekly posts that will focus on the chapter of scripture for that week. These posts are simply offered as an aid to the readings. It is my hope that as we journey together in this study we will develop a greater appreciation for our sacred scriptures and a deeper love for the God who has provided them for us. Luke Chapter One Luke and Acts, although written anonymously, are generally thought to have been written by the same author and intended to be two parts of one written account. This belief is due to the theological and linguistic similarities between the two books as well as the prologues, which are similar and identify the compositions as having been written for ‘Theophilus.’ Tradition holds that the two compositions were written by the ‘Luke’ that is mentioned in Colossians 4:14 who was a companion of Paul’s, but there has been a significant amount of disagreement over this. While precise dating is impossible, these books were probably written shortly after the fall of Jerusalem, around 80-90 CE. The Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles are products of the culture in which they were written. As with all scripture, it is important that we approach the text with humility and with the understanding that there is and always will be much that we do not know about its intended meaning. The first chapter of Luke is quite long and includes a prologue that sets this book apart from the other ‘gospels.’ What we call ‘the Gospel of Luke’ is not a ‘gospel’ or ‘proclamation of the good news,’ but is rather an orderly account of events that is intended to persuade Theophilus. In this way the intent of the author is closer to that of Paul than to the writers of the other gospels and indicates a level of literary sophistication and Hellenization that is not present in Matthew and Mark. The stories that follow the prologue are familiar, and are ones that are often read during the Advent season. These are stories only found in the Gospel of Luke. Verse five begins “In the days of King Herod of Judea…” Although easy words to pass over, they tell us much about the context of the birth narratives that follow. The Herod spoken of here is Herod the Great who was set to rule over Judea by the Roman Empire. Herod the Great, although Jewish, worked for Caesar Augustus. Herod was responsible for several great building projects during his reign including the Second Temple (which is the temple referred to in the New Testament), Masada, and his palace in Jerusalem which has recently been opened up for tourists. Beyond his building projects, however, Herod was known for his brutality and violence to the extent that it was said that it was better to be Herod’s pig than to be his son. After his death in 4 CE, Judea was divided into three parts that were ruled by his three surviving sons (he had killed the others). Upon his death, Herod had scheduled mass executions to ensure that there would be great mourning on that day. Herod’s son Antipas ruled the area of Galilee and it was this Antipas that Pilate presented Jesus to before he was crucified. The short phrase ‘In the days of King Herod of Judea’ that we find in verse five is a reminder that Luke’s narrative is set in a time of great oppression for the people of Israel and that every aspect of life was impacted by the presence and rule of the Roman Empire. Luke tells us that Zechariah was chosen by lot to enter the sanctuary and offer incense. As a priest, Zechariah (whose name means ‘Yahweh has remembered again’) would have served in the temple for two one-week periods each year. Being chosen to enter the sanctuary and offer incense usually happened only once in a priest’s lifetime, if at all. We are told that “the whole assembly of the people outside was praying.” One tradition says that the people prayed “May the merciful God enter the Holy Place and accept with favor the offering of his people.” Luke does not describe an individual in prayer, but a man carrying the prayers of the people into God’s presence. This was a time of great hope, eschatological hope, hope that Messiah would come to save God’s people from their oppression. As Zechariah prays, an angel appears and tells him that his prayer has been heard. Zechariah’s wife will bear a son in her old age, and this son will be filled with the spirit of the Lord and will bring many people back to God. Zechariah asks, “how will I know for I am old…?” I think that we usually read this as ‘how can I believe you that she will get pregnant, for I am too old to father a child…?’ But I think what he is actually asking is, ‘how can I know that all of this will be fulfilled when I will certainly not live long enough to see it all happen?’ In a time of such oppression and rebellion, it would be difficult to bring forth a child destined to be an orphan. Unlike Mary, Elizabeth would need Zechariah’s cooperation, and Zechariah wanted assurance that what the angel was saying about the child would be true. And Zechariah is assured by the angel Gabriel that the message is from God, but he takes away Zechariah’s ability to speak because of his lack of faith. Zechariah’s muteness in this section allows the women, Mary and Elizabeth, to take center stage in the story which is quite unusual in scripture. The same angel that appeared to Zechariah appears in the next section of text, this time to Mary, but with a similar message. She is told that she will conceive and bear a son, and that Elizabeth is also pregnant and in her sixth month. One of the biggest mistakes we make in reading this text, I think, is in viewing it through modern cultural understandings. Regardless of her single status, this angelic announcement was good news for Mary. In this second temple period, a woman’s status was based solely on that of her husband and her sons. Mary was being told that she would have a son who would be given the throne of David. Her response was not one of fear, but of wonder. “How will you do this for I am a virgin?’ As a woman of her time, she was being given the greatest news she could receive. The angel tells her “you will name him Jesus,” or in Hebrew yēshȗa’ (Joshua). While the English language distinguishes between the name of the son of God (Jesus, from the Latin Yesu) and the other Joshua’s of the Bible, the name given to Mary’s child was a very common one. Although he was conceived through divine circumstances, he was born in an ordinary way, with an ordinary name, among ordinary people. And that in itself is extraordinary. One of the most significant aspects of this first chapter of Luke is the place held by the women in the story. Their voices are central to this part of the text. The first message of good news is proclaimed by the angel, and the second is proclaimed by the women. Even by today’s standards this stands out. The Bechdel test, which is a test originally formulated to evaluate gender bias in films, asks the simple question of whether or not a particular work features at least two women who talk to each other about something other than a man. About half of all contemporary films fail the test. While Luke’s account is not a film, it is still quite incredible that situated in a time when women had no status outside of the men they were related to, we have this story of two women (and a man who cannot speak) who talk to each other about their own contributions to God’s work in the world, about their faith, about their joy, and about their place in Israel’s history.
Posted on: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 00:36:35 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015