19:12 If Jesus is the Nobleman in this parable, has he really gone to get kingly power?
19:21, 22 Again, the parallel does not quite fit. How is Jesus a harsh master taking what he did not deposit etc.?
19:26 What an odd metaphysical bent What do the minas represent here? Knowledge? Power? Spirit? In any case, how is it that those who have nothing have theirs taken away? a riddle?
19:44 It sounds like they are recognizing it. and is he claiming to be God here?
20:4 Whence comes this hesitation, even at the end of the tale? From a necessity that the deed be done on a certain day? some incomplete aspect fo the ministry? Genuine fear?
20:8 Or is he just toying with the buggers?
20:9-16 This parable fits the narrativemuch more nicely than the one in Ch. 19.
I like Jesus best as he is in this chapter: a teacher, not a prophet. He teaches, not by answering questions, but by exposing principles at the root of the questions. He reminds me of Socrates or Confucius, who, when asked what happens after death, answered (roughly), "Idiot. You can't even get this life right. Why worry about the next one?" Likewise, Jesus answers the question that isn't asked, which is usually more important than the one that is.
21:6 Is it possible that he was speaking generally, and not prophesying? More, "This will not last forever" than "This will be destroyed!"?
21:14 A nice verse that had never caught my attention before. "Do not prepare what you will say in advance" is good general advice.
I have a bit of a problem with this chapter. On one hand, it appears to be a pretty accurate prophesy. Things did occur mostly as said here. On the other hand, people (coughthewitnessescough) take it too far and apply it on a greater scale than the JEwish system of things. I'm not sure how I feel about the idea of prophesy anyway. A pretty compelling case can be made that this is the real thing. What does that mean metaphysically? Does it argue for a Boethian, simulatneous model of time?
22:3 As concerned with facts as Luke is usually, he seems to let a bit of supposition slip in here.
22:17 This is an interesting detail: There are two cups in Luke's account of this meal. One before the bread and one after. Does each have a significance?
22:21 I can just see everybody jerking their hands off the table at this point . . .
22:24 A natural extension of the "Who is the villain" topic
22:38 The point at which Judas wasuncovered and left is missing. Was it before or after the kingdom was conferred in verse 29?
22:62 From whom did Luke learn this account? Peter himself seems the most likely source, in which case we have to wonder about the objectivity of the account.
The Jesus of this, and indeed of the last three chapters, more closely resembles the peaceable, gentle Jesus of the first ten chapters than the angry, fiery Jesus of 11ish-19ish. I like this one better.
23:2 a lie, to be sure.
23:9 As it should be. Herod has no part to play in the unfolding of this drama, and Jesus rightly denies the murderer of his cousin the dignity of a response.
23:24 Pilate is often painted as a villain in this scenario, but so far it seems that he acted rather more nobly than he is given credit for. The common claim of Jewish apologists is that the Romans were Jesus' murderers. It certainly does not seem so from this account.
23:36 and these soldiers could easily be officers of the Sanhedrin, not of the Roman government.
23:47 never mind.
24:1 This verse is one with which My Dad has had some issue, and I credit it with the beginning of his mistrust in The Witnesses. According to his math, Jesus was not dead for 3 1/2 days if what Luke says is true. That certainly blows apart a whole mess of prophecy!
24:7 "On the third day", not after. So, less than three days in the tomb!
24:18 Interesting that we never hear ore about this Cleopas. I wonder what his connection to the early church was, that Luke felt it necessary to name him?
24:34 Rather an unsupportable conclusion . . . Peopple see what they want to see, after all.
24:36 This account is a little more credible.
In brief, I liked the beginning and end of this account. The Jesus described in those sections is a marvelous example as a teacher and as a human. The Jesus of the middle part, though, what a character! I'm not sure I like him . . .
20:4 Whence comes this hesitation, even at the end of the tale? From a necessity that the deed be done on a certain day? some incomplete aspect fo the ministry? Genuine fear?
20:8 Or is he just toying with the buggers?
20:9-16 This parable fits the narrativemuch more nicely than the one in Ch. 19.
I like Jesus best as he is in this chapter: a teacher, not a prophet. He teaches, not by answering questions, but by exposing principles at the root of the questions. He reminds me of Socrates or Confucius, who, when asked what happens after death, answered (roughly), "Idiot. You can't even get this life right. Why worry about the next one?" Likewise, Jesus answers the question that isn't asked, which is usually more important than the one that is.
21:6 Is it possible that he was speaking generally, and not prophesying? More, "This will not last forever" than "This will be destroyed!"?
21:14 A nice verse that had never caught my attention before. "Do not prepare what you will say in advance" is good general advice.
I have a bit of a problem with this chapter. On one hand, it appears to be a pretty accurate prophesy. Things did occur mostly as said here. On the other hand, people (coughthewitnessescough) take it too far and apply it on a greater scale than the JEwish system of things. I'm not sure how I feel about the idea of prophesy anyway. A pretty compelling case can be made that this is the real thing. What does that mean metaphysically? Does it argue for a Boethian, simulatneous model of time?
22:3 As concerned with facts as Luke is usually, he seems to let a bit of supposition slip in here.
22:17 This is an interesting detail: There are two cups in Luke's account of this meal. One before the bread and one after. Does each have a significance?
22:21 I can just see everybody jerking their hands off the table at this point . . .
22:24 A natural extension of the "Who is the villain" topic
22:38 The point at which Judas wasuncovered and left is missing. Was it before or after the kingdom was conferred in verse 29?
22:62 From whom did Luke learn this account? Peter himself seems the most likely source, in which case we have to wonder about the objectivity of the account.
The Jesus of this, and indeed of the last three chapters, more closely resembles the peaceable, gentle Jesus of the first ten chapters than the angry, fiery Jesus of 11ish-19ish. I like this one better.
23:2 a lie, to be sure.
23:9 As it should be. Herod has no part to play in the unfolding of this drama, and Jesus rightly denies the murderer of his cousin the dignity of a response.
23:24 Pilate is often painted as a villain in this scenario, but so far it seems that he acted rather more nobly than he is given credit for. The common claim of Jewish apologists is that the Romans were Jesus' murderers. It certainly does not seem so from this account.
23:36 and these soldiers could easily be officers of the Sanhedrin, not of the Roman government.
23:47 never mind.
24:1 This verse is one with which My Dad has had some issue, and I credit it with the beginning of his mistrust in The Witnesses. According to his math, Jesus was not dead for 3 1/2 days if what Luke says is true. That certainly blows apart a whole mess of prophecy!
24:7 "On the third day", not after. So, less than three days in the tomb!
24:18 Interesting that we never hear ore about this Cleopas. I wonder what his connection to the early church was, that Luke felt it necessary to name him?
24:34 Rather an unsupportable conclusion . . . Peopple see what they want to see, after all.
24:36 This account is a little more credible.
In brief, I liked the beginning and end of this account. The Jesus described in those sections is a marvelous example as a teacher and as a human. The Jesus of the middle part, though, what a character! I'm not sure I like him . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment