So, what did you come up with? Why does Luke choose to begin his narrative with the birth of John the Baptist?
Why do you think Luke thought the backdrop of this story was so important in order to tell the story of Jesus?
Luke is very clear to show the territory that John covered as different from the territory that Jesus covered. Could it be that Luke wanted to show how different Jesus was from all the 'other prophets'?
6 comments:
The way I see the birth of Christ begins with strictly accepting the impossible. Sometimes it seems that this story only exists on paper. I know that that’s not how it should be, but seriously it’s hard to relate to a story that begins with: "so a baby was born of a woman who had never slept with a man..." I bet Luke, being a physician, had his doubts like all the rest of us. That’s why I believe he started with the birth of the mystical baby's cousin. That kinda sounds like those shows that document the lives of famous people and always include a segment about a crazy relative that holds the Guinness world record for the biggest Popsicle stick birdhouse or something, but I digress. The thing is, who do you relate to more? The man who was born under impossible circumstances, or the birdhouse fanatic. Be honest. People are more likely to listen when the one who is speaking, or being spoken about, is like them. I'm a country music fan. When I go to a George Straight concert, I don't expect to see guys with skinny jeans and eye liner with fish hooks in their eyebrows rocking out in the front row. Usually the entire audience, from the nose bleed section to the members of the band, is decked out in cowboy attire. We call it running with a crowd. Why would it be different with the people Luke was writing to? Luke put John first to act as what English teachers call a "hook." In short, a listen up signal. Luke was giving the general public someone to refer to. Now I know and realize that Jesus was also in the line of the general public, considering his birthplace and the people he chose to be around, but it’s not the same. John was just John. He was probably expected to pick up his father's line of work and raise a family. Luke was giving us an example of humbleness, loyalty, and overall conviction to proclaiming the Christ as Jesus.
Are we not like John; reborn to claim the name of Jesus for such a time as this? Called to make disciples, preparing for the return of Jesus, being sure in our faith, yet sometimes having doubt creep up to bite us (you pick the place). I guess I'm somewhat comforted to know that even John the Baptist didn't quite get the whole picture. Setting the ground work by taking you from John's beginnings to his question to Jesus asking "are you the One or should we expect someone else?"..not only shows he's only human, but provides us with a clear cut answer as to our mission. "Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor." You know you're told to always be ready with an answer as to why you believe in Jesus... that always worried me because I don't think well under pressure. Yet the answer is so simple.. just tell 'em what Jesus has done for your personally. No fancy "Bible" words.. just tell 'em what you've seen and heard.
I think Luke just wanted to be that thorough. To paint a large and all encompassing, detail ladened picture,...to help us believe.
"These are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God."
Interestingly enough, a lot of people thought the 'hook' was the real deal! In John chapter three it says..."25 An argument developed between some of John's disciples and a certain Jew over the matter of ceremonial washing. 26 They came to John and said to him, "Rabbi, that man who was with you on the other side of the Jordan—the one you testified about—well, he is baptizing, and everyone is going to him."
Do you think there might be a similar problem of comparison in starting his narrative with John? Is 'a hook' really necessary when telling the story of Jesus?
This is probably sacrilegious to say, but what was Jesus? The obvious answer would be God in the flesh, but if he were standing across the Jordan from you, what would he look like? I know this conversation could go pretty deep so I'm going to try and stay on level one. Jesus would look like an ordinary man. I'm pretty sure that's what God was going for, but seriously it's easy to say he was just a guy. Starting the book off with John leaves the readers asking, "Well, why is this guy so important that the book moves on to him?" I think the "hook" was really all in that question and necessary.
I was doing some studying this week, and in a commentary I read, the author argued that 'Luke uses the first three chapters deliberately to intertwine the stories of Jesus and John the Baptist, especially the accounts of their births. In Luke 3, as John's ministry reached a high point, the Holy Spirit descended upon Jesus, signifying the start of His public ministry after 30 years of private life and silence.' -- Larry Sibley
Maybe the question is...where do all of our lives intersect and intertwine with the person and ministry of Christ?
Post a Comment