Can God Be Killed

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting March 16 to study Luke 23:26-56 (or as far as we get through).  The parallels to this passage are Matthew 27:24-61, Mark 15:15-16:1, and John 19:16-42.  It might be helpful to use all four to help create the scene with all the elements.

Be sure to make notes about all the various details that jump out at you; questions, observations, and just plain odd things.  After you have your own notes, I encourage you to review a few commentaries on Luke.  As always, Blue Letter Bible has some, but anything else you can find in print will also be helpful.

After you've done your own study, go back through with the questions below:

• In Matthew, Mark, and John (19:1), the writers state that Jesus is scourged.  Luke leaves out this detail.  Why do you think Luke would leave that part out?
• Scourging is not described in any of the other three Gospels.  We tend to make much of it, but none of the Gospels give it more than a sentence, and Luke leaves it out entirely.  Why do you think we emphasize something they minimized?
• Matthew, Mark, and Luke mention Simon of Cyrene who carries the cross for Jesus.  In Mark, he is referred to as "the father of Alexander and Rufus".  Many think this signifies some familiarity with his family in the early church.  Why do you think this detail significant enough for these three to mention?
• The Catholic Church has Fourteen Stations of the Cross on this road to Golgotha.  Some are in Scripture and some are "legendary".  What do you think is the point of going over those "stations" for this church tradition?
• If you've never seen this attraction, you will enjoy this.  This link goes to the official website where you can read about this Texas roadside attraction in Groom, Texas, on I-40.  Why do you think someone would spend so much money on such an attraction?
• Luke leaves out what we think of as a lot of detail, but he includes Jesus and the "weeping women" in verses 27 through 31.  To what do you think Jesus is referring here? 
• If it's possible that Jesus predicts the destruction of Jerusalem now for a third time, what do you think this might have to do with Luke's purpose in writing his account of Jesus?
• Jesus is depicted as being crucified between two others.  In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, they are criminals.  In John, they are just two others.  What do you think is the importance of Jesus being between two other people, criminals or not? (Maybe Mark 15:28?)
• During the time Jesus is on the cross, it's agreed that the soldiers divided up His clothes by casting lots (see John's account though for more detail), and Jesus was mocked by pretty much everyone close at hand around the cross.  Why do you think this was such an important detail?
• In Matthew and Mark, both the others crucified with Jesus are joining in the mocking.  Luke has a different detail, where one does, but the other professes faith in Jesus.  Why do you think this didn't make it into the other three Gospels? (How does Luke know this?)
• There is darkness over the land for three hours in Matthew, Mark, and Luke.  And in all three, He dies after.  Imagine the scene:  A major solar eclipse, and as Jesus dies, the sun emerges from the other side of the moon; it's light out again.  What do you think is the significance to that?
• In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, a centurion professes a modicum of faith in Jesus when he sees how Jesus dies.  How do you think this detail made it into the three Gospel traditions?
• Only in Luke do we have the quote, "Into Your hands I commit My Spirit" as Jesus dies (Psalm 31:5). In Matthew and Mark, it's a quote from Psalm 22:1.  What do you think is the essential difference between those two quotes?
• In all four Gospels, we have followers of Jesus witnessing the crucifixion.  In Matthew and Mark, we have women specifically, and several named.  In Luke we have some including women, but no one is named.  In John we have a similar list, but also a whole discourse where Jesus commends His mother into the care of "the disciple whom Jesus loved".  What does this tell you about the source for the Gospel details about the crucifixion?  
• Only in John is Jesus' side pierced with a spear.  John as specific testimony that he witnessed this, and also what Scripture it fulfills.  Why do you think this never made it into the other Gospels?
• Joseph of Arimathea goes to Pilate to ask for the body in all four Gospels.  Why do you think this detail is so important to the Gospel writers?
• In John, Nicodemus joins Joseph in caring for Jesus' body.  What might this detail tell you about John and Nicodemus?
• John has a detail that the tomb was in a garden close to where Jesus was crucified.  The others include no such location clue.  But all agree it was a stone tomb, three agree that no one had ever used it.  What do you think it means that "no one had yet been laid in it"?  Who reuses a tomb?  (for a clue, go to the Blue Letter Bible, or Google, and look up an "ossuary box")
• There are witnesses (or a witness) to where Jesus is laid.  Consider the detail of Matthew 25:61. This obviously sets up the next chapter in every Gospel.  But what do you think is going through their minds?

This will probably take us several weeks, but at least we'll be ready for Easter!

Passing 'Round The Messiah

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting March 9 to study Luke 23:1-12.  It was going to be longer, but I think there's enough here to take up our time.

Read through the passage and the parallels in Matthew 27:1-14, Mark 15:1-5, and John 18:28-38.  Not all the Gospels share the same set of characters, sequence, or wording.  There's enough detail between them to get some sense of the event, including the chaotic feel of it.  Make notes and jot down questions as you go through.

After you have your notes and questions, go back through with some sort of commentary.  The more detail the commentary has the more they will deal with the discrepancies between the Gospels.  They're not critical to know and address, but can be helpful in getting a sense of what happened.

After you have your notes and questions, revised them with some commentary, go back through with the questions below:

• The Sanhedrin brings Jesus to Pilate.  Later on there is a stoning of Stephen, so they can execute someone in an unofficial sense and get away with it.  Why do you think they want the Romans to execute Jesus officially and publicly?  (for more food for thought here, consider John 18:32)
• In verse 2, the religious leaders accuse Jesus with different accusations than they arrived at in their council chambers.  Why do you think that might be?  Even so, are they "lying" to Pilate?
• Once Pilate says he finds no guilt in Jesus, the religious leaders then widen the accusations.  When Pilate hears Jesus was from Galilee he perceives a way out for himself.  Why do you think Herod happened to be in Jerusalem just then?
• Luke records (actually repeats from earlier in Luke 9) that Herod actually wanted to see Jesus.  But why do you think he was interested in Him?
• Herod gets nothing from Jesus.  At least Jesus spoke with Pilate, but to Herod He says nothing.  Why do you think that would be?
• Herod and his detachment of soldiers mock Jesus but also give Him an expensive robe.  Why do you think Herod would give Jesus such a thing?
• The Jewish leaders are accusing Jesus strongly as Jesus gives no answer to Herod.  What sort of effect do you imagine this is having on Herod?
• Herod sends Jesus back to Pilate.  Luke then makes the odd statement that Herod and Pilate became friends from that day on, and that before they had been enemies.  Why do you think this is in any way important to the account in Luke?  He leaves out so much other stuff, but this he includes.  Why do you think that might be?

 That will probably keep us busy for a few hours.  Remember to think through what all this says about Jesus and your relationship with Him.  What do you learn about that relationship from Jesus' treatment and response?

Denials and Trials

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting March 2 to study Luke 22:54-71.  This is both Peter's denial and Jesus' "trial" such as it is in Luke.  The parallel passages are Matthew 26:57-75, Mark 14:53-72, and John 18:13-27.  It will be helpful to read these others as there are details that are actually difficult to reconcile.

Read through the passage in Luke, and the parallels looking for the scenes in as much detail as you can imagine.  There are two scenes, one in the courtyard, and one in a big room in the house.  Put yourself right in the crowd in the courtyard.  What noises and voices do you hear?  What do you see?  What do you smell?  What are the people talking about?  Once you have the scene set in your mind, now read the text.

Now put yourself in the house with the religious leaders and guards.  What noises and voices do you hear there?  What do you see, what do you smell?  What are the people on the fringes of the crowd discussing?  Once you have the scene set in your mind, now read the text.

Jot down your observations, questions you have about what's in Luke or the parallel passages.  Think through the differences and see if any sort of reconciliation makes sense in your mind.  Re-imagine the scene again with the insight you've gained and see if anything changes.  Remember to ask why who says what.

Armed with those notes and questions, now go to commentaries.  The Matthew Henry Commentary on the Blue Letter Bible will be helpful here because it's so detailed.  Keep in mind that commentators have trouble with synchronizing the various Gospel accounts.  So, different commentators will take different approaches.  Of the variety of views you find, try and pick one, or combination of some, that make the most sense to you.  You won't be in danger of being wrong if you disagree with any of them (or me, or each other).

After you've done this work, go back through with the questions below:

• Peter follows the soldiers and officials who arrested Jesus at a distance, but then joins them at the courtyard fire.  Why do you think Peter would approach so close?  Why do you think none of the other disciples did?
• The accounts in the various Gospels disagree on almost every point surrounding Peter's denial except that there were three, and in the courtyard of the high priest.  Why do you think there was such variance in the accounts?
• The first accusation always seems to be a servant girl, either the one who let Peter in or one present.  Why do you think that might be an important point?
• The second accusation takes various forms from different people, and Peter's response is also different in each account.  How significant do you think these differences are in light of the point of the overall "denial scene"?
• The third denial in each Gospel seems to stem from Peter being from Galilee (his speech/accent gives him away).  While the exact details vary, the element of his being from the same region as Jesus seems the same.  Why do you think that might be significant, or significant enough to show up in the same order in each Gospel?
• In Luke, as Peter makes his third denial, Jesus looks straight at him.  This detail occurs only in Luke.  It may be hard to imagine how they could see each other, but why do you think this detail is important for Luke to include?
• Peter weeps over his failure in Matthew, Mark, and Luke; but John has nothing.  What do you think is going on in Peter's mind and heart?
• The trial of Jesus in Luke is very short, but when does the event take place in Luke?
• The beating of Jesus by the guards in Luke comes before He stands before the council, in the others, after they accuse Him.  How might this help you reconcile the timing of the three accounts of Matthew and Mark with Luke?
• As the guards blind and then beat Jesus, they ask Him to prophesy who hit Him.  This is supremely ironic for the readers/hearers of the first century because of how Luke arranges his account.  What irony do you see here?
• The council of elders, chief priests and scribes assemble and Jesus is brought to them.  They ask Him if He is the "Messiah".  What do you think they mean by that term?
• Jesus' answer to the council is really weird in Luke.  What do you think Jesus means by "...if I ask you a question you will not answer..."?  Read Luke 20:1-8 and see if that helps any (it may not - honestly nobody really knows)
• Look at how Jesus describes where He will be seated the next time they see Him.  In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus will be "...seated at the right hand of power...".  Luke adds, "of God", which is obvious, but look at the range of options for this word in the Strong's entry on the Blue Letter Bible.  This is supposed to be a quote from Psalm 110:1, but only the reference to "sitting to the right" is from there.  So, why do you think there is this common reference to "power" in each Gospel (except John)?  What do you think is the point of "power" to the early followers of Jesus?
• In Luke, Jesus is asked if He is the "Son of God".  How do you think the religious leaders made the leap from "seated at the right of 'power'" to Jesus being the "Son of God"?  Keep in mind that's not a normal understanding of the "Messiah" in Judaism.
• In each of the responses recorded in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus literally says, "You say that I am."  In a sense Jesus dodges the question, but still affirms the title.  Why do you think this might be important enough for each Gospel writer to record it exactly the same?
• This assertion, or affirmation, is all the religious leaders need to accuse Jesus.  Why do you think it was enough?  What is Jesus being accused of by the religious leaders?

That's plenty to keep us busy.  Remember to look for places where you learn about your relationship with Jesus.  Keep in mind, saying you'd never think or act that way isn't where you'll learn and grow the most.  Stretch yourself, and see where our Master might be trying to deepen your relationship with Him.

Blessings upon you all until we meet again!

Capturing God

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting February 23 to study Luke 22:39 through 53.  This is a smaller chunk, but I wanted to take the trial and denial in one sitting.  The parallels to this are in Matthew 26:36-56 and Mark 14:32-52.  But also read John 18:1-12.

If you have time to read this in various translations, you will some variety in word choice, but the essential meaning remains in each.  The passage breaks nicely into two parts, Jesus' prayer and arrest.  John only has the arrest, unless you count John 17 as the prayer in the Garden.  Most readers don't, because it's simply too different. 

Each Gospel writer emphasizes something different.  Focus on Luke's emphasis, but to do that, you'll need to at least see how he's different from the others.  If you have a "Harmony of the Gospels" you will find this task a lot easier.  The Blue Letter Bible site (not the app) has one if you don't.

Make sure to take good notes and questions as you go through the Gospel accounts.  After you have your own notes and questions, refer to commentaries you have available.  Revise your notes and questions as necessary.  After your own work go back through with the questions below:

• Gethsemane is supposed to be on the Mount of Olives.  But Luke isn't that precise.  The others are, so we know Jesus was in the Garden of Gethsemane.  Why do you think Luke would not include such a detail?
• In Luke 21:37, Luke includes the detail that Jesus "camped" out on the Mount of Olives rather than stay in some house in the city.  Since there were so many pilgrims in Jerusalem, this isn't odd.  But what does that also tell you of the "privacy level" of the Mount of Olives at this time?
• In the other Gospels, Peter, James, and John are singled out to follow Jesus deeper into the garden.  Why do you think Luke would leave out such a detail?
• In Luke Jesus instructs all the disciples to pray and in Matthew and Mark only tells the three to "keep watch".  Why do you think Luke is more inclusive and focus' on prayer here?
• In Matthew and Mark both, Jesus prays three times.  Luke has only once, but it's intense.  See if your favorite translation footnotes verse 43 and 44.  If they don't it's not important, but it's possible these verses were added later.  Why do you think that would be unlikely?
• Luke is the only Gospel writer to mention why the disciples were so tired.  What do you think Luke means by "...from sorrow"?  What do you think they are grieving?
• Luke has the crowd show up immediately while Jesus is telling them to pray to avoid temptation (repeating His earlier command).  What is interesting to you about Luke's crowd (v.47) as opposed to the other Gospels (including John)?
• Matthew and Mark explain the kiss of Judas, Luke says he tried to kiss but Jesus didn't let him, and John doesn't even mention any sort of attempt by Judas.  What do you think happened?
• Then there was sword play.  The servant has his ear cut off.  In Matthew and Mark someone does it.  In Luke someone does it but Jesus heals it.  And in John Peter does it to Malchus.  What do you do with the differences?
• In Matthew, Jesus tells them that to live by the sword one dies by the sword, and that He has legions of angels to fight if it were warranted.  In Mark, Jesus just moves on to address the "angry mob".  In Luke, Jesus simply says to stop it (then heals the man).  In John, Jesus addresses Peter telling him not to prevent this from happening (allusion to the Garden prayers in the other Gospels?).  So what do you think happened?
• Now, in verse 52, Luke has the make up of the crowd.  Matthew has a crowd from the chief priest and elders with swords and clubs.  Mark has a crowd with swords and clubs.  Luke finally mentions the make up but the chief priests and and officers of the temple are actually there.  And John continues to refer to the Roman soldiers, a detail missing from all the others.  Why do you think such details might have been difficult to sort out from this event?
• What Jesus says to the crowd is similar in Matthew, Mark, and Luke; but very different in John.  Luke has Jesus referring to "this hour and the power of darkness" which is missing from the others, and John has Jesus going out to them, and them literally falling down at His approach.  Again, why do you think these details might be difficult to sort out?
• Read verse 53 of Luke in a couple of translations.  At least use a King James and an NIV.  It's even better to have a New American Standard or English Standard Version with those.  Literally, the verse reads: "...but this is of you the hour and the power of darkness."  The pronoun "this" matches exactly with the objects "hour" and "power".  What do you think Jesus means by the "power of darkness" being of them?

That should keep us busy for the time we have.  Remember to consider this passage as it applies to you?  For instance, when have you ever tried to solve a problem God doesn't have (with a sword, screw driver, or sack of groceries)?  There are other points of application you can find.  Make sure those make it into your notes.

Of Cups, of Memories, and of Future Glory

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting February 9 to study as far as we get between Luke 22:14 through 38.  Chances are good that we won't get through the bread and cups (yes, cups).

Read this passage through several times.  The parallels in Matthew 26 and Mark 14 are also helpful.  John covers the same time frame in chapters 13 through 16.  It's possible the prayer of John 17 was also said in the upper room.  Reading at least John 13 is probably very helpful as well, since it explains some things missing in Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

Be sure as you read to make notes, especially questions.  If you have access to a book (large or small) about how the Passover goes, it will be helpful here.  A Bible handbook (big, thorough one) might have a succinct treatment of the Passover as well. Luke's sequence is not quite the same as the others, so pay attention to the differences.

The remainder through verse 38 of Luke are made up of small discourses.  The questions below will take them individually.  You may find it useful to consider them that way, but commentaries will differ in how they do that, if they even do.

After gaining your own notes and commentary examination, then go back through with the questions below:

• Luke uses the term "apostles" here instead of disciples.  Prior to this he uses "the Twelve" or disciples.  It's possible that he has a technical reason for this or is making some other point.  What reason do you think Luke has for referring to the twelve disciples of Jesus as "apostles" here?
• Luke begins Jesus' discourse with His looking forward to when they celebrate it again in the "final kingdom" of God.  Matthew and Mark both have it at the end.  Why do you think Luke would put that at the beginning?
• Luke has Jesus passing around a cup, having given thanks, before the bread.  There's some question about when, during a traditional Passover meal, this might happen, and exactly which of 4 cups of wine Jesus shares first (thanksgiving).  In any case, there are two cups before the "bread" and two after.  So why do you think Luke makes a point of including this first cup?
• There is some debate about whether the practice of the Passover in the first century used a 3-pocket bag for the unleavened bread.  But regardless, bread was broken in the course of the meal.  Jesus' use of this to refer to His physical suffering changes the meaning from what it was in the meal.  To what do you think Jesus refers with the bread, and why do you think it is so important for us to remember?
• Jesus then shares a cup, again of memorial.  This though, signifies something completely different.  The final two cups of wine in a more modern tradition are the cup of Elijah and the final cup.  Again debate exists as to which cup Jesus uses to signify His blood.  The practice in the first century could have been very different from what we have today.  But which one makes more sense to you, the cup of Elijah or the final cup? (you're going to need to do some research to get at the difference on this one)
• Jesus then reveals He is going to be betrayed.  What do you think it means when Jesus He is going where it has been determined but still "woe" on His betrayer?  Why, if it's determined (think, "necessary") is the one betraying Him in such trouble?  (this was brought up last week)
• Only Matthew has Judas asking Jesus if it's him (like everyone else asks, but this time to see whether Jesus really knew or not).  Jesus responds there with an enigmatic statement.  Considering that Jesus washes Judas' feet and Judas is part of the meal, what do you think Jesus is doing for Judas by including him in all of that?  
• As they were looking back, what do you think Jesus' treatment of Judas meant to the Twelve, you know, "upon reflection"? What can you tell from what they remember and relate about Jesus' treatment of Judas in the Gospels?
• The disciples begin to discuss among themselves who might be the one betraying Jesus, which makes sense.  But then their questioning breaks out into an argument about which one is the "greatest".  Imagine you're in the room with them.  What do you hear?  What are they saying, and how do they get from asking about the betrayer to asserting their own greatness?  What do you learn about yourself and human beings from this exercise?
• Only Luke has Jesus comments about greatness right here in the upper room discourse.  Although John 13 has something very similar here related to Jesus' washing of the disciple's feet.  How does John 13 help you with Jesus' statements recorded here in Luke?  
• Only Luke has Jesus next comment about the apostles sitting on thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel.  But read verses 28 through 30 in several translations (Blue Letter Bible may help here).  Look particularly at how 29 is connected to 30.  So, what do you think?  Is Jesus promising the twelve a kingdom, just as He Himself has been appointed one by the Father?
• In verses 31, Jesus begins speaking to Peter about his denial.  Only Mark do we have this statement about satan requesting to "sift" him.  The way it's worded (and the context supports this), the implication is that God granted satan's request.  Why do you think God would do that?
• Jesus prays for Peter that his faith may not fail.  Considering Jesus' next comment about Peter's "return" what do you think Jesus means by praying for Peter's faith not to fail?
• Jesus seems to know what Peter will face, and yet still gives him a job to do afterwards.  He knows how it will go, but that does not disqualify Peter for service (at least not after he returns).  What does that tell you about Jesus' thoughts on qualifications for ministering?
• In the other Gospels, Peter claims his faithfulness in the Garden (Mount of Olives).  In Luke and John, they haven't left just yet.  How important is this detail to you?
• In Matthew and Mark, the other disciples claim faithfulness as well along with Peter.  This detail is missing from Luke and John.  Is it sort of assumed in the other two, or do you think there's some reason it didn't make it in?
• Read Matthew 26:34, Mark 14:30, Luke 22:34, and John 13:38.  How many times does the rooster crow before Peter denies Jesus?  Write that down.  Now read Mark 14:66 - 72.  Why do you think Mark would have such a precisely numbered detail?  (who was Mark's source again?)
• Only Luke has the detail about the twelve disciples/apostles now being "equipped" and Jesus contrasts that with when they were sent out as 12 and 72 taking no provisions.  Why do you think things are different now?
• Jesus tells them to sell a coat and buy a sword.  What do you think that is about?
• Jesus' explanation about the sword is because it has been foretold that He will be numbered (accounted) among "lawless" ones (outlaw?).  Why do you think that makes a sword necessary?
• The disciples already have two swords (for 12 men?), and Jesus says that's sufficient.  Why, if they are supposed to sell their coat and buy a sword, are 2 swords sufficient for 12 men?

 That's going to take us a while to get through, so get comfy!

Don't forget to look at what these things mean for your own walk with Jesus.  How does the Passover celebration and Jesus' changes reveal something of your relationship with Him, and His love for you?

And Jesus' dealing with Peter and the other disciples, how does that help you better understand your relationship with Jesus? 

Setting Up

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting February 2 to study Luke 22:1-13.  This passage sets up the betrayal of Jesus and the place where He will celebrate His "Last Supper".

This may be a familiar passage to you, so you will need to either read it in an unfamiliar translation or force yourself to read it slow.  Using a few translation will also help shake up your familiarity and provide insight into ranges of translation options.  Be sure to jot down your questions and insights.  Below is a question or problem I want you to work through before you use any commentaries:

For some insight on the timing of the Passover and Unleavened Bread, look up Deuteronomy 16:1-8.  That will explain somewhat about the timing.  Compare  Matthew 26 and Mark 14 with this passage, and see that the timing is pretty consistent.  Now look at John 13, there the timing is before the feast.  Consider again Deuteronomy 16.  If all the able Jews from all over the known world came to Jerusalem for a sacrifice, how could they all have their lambs sacrificed in a single evening?  How would you solve this dilemma?

Once you have some questions and observations of your own, go back through the passage with any commentaries you can find.  They will be somewhat helpful (although not all agree) on some of these details.  Once you've revised your questions and observations from commentary reading, go back through with the questions below:

• Even John (John 11:45-53) agrees that the religious leaders plotted to kill Jesus, but were afraid of a riot during the Passover/Unleavened Bread festival.  But John is clearer about why they wanted to avoid a riot.  Why do you think it was so important to the religious leaders not to upset the Romans?  Why do you think the "people" would be less concerned?
• That Satan enters Judas is supported by John as well (John 13:27), but the timing is different.  Yet in another place Jesus says about Judas (on the side) that he is a devil (John 6:70).  When do you think Satan was working in Judas, and what does the point about Satan entering him really mean for the writers?
• Matthew says the religious leaders gave Judas 30 pieces of silver, Mark and Luke don't mention a specific amount, and John has nothing about it at all.  What do you think is the point about the silver?
• Notice that the actions of Judas enable the religious leaders to consider getting rid of Jesus during the festival instead of waiting.  Why do you think this is important to the plan of God?
• The instructions for finding the room for the Passover preparations should sound a little familiar (Luke 19:29-35).  Mark has similar details (Mark 14:12-17), and Matthew has far fewer (Matt. 26:17-20).  So what do you think is the point of the Gospel writers in providing this detail about Jesus, that He has these arrangements somehow already made?

That should keep us busy for a while.  Be sure to bring your notes with you.  Also consider the character of Judas, and how he may give you insight into our own relationship with Jesus.  What strikes you as odd and what do you learn about yourself?

A Confusing Ending

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting (hopefully) January 26 to study Luke 21:5-38 (the end of the chapter).  This passage mostly parallels Matthew 24 and Mark 13, but the elements are similar not exactly alike.  It would be good to read those other two chapters along with Luke.

I recommend trying to break down this passage into individual events; as small as possible.  For instance verses 8 and 9 are about those coming falsely in His name.  That would be one small event, and there are other references like that all through out.  Once you have that breakdown, you can better compare with Matthew and Mark.  Make notes and jot down questions as you go through the process.  Here again, various translations will help.

Once you have your own notes and questions, then go through a commentary or two.  For this passage, there may not be enough to use in a study Bible or one-volume commentary.  I recommend something you can find on Blue Letter Bible or some other multi-volume commentary.  Adjust your notes and questions accordingly.  Once through your own study, go back through with the questions below:

• In Matthew and Mark the quality of the temple on which the disciple(s) comment seems to be the buildings, Mark has the "stones", but in Luke it's the "beautiful stones" and "gifts".  What sort of "source" do you think might have been used by the three writers?  Why a difference here?
• Jesus' response in each Gospel is almost exactly the same.  In Jesus' comment, the stones are the material used to build.  If the question is slightly different, but the answer is the same, what does this tell you about the "source" for all three Gospels?
• To whom is Jesus talking, Matthew and Luke have "the disciples" but Mark says, "Peter, James, John, and Andrew privately".  Consider that Mark's source is thought to be Peter, why do you think there would be a difference here?
• The disciples ask Jesus "when these things will happen" in one way or another.  What "things" do you think they are asking about?
• Jesus' intro in each account begins with "See that no one mislead you".  What does this tell you about a consistent theme of the "end-times"?  How often has this happened already?
• Many are misled/deceived by those claiming to be the Messiah.  Why do you think that would be?  What do you think would have to be true for that to happen to "many"?
• So false-messiahs and wars and news reels of war are not the end.  So why do you think Jesus leads with this statement?
• Nation rising against nation, earthquakes, and famines all make up the next part.  Luke adds "terrors and signs from heaven", but does not have the reference to "birth pangs".  Why do you think he would make that change?  What do you think is Luke's point?
• At this point the three Gospel accounts start to differ greatly and it gets somewhat confusing to try and connect them.  Luke and Mark seem to be closest, but still have differences.  In essence there may have been "editorial choices" about the order and element of Jesus' statements.  But even it wasn't the issue, what do these differences tell you about this section of the Gospels?
• The next section in Luke is the legal persecution (v.12-19), but there are even smaller elements to be seen in this one.  By looking at the other gospels, how many sections to do you divide this one into?
• Notice that much of the sayings in this section are actually distributed around Matthew (10:17-22), it's not just Luke who did that.  So it's possible some of this material doesn't belong to this discourse at this time on the Mount of Olives.  Why do you think that might be?  Why do you think the gospel writers would have any such liberty with the material?
• Common features are the persecution is an opportunity for witness, the Holy Spirit will give the right words, family will betray family members, and endurance saves.  What do these common factors tell you about the church and persecution?
• The destruction of Jerusalem is foretold in verses 20 to 24.  The parallels in Matthew and Mark are Matt 24:15-22 and Mark 13:14-20.  Luke's description differs in key points from Matthew and Mark.  Matthew and Mark speak of a "great tribulation" in those days and Luke leaves that particular description out.  He still refers to a persecution but it more on Jews than on the world at large.  From Matthew and Mark what do you surmise about the timing of the destruction of Jerusalem?  How is the timing different from Luke? Or is it?
• In Luke 25 through 28, Jesus describes His return.  The parallels in Matthew and Mark are Matt 24:29 to 31 and Mark 13:24 to 27.  Luke's description is less detailed, and has only one Scripture reference ("the Son of Man coming in a cloud" Dan. 7:13).  What do you consider the point and timing of Matthew and Mark as opposed to Luke?  What significant differences do you see?
• The next section I see (you may see more or less) is in verses 29 to 33.  The parallels are in Matthew 24:32 to 36 and Mark 13:28 to 32.  In all three Jesus says to watch for signs.  Considering the vast and terrifying array of signs He's mentioned, to which of them do you think He refers right here?
• Read this small section carefully.  Consider all that has gone before, and then the specific wording in all three Gospels.  What do you think Jesus means by "...all these things..." that will take place before the generation passes?  Just consider the plain surface meaning.
• Matthew and Mark both have this immediately following statement that 'no one knows the day or hour' which is missing in Luke.  Why do you think, if they are to watch for signs, would Jesus then say no one knows the day or hour? 
• This section is probably the single most problematic for commentators.  What sorts of explanations were you able to find, and which explanation best fits the facts for you?  How clear were those explanations from the text?  Were they the "plain sense" or was there some grammatical/literary gymnastics necessary?
• The last section (for me) of this discourse in Luke is in verses 34 to 36.  The parallels are Matthew 24:43 to 51 (includes a long parable of readiness) and Mark 13:33 to 37 (includes a short parable of readiness).  Luke's description is simple and direct.  Matthew and Mark are more involved with the parable and so on.  How do you see the tone in Luke similar and yet different from Matthew and Mark?  What does that tell you about how each writer was able to use the material slightly differently?
• Luke wraps up with a simple declaration of Jesus' week in Jerusalem.  The other Gospels (including John) have a lot more detail on that week.  Luke is heading to the crucifixion and doesn't waste a lot of time on the week.  Why do you think that Luke is different here?  What does that tell you about Luke's point of his Gospel and audience?

That should more than consume our time together.  You can see we have plenty of stuff to discuss.  Be sure to use more detailed commentaries this time as study Bible notes simply won't be detailed enough but more general.

Two final questions: 1) when was the last time you heard a sermon or lesson on readiness for Jesus' return?  2) How ready are you for Him to return?

Of Messiahs, Scribes, and Widows

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting December 29 to study Luke 20:41 through 21:4.  This passage has three parts, a theological question Jesus asks, a warning to the disciples by Jesus, and the "widow's mite" story.  It would be a good idea to get some sort of sense of these accounts in Matthew 22 (41-46) and Mark 12 (35-44).  They are differing view points, so add to the overall scene.

Read through the passage several times, since it's short look also at the other Gospel parallels.  Jot down notes of things you notice or wonder about.  Imagine yourself in the temple courts, hearing Jesus, seeing the people and the religious leaders.  Describe the scene with as many senses as you can.  Ask questions of what you hear and see.

Once you have your own notes, look at commentary.  Don't just use "study Bible note", but include other things with such notes.  The Matthew Henry Commentary has a bunch, and can be found on the Blue Letter Bible.

After you have your own notes and have looked at a commentary, go back through with the questions below:

• Why do you think the Messiah was thought to be son of David?  See if you can find a reference for that.
• Read Psalm 110.  What do you think this is Psalm about?  Jesus asks why David calls the referenced "Messiah", "my Lord".  Why do you think David calls the subject of the Psalm his lord?
• It's not wrong to call the Messiah the "son of David", remember the blind man in Luke 19 as Jesus enters Jericho?  So what do you think is Jesus' point?  What concept about the Messiah do you think He is challenging with the question?
• Simply put, what do you think it is about the scribes that Jesus has a problem with?
• Why do you think these scribes will receive a "greater condemnation"?  Read Matthew 23 (all of it).  What does this tell you about why the "greater condemnation"?
• After Jesus says these things, He looks up.  In Mark 12 He intentionally goes and sits where He can see the offerings being given.  Even though Luke leaves this detail out, it's probably what happened.  So why do you think Jesus would want to watch this?
• Jesus points out how the widow puts in more than everyone even though the amount was less.  What character of the widow do you think Jesus is pointing out?

Jesus makes a lot of character of people in this passage, character of teachers and those who give.  So where is the point of application for you?  Think through your own life and character in your relationship with God. 

Taxes and Resurrection

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting December 15 to study Luke 20:20-40. This passage has two challenges/questions posed to Jesus by those seeking to find fault in His teaching.  Luke doesn't tell us when during the week these occur, but is clear that they occur as a direct result of His embarrassment of the leaders when they questioned His authority.

Read through these passages in a few translations (KJV, NIV, ESV, and maybe NLT).  Be looking for differences in word-choice and where the translators seem to explaining something.  Make notes on observations and questions.  At that point consider commentary options you have (Blue Letter Bible, study Bible notes, ones on your shelf, etc.), and revise your notes as needed.

After you have gone through with your own study, go back through with the questions below:

• Why do you think the religious leaders wanted to get Jesus in trouble with the Roman authorities?  If they were trying to prevent a "riot", why involve the Romans?
• The "spies" puff Jesus up a bit, and lower their "boom".  What do you think they hoped to gain by setting Him up this way?  What do you think their introduction had to do with the question?
• Jesus "perceives" their craftiness or trickery.  How do you think this affected Jesus answer?  
• Verse 23 is longer in the King James Version.  This question Jesus asks is found in a few texts dating back to the 4th Century AD, but not very many texts of any period.  So it's not in the earliest texts, but is pretty early, nor is it a common reading, but in a few.  The question does occur in Matthew and Mark.  So, how do you think it might have come to be in a few Luke texts after the 3rd Century?  By the way, it also appears in the Aramaic text, which has early attestation.
• The denarius was a Roman coin used for trade everywhere in the Roman Empire.  Clearly it belonged to Rome.  So what do you think corresponds to "the things that are God's"?
• How do you "give to God the things that are God's"?
• The Sadducees come to test Jesus.  This is possibly a question they have used to test Pharisees and anyone else who claims to believe in any sort of resurrection.  They refer to the Levirate Law (Deuteronomy 25:5-10).  Why do you think they assumed marriage extended to resurrection?
• Jesus says that resurrected ones do not marry.  What clues do you think He could have referenced in the Torah (first 5 books) to support this claim?  (The Sadducees only accepted the Torah)
• But then Jesus supports resurrection in the Torah by citing Moses' claim that Yahweh is the God of the living Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. What do you think might be a problem here? 
• Look at Matthew 22:32 and Mark 12:27, where "for all live to Him" is missing.  If these patriarchs haven't "risen from the dead", how do you think Jesus' point about the resurrection is being made?
• The leaders lack the courage to ask further questions.  Why do you think they were so scared?

That should give us plenty to discuss in the time we have.  Be sure to find those areas where the Holy Spirit is revealing to you an area of your life to change.  

The Authority of the Son

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting December 8 to study Luke 20:1-19.  This is the first second day described by Luke.  He never actually says it's the second day, he doesn't number them as such.  This is simply the next account of Jesus in Jerusalem leading up to His death.

Read through the question and parable a few times.  I believe they are connected in a very important way.  Be sure to jot down questions and observations to bring to the group.  It may help to read an old and new translation as well, though the differences should be slight.  Once you have your own notes, go back through with a commentary or two.  After you have revised your notes and questions, go back through with the questions below:

• Three groups are mentioned in verse one: Scribes, chief priests, and elders.  Why do you think the chief priests are "plural"?  Who do you think the elders are as opposed to the priests and scribes?
• The authority of Jesus is questioned.  In other Gospels, this is done in response to Jesus casting out the money-changers.  What do you think is being questioned here, His authority to do what?
• Their question has two parts, "what authority" and "who gave you authority".  What do you think they meant by the difference, and why do you think they are asking Him?
• Jesus responds with a question about the baptism of John.  Their lack of response is based on their fear that the people will stone them.  What do you think of that fear?  Why do you think the "elders" and "chief priests" would fear such a thing?  If their fear is valid, what does that tell you about the relationship of the elders and chief priests with the people?
• Jesus also refuses to tell them.  What do you think of the possibility that He won't for some of the same reasons they won't?
• Read Isaiah 5:1-7.  Now re-read the parable in 9 through 16.  Considering Isaiah 5, what does the vineyard represent?
• Considering how the characters line up, who do you think the "farmers" represent?
• Who do you think the "servants" represent in the parable?
• The "son" is now obvious.  Matthew, Mark, and Luke all connect this parable with the questioning of Jesus' authority.  So how might this parable actually answer the scribes, chief priests, and elders question about Jesus' authority?
• If it does answer the leaders question, how likely do you think it is that the crowd of people understood it that way?  
• What are some reasons Jesus would say He would not tell the leaders what His authority was or Who it came from, and then tell this parable which serves both purposes?
• Look up Psalm 118 and read through the whole thing.  In what way do you think this line about the corner stone is used in the psalm?
• As Jesus uses it, it refers to Him.  Who do you think are the "builders" in this psalm?  Who are the "builders" in Jesus' day?
• Jesus then adds the line about being crushed and pulverized.  What do you think is the difference between falling on the stone and the stone falling on someone?
• Only Luke and Matthew have the line about crushing and scattering.  Why do you think this was important to them?
• Again the fear of the people keep the leaders from seizing Jesus.  What do you think this says about their authority?  

That should be plenty to chew on for our time together.  Remember to look for lessons for your own life in this passage.  Be asking how you are like the religious and political leaders, how are you like the people, and so on.  What lessons were they supposed to learn, and what are the lessons for you?

Getting To Jerusalem

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting December 1 to study Luke 19:28-48 (the Triumphal Entry).  Luke's version of this event is slightly different from the other three (none of which are the same).  So be sure to also read Matthew 21:1-16, Mark 11:1-10, and John 12:12-19.  The details will show in two Gospels, but none of them has all of them.

Read through Luke's account in a few translations.  Look for differences in words or phrasing between older and newer, or smoother and rougher translations.  See if you can figure out why on the Blue Letter Bible site.  Make your notes and jot down questions as you find things.

Take your notes and look through a commentary or study Bible notes.  See if you find some answers (or more questions), and revise your notes and questions.  After you've done that, then go back through with the questions below:

• A colt is a baby whatever.  Only in Matthew does it say it was a donkey colt, but John mentions a version of the same prophecy mentioning the donkey colt.  In any case, why do you think it was necessary to have a colt on which no one had ridden?
• The disciples throw their cloaks on the colt and on the road.  What do you think this signifies?
• How do you think Jesus knew there was a colt in the opposite village, and why do you think no one seems to mind Him using it?
• The "multitude of disciples" are rejoicing.  How many do you think there were following Jesus at this time?
• The ending of what the disciples cry out is somewhat different than any other Gospel.  What does the phrase, "Peace in heaven and glory in the highest" remind you of?
• The disciple specifically refer to Jesus as the King.  John has this detail as well.  Considering the previous parable, what do you think might have been in their mind at this point?
• Some of the Pharisees in the crowd ask Jesus to silence His disciples.  If these were the ones following Him since early on, why do you think they have a problem with what the disciples are saying?
• Jesus says that if the disciples are quiet the rocks will cry out.  What do you think is Jesus' point?
• If Jesus knows what's coming, and He's predicted it so He obviously does, what do you think is going through His mind as He hears the shouts of joy and adulation of the crowds, palms and cloaks in the road, and all the pomp? 
• Jerusalem comes into view and Jesus weeps over it.  Only in Luke do we have this detail.  Jesus describes how the Romans conquered Jerusalem in AD 75.  Luke may have been written around that time.  What do you think this detail means for his readers/hearers?
• If Jerusalem had known.  How much of what we know has an effect on living active faith in Jesus?  We have the amazing gift of Scripture, so we know more than they would have in the moment.  How well do we know the things that make for peace on the day of our visitation?
• Jesus says that these things have been hidden from their eyes.  Why do you think God would do that?  Why setup the city of Jerusalem for destruction?  What does that remind you of?
• Jesus goes directly into the Temple and throws out the sellers of goods.  Then teaches.  There's not a lot of detail here, but He does use the "House of Prayer"/"Den of Robbers" reference.  It seems so tame here in Luke.  But how do you think Jesus still makes His point?
• Look up Matthew 21:12-13, Mark 11:15-17, and John 2:14-16 (the most detail is in John).  We make a lot of Jesus' clearing the Temple, but most Gospels (except for John) have little more than the Scripture references to Isaiah 56 and Jeremiah 7.  Why do you think that might be?  Why do you think the details were scant in the Gospels?
• Only John reminds his readers of the reference to Psalm 69:9, that "Zeal for Your house will consume Me."  Why do you think this helps understand Jesus' actions?
• So, do you think the money changers and sellers of animals remained outside the Temple the rest of the week?
• Luke has the phrase that the people were "hanging on every word He said" and this is literally how he wrote it, with the verb "hanging".  None of the other Gospels have this phrase.  So is this where we get our colloquialism, "hanging on every word"? (I couldn't find it when I Googled this)

That should keep us plenty busy.  Remember to put yourself in the scene as you read.  Then consider who you are more like, the crowd, the disciples, the Pharisees, or someone else.  Always ask what this means for you; what is God saying to you through this passage?

Of Taxes, Minas, and Bruttal New Kings

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting November 10 to study Luke 19:1-27.  The odds are very long that we will actually get to verse 27.  Even if we get through the familiar account of Zacchaeus, I doubt the parable will be able to go through in one week.  It's just too weird.

Read through the passages in several translations.  It would be good to read the parable in Matthew 25:14-30.  This is the one with which we're most familiar.  Jot down notes and questions; there will probably be lots of questions.

Go through a commentary or two.  You will probably want more than one opinion here.  There may be some disagreement about details in Luke. 

After you go through your own and commentary study, go back through with the questions below:

• Jesus is passing through Jericho, so it doesn't seem He intends to stay.  Why do you think Luke would include this detail considering who is waiting to see Jesus?
• Luke includes two details about Zacchaeus, he's the chief tax collector and he's rich.  What might that tell you about how Zacchaeus conducts his "collecting"?
•  Zach can't see Jesus because he's short.  What do you think about this detail in the story and how Zach finds a solution?
• Jesus sees Zach, and acts like He's come on appointment to stay with him.  What do you think is going on here?  Could it have been an appointment?
• Jesus says it is necessary for Him to stay at Zach's house.  Why is that?
• The people grumble, so what do they obviously think of Zach?
• If Zach is being honest with Jesus about what he is doing to do, what does that tell you about how Zach actually collects taxes?
• Jesus claims to have recovered a son of Abraham.  What do you think that means culturally for Zach and everyone who witnessed this interaction?
• Jesus claims to have come to seek and save what was lost.  Look back to Luke 15.  If this relates that chapter, then what has Zach done here?
• In verse 11, Jesus transitions to a parable.  What do you think of the differences between this account and Matthew 25:14-30?
• Luke adds detail about a king leaving to receive a kingdom.  This actually happened with Herod and then with Archelaus, his son.  The Roman Emperor gave them their kingdoms.  But the detail about killing those who opposed him didn't happen.  Considering that most of those hearing Jesus would probably have been familiar with this historical fact, what do you think they thought of the parable?  Especially the ending?
• The reason behind the parable is that the people are expecting the Kingdom to appear.  Why do you think Luke uses that word, normally he uses "come"?
• In this passage, minas aren't birds.  Look up how much it is here.  Why give a "slave" so much money?  What do you think Jesus is referring to here, and who receives it?
• Look up the word for "do business" is here.  Listen to the pronunciation.  What English word do you hear sort of in the midst of this one?
• Who do you think the people who send a delegation to renounce the king might refer to?
• What do you think the 1-slave means by his description of his master?
• The master doesn't disagree with the slave.  If the master is "God", then what do you think this tells us about God?
• Why would those hearing question giving the mina to the one with 10?  Doesn't that sound like a good investment?
• Jesus explains that those having will be given, and those not having, even what they have will be taken away.  So what do you think that means?  Having what?
• So who do you think the "enemies" slain before the king refer to?
• Again, if the "king" is God, then what does this "slay them in my presence" tell us about God?

That should take way more time than we have Thursday.  I consider the chances excellent that we could take 3 weeks on these passages.  As we do, remember to consider yourselves in the accounts.  What is God revealing to you about your own relationship with Him?

Blind Persistence

This was the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting October 27 to study Luke 18:31-43.  But now this is the Bible study page for Thursday, November 3.  This has a prediction of Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection, and then the healing of a blind man as Jesus enters Jericho.

Read the passages in multiple translations, especially the prediction in verses 31-34.  Look for word and grammar choices in translations.  Notice the similarities, over the differences.  That will actually tell you a lot about this passage.  Jot down notes and questions.  Be sure to walk through the healing account as if you were there noting what you see, smell, and hear.

After you have made your own study, look through commentaries you have at hand.  Revise questions and notes, and then go back through with the questions below:

•  Jesus calls the Twelve together.  This is the select group He has called, and not the troop of camp-followers.  To these He relates what will happen.  Why do you think Jesus would limit this just to them?  Why not the larger group to whom He appears after His resurrection?
• Everything will be completed as predicted about the Son of Man by the Prophets.  How do you think the disciples (and therefore Judaism) taught in that day about the "Messiah"?  They don't get this so it had to diverge significantly.
• Jesus goes on to describe the treatment He will receive, and it's not all beatings and crucifixion.  Why do you think Jesus makes a point of including both here?
• In Matthew 20:17-19 and Mark 10:32-34 this prediction is mirrored to an extent.  In all three Jesus takes the Twelve aside, and in each account He includes His humiliation.  But why do you think that Luke would leave out the chief priests and scribes which Matthew and Mark include?  Luke has "Gentiles" instead, which matches the majority of his audience.
• The disciples are not able to "bring these things together" (i.e. "understand") but they can't, not because they're unintelligent, but because it was "hidden".  Who do you think hid it from them, and why hide it?
• The blind beggar "hears" the commotion, and learns it's "Jesus the Nazarene".  What do you think it means for the beggar that he is able to connect "the Nazarene" to "Son of David"?  Why call Jesus the "Son of David"?
• The crowd, having told the blind beggar Jesus is coming, then tells him to be quiet.  Why do you think they were upset about the beggar crying out to Jesus?  Later they love the healing, and it was known that Jesus heals, so why prevent this man in need of it from crying out?
• Jesus stops and orders the beggar to be brought to Him.  Why do you think the crowd is now engaged on the bind man's behalf? What changed?
• Jesus asks what the mans wants Him to do for him.  Why ask a blind man what he wants?
• Literally the man wants to "look up".  There is a Greek verb for "see", but it's not used here.  What do you think might be inferred by "to look up" over "to see"?
• Look at the variety of ways the word "to look up" is used.  Sometimes it's for "look up" as into heaven.  But also notice the Gospel writers use it a as a "pun" in some healing accounts.  How does this usage help you understand why it might be used here instead of "to see"?
• Jesus says his faith has "saved" or "made him well" ("given life" in one translation).  The word is normally "saved" elsewhere (93 times).  Why do you think this applies here?  What do you think this healing was about?
• What role do you think what the man cried out to Jesus played in his "faith" about Jesus?
• The man could see immediately and "praises God".  The people see it and "glorify God". What do you think is the difference, if any, between "praising" and "glorifying" God?

That will keep us busy I'm sure.  Be thinking of how you are or are not like the disciples as you read Scripture, and are and are not like the blind beggar and his faith.  These are the best points of application.  Jot down some thoughts about that.

Of Infants and Young Rulers is the Kingdom

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting October 20 to study Luke 18:15-30.  This is mostly on the "Rich Young Ruler", but also has Jesus blessing children.  Jesus is right about to enter Jerusalem, and everything changes after this.

Read this passage through, and even complete the chapter (Triumphal Entry) to get a sense of what's happening.  Try reading this passage keeping the two segments separate, and then try it again tying them together (Jesus with children when the ruler shows up).  Use a few translations to see what translation differences there are.  As always, make notes, jot down questions.  If you haven't seen this feature of Blue Letter Bible yet, Strong's is tied to more than the KJV now.  You can reference Strong's with the New American Standard Bible, the English Standard Version, and even the Holman Christian Standard Bible.  This makes checking out those translation differences a lot easier.

After you make notes and questions, then refer to some commentary references.  Again, the Blue Letter Bible has some nice ones.  Commentaries can be good options, but so can sermon notes, study guides, and other references.  Use these to answer some of your questions, revise your notes, and come up with other questions.  After you've done this work yourself, go back through with the questions below:

• In this account in Luke, babies are being brought to Jesus.  In other accounts (Matthew 19 and Mark 10) the word is "children" which refers to ones who could walk.  Later in verse 16, Jesus uses the world for "children" again.  Why do you think Luke refers to "babies" rather than children?  Could there have been more than one event or someone remembered it differently?
• Jesus says that the Kingdom of God belongs to (is of these) children.  What does that mean to you? How do you think the Kingdom of God belongs to children?
• Jesus then strengthens His meaning when He says that unless someone receives the Kingdom as a child they can't enter.  How do you think you receive or accept the Kingdom of God like a child would?  If you have a young child, what would that look like for them, how would they do it?
• If you haven't, read the account of the "Ruler" in Matthew 19:16-22 and Mark 10:17-22.  In Luke's account the man is initially just a "ruler".  In fact, he's not referred to as "young" in Luke's or Mark's account.  Why do you think Matthew remembered him "young"?
• All of the accounts have Jesus saying, "Why call Me good, no one is good but God."  Why do you think Jesus says this to the "ruler"?
• Of the three accounts, Luke has the shortest list of laws.  Why do you think that might be?
• The man says in all accounts that he's done these from his youth (all his life).  With Luke's list, this might be possible, even with Mark's list.  But with Matthew's list?  What do you think of this person's claim to have lived this life this way?
• Jesus then sees his problem: his wealth.  If this man knows he's lived his life according to the law, why do you think he still needs to ask Jesus about how to inherit eternal life?
• Jesus addresses the stumbling block in his life, the man's wealth.  But what does he also forfeit when he gives up everything and follows Jesus?
• Jesus tells him to give everything to the poor in order to get treasure in heaven and come follow Him.  Considering the man's initial question, what about the idea of "treasure swapping" should have been attractive to the "ruler"?
• In some translations, Jesus is grieved when the man is grieved.  There is good evidence both ways.  Why do you think Jesus would be "grieved" that the ruler left grieved?
• Jesus says that it's hard for the wealthy to enter the kingdom of heaven.  Considering wealth on a global scale, most Americans are wealthy.  What do you think this means for us and our culture?
• The people who hear Jesus (in Matthew and Mark, His disciples) are astonished.  In all three accounts, camels go through needles easier than rich people enter heaven.  What point do you think Jesus is making to the astonished people?
• In all three accounts Peter points out that they have left all that.  Why do you think Peter is making that point?
• Jesus responds to Peter that all who sacrifice much will gain much, and eventually, eternal life.  So what do you think of Jesus' claim they will gain it all back and more in this life?  Or do you think He meant something different?  If so, what?

Consider your own life in relation to these accounts.  Where is God revealing to you areas you may need to surrender more to Him, give something up, or embrace something you've been avoiding?

Persistent Widows and Humble Tax Collectors

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting October 13 to study Luke 18:1-14.  This passage is made up of two parables both with similar literary introductions.  They probably stand on their own, and Luke includes them here as separate elements.  From the remainder of the chapter we learn that Jesus is still heading south to Jerusalem, but that's all we know about the setting.

Read through both parables in at least two very different translations.  Note where the two sets of translators made very different choices.  Try reducing the point of each parable into one simple sentence (one sentence for each).  Make notes on the various elements, note questions and so on.

Once you have your own notes, look at the notes of other commentaries or study Bibles.  Revise your notes and questions as you like.  Only at this point go back through the passage with the questions below:

• Luke gives the point of the first parable as teaching to always pray without giving up.  These two parables are the only place Luke uses such a literary introduction.  How do you think this helps the reader (or listener) get the most out of the parable?
• The judge does not fear God nor respect people.  Why do you think such a person would be a "judge"?  Later Jesus refers to him as an "unjust" judge.  This is ironic, partly because of the comparison with God.  Why do you think Jesus would use such characters in a parable?
• If the widow knows the character of the judge, and has no leverage with him, why do you think she would persist in coming to him?
•  The judge, as we would expect, ignores her.  But his explanation of why he eventually listens to her is that she bothers him.  What do you think this says of God?  What do you learn here from this?
• Jesus then says God will act swiftly on behalf of His elect.  Consider again the intro to the parable.  If God is swift, why is the parable needed?
• Jesus then asks if He will find faith on the earth when He comes.  When do you think He is referring here?  Is this His return or when He passes through on the way to Jerusalem?
• In verse 9, we have a similar literary structure for the introduction to the parable.  There are two parts to the problem with the target audience.  Which one do you consider more severe?
• The prayer of the Pharisee is made up of what he says, but also his physical stance.  Why do you think our physical stance matters to God?
• The Pharisee prays a prayer of thanksgiving.  But considering what he is thankful for, who do you think he is really thankful to?
• The tax collector's physical stance is different.  What do you think his stance shows about his attitude here?
• Consider what the tax collector says.  He's not thankful but asks for something.  Without considering the detailed content, we might think that was presumptuous, but the content makes it clear he's not.  So how can prayer "structures" distract us from prayers that truly honor God?
• The result of each prayer was supposed to be justification (see v.14).  What do you think your prayers would sound like if this were your goal of prayer?  How often is justification your goal in prayer?
• Only one prayer of the two achieved the goal of justification.  Once again, the tax collector is the hero and the Pharisee is the antagonist.  Considering the make up of Jesus' traveling party, why do you think He would choose these characters?

There is plenty more we can discuss on Thursday.  Be sure to bring your notes.  And pray through this week.  That seems to be the consistent theme, pray.

The Surprising Ending...And Vultures

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting October 6 to study Luke 17:20-37.  This is one of three "Little Apocalypses" in the Gospels.  This is Luke's version and it is significantly different than Matthew and Marks.  It might be good to go look at Matthew 24 and Mark 13 after you have read through Luke's version once or twice.

Read through this passage in two very different translations: NIV/KJV, or NLT/NASB, or another combination of a "literal translation" (like ESV, NASB, KJV/NKJV) with an "interpretive translation" (NIV, NLT, RSV).  The point is to see the options within translation, and places where translators struggled with the meaning.  Although, even in literal translations the translators struggled to make sense of what was written.  Make notes and questions as you go through.

Next, look at what commentaries you find.  If necessary, revise your notes and questions.  After that, go through the questions below:

• The Pharisees ask Jesus when the Kingdom of God will show up.  Why do you think they were asking, considering the things they had seen and heard Jesus do and say?
• Jesus' response seems to say that the Kingdom of God shows up within people.  Considering the range of translations of verse 21, what do you think Jesus meant?
• Jesus switches from answering the disciples to speaking to the disciples.  What do you think about the differences between what He tells the disciples (to begin with, v.22 and 23) compared to what He said to the Pharisees?
• In verse 24, Jesus' description changes to something of a "sudden" event.  To what do you think Jesus refers to as "sudden"?
• Luke puts Jesus' saying that these things have to happen after His crucifixion.  Why do you think He puts that statement right there?  What point do you think Luke is making?  What point do you think Jesus makes here?
• In the days of Noah and the days of Lot.  Most commentaries take the very traditional view of the degradation of the societies.  I don't.  Considering the explanation Jesus gives of how the days of Noah and Lot match the days of His coming, what is the correspondence?
• At verse 31, Luke is missing the reference to the "Abomination of Desolation" used in both Mark and Matthew.  Why do you think such a reference would be missing here?
• The reference to escaping without stopping for stuff is abbreviated here as opposed to Matthew, so why do you think Luke breezes through it?
• The statement about saving a life loses it, and losing a life saves it is found in both Matthew and Mark, but the context is different.  Why do you think Luke thought it might belong here?
• This statement is even found in John (12:25), making it rare indeed.  Why do you think this statement was so important that all four writers made sure it was in their record of Jesus?
• The statements about 2 being present and one left and one taken is in Matthew.  Reading through his description of the "End", what does this statement tell you about what will happen?
• The word "will be left" is the same word used for "divorce" and "forgiveness" in both Gospels.  What do you think of that word-choice?
• Verse 36 is missing from all manuscripts dated before the 5th Century (AD 400).  Why do you think it might have appeared thereafter?
• Consider verse 37 in light of what Jesus has said in verse 20.  Why, if there will be no "signs" does Jesus tell the disciples to look for "vultures"?  

Consider what this means for us today.  It sounds hard to understand, especially when all the other Gospels have such different sounding accounts of the end.  The point remains though, endure to the surprising ending, whether your own here on earth or of the earth itself.

Some Rich Dude and Lazarus

This is the study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting September 15 to study Luke 16:14-31.  The chances are good we won't get through the whole thing, but it might be possible to do all of it.

This is the completion of Jesus' teachings on wealth from this chapter.  It seems to move the issue to the heart or attitude of people, and for some reason include divorce.  It concludes with the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus.  The elements of this part of the chapter are hard to follow and the details can be distracting from seeing a main point (sort of like the last one).

Read through the entire chapter at least once to get a sense the overall context.  As you begin to focus on the statements of Jesus in verses 14 through 18, seek the connecting thread.  Break down the parable based on the preceding statements of Jesus and His audience.  As we noticed last week it's good to read the parable in a few translations.  This one may have as many differences as the previous one, but it's still a great exercise.  The NIV with NASB, NLT with ESV, and NRSV with NKJV are good pairings (any of the first suggestions with any of the second will work as well).  Make notes and questions for yourself as you go.  Then see what commentaries have to say.

After you done your own work, go back through with the questions below:

• Once again, the Pharisees are close enough to hear Jesus speaking to His disciples.  So, how likely is it that at least some Pharisees made up the number of Jesus' disciples (not the 12, but followers)?
• These Pharisees scoff at Jesus.  So, following closely enough to hear Him speak to His disciples, they don't necessarily buy in or completely buy in to His views of righteousness.  Why do you think that might be?  How close do you think we need to be to Jesus' views to be considered disciples?
• The Pharisees "justify" themselves, a term which nearly every translation uses, but what do you think this means?  Look at the Greek word on the Blue Letter Bible here.  If you want more information, follow the link to the root word (G1342).  How does this help you understand what the Pharisees were doing?  How does this help you see this activity in yourself?
• The final statement of verse 15 is interesting in that it sounds very much like a blanket statement about everything lifted up among people being detested by God.  Why do you think Jesus put it that way?  What point do you think He's trying to make?
• Jesus uses the word "abomination" or "detestable thing" which is actually a technical theological term in Judaism.  Look at the Greek word on Blue Letter Bible here.  Pay special attention to its usage in other places.  How do you think the Pharisees heard Jesus' statement?  What do you think they thought when He said that?
• In verse 16, we have a really strange statement by Jesus.  This is one verse that really needs several versions, not just one to get a good sense of.  Here again, the Blue Letter Bible will provide an excellent set of parallels.  Pay special attention to the KJV, NIV, NASB, and ESV translations of it.  What do you think Jesus means about John being a "boundary" of some sort?  What do you think Jesus means by people entering the Kingdom of God by force?  What do you think was preached before John if it wasn't the "Kingdom of God"?
• Verse 17 is a well-known statement from Matthew (17:18) as well.  How do you think this statement relates to the two previous verses?
• Verse 18 has parallels in Matthew (5:31-32, 19:9) and Mark (10:11,12).  How do you think this teaching on divorce relates to wealth, the law, and what God finds detestable?  Why do you think Luke put it here?
• The parable of the "Rich Man & Lazarus" begins with the setting of the two characters in verses 19 through 21.  What are your first impressions?  Why do you think Jesus made them so incredibly opposite?
• The rich guy ends up in hell, and Lazarus in "heaven".  Why?  What clues do you have for why one went one place and the other to the other?
• The description of the "after-life" is pretty spooky, one side can see the other but neither can get to the other.  What do you think of that?
• Hell (Hades) is "torment" in verse 23, or "agony" due to "flame" in verse 24.  What do you think of this description, in agonizing torment by fire yet able to see the other side where they aren't?
• Notice Lazarus never speaks in this parable.  Why do you think might be important to Jesus' point?
• Abraham has several comments on the rich man's situation (verses 25, 26, and 29), they get progressively more depressing (from irreconcilable agony to it being his own fault).  What do you think of this assessment of the description of this afterlife?
• The rich man constantly wants Lazarus to do this or that, come here, go there.  What does this tell you about the rich man's understanding of himself and Lazarus?  How different do you think this is from when they were both alive?
• Obviously Abraham's final statement relates to Jesus' resurrection and people's persistent unbelief.  Why do you think Jesus would include that to people following Him closely?  What does that tell you about people, even those who follow Him closely?

That should be plenty to keep us busy, probably for a few weeks.  Consider where you see God seeing you in these passages.  It's easy to see others, but the Holy Spirit desires to awaken you to growth in your relationship with Him, just as Jesus was prodding the Pharisees in much the same way, to be authentic with their belief and pursuit of a relationship with God.

Finding Party

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study meeting September 1 to study Luke 15 (since we didn't even touch it last week).  This chapter is made up of 3 parables about the rejoicing in heaven over repentant people.  The first two setup the third.

Read through these a few times.  Their familiarity, especially with the third will be the biggest barrier to really understanding them.  I found it very helpful to keep Luke 14:25-35 in view as you read through these parables because together they provide balance to the issue of evangelism, an intrinsic issue in these parables.

If you're only going to read it once, or focus on it once, do it with an unfamiliar translation.  Jot down things you notice, questions that come up, and details you don't remember quite that way before.  After making your own study, go back through with the questions below:

• After Jesus turns to the many crowds following Him and tells them how expensive it is to be a 'disciple', now "all the tax collectors and sinners" are following Him.  Considering the previous passage, how committed do you think these tax collectors and sinners were about following Jesus?
• Both the Pharisees and scribes began to grumble about all the tax collectors and sinners around Jesus and His close association with them.  What does that tell you about these two ends of the spectrum of "righteousness" among those following Jesus?
• Why do you think the Pharisees and scribes always seem to be around Jesus as well?
• Jesus tells the parable of the lost sheep, explaining how the shepherd leaves the 99 in the fields to find the lost one.  And then finding celebrates with his friends and neighbors.  Jesus explains this to illustrate the celebrating in heaven over one repentant person.  So, what do you think is the point to those following Jesus?  Where are they in the parable?
• Jesus then tells the parable of the lost coin where the woman seeks diligently, and then celebrates with her friends and neighbors when she finds it.  Again the rejoicing in heaven is the explanation.  So where are the listeners around Jesus in this parable?
• Then the parable of the lost son.  Now there is a lot more detail.  The lost son repents for one thing (only found in the previous explanations).  The father goes out while the son is still far off, but how diligently is the father seeking the son, as in the previous two parables?
• The lost son is welcomed back and they throw a party.  The elder son is upset (like the Pharisees and scribes).  So, how do you think the father's explanation to his elder son clarifies the response of heaven, and what Jesus expects of the "righteous"?
• Consider again the cost of discipleship from the previous chapter.  How do you see that relating to these parables of rejoicing over finding lost?  How do you see "discipleship" related to elements of the parables or their explanations?

It is likely we won't get through all of chapter 15, but it's possible we will.  The "AHA" of this chapter should be easy since we spent so much time on this parable through that study.  But see what you can do tying the cost of discipleship to the parables, and what you learn from that?

The High Cost of Following

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study meeting August 18 to study Luke 14:25-35.  This passage wraps up the chapter, but it also serves as a transitional narrative between the banquet which begins Chapter 14 and the set of parables about God's perspective of kingdom people living outside the kingdom (all of chapter 15).

This is essentially about the cost of discipleship but with lots of other elements sprinkled throughout.  Read through the passage asking "why" a lot.  This is a familiar passage, but there are some elements that should give us reasons to ask why Jesus said that, and said it that way.  Once through, see what you think about what it means to be a disciple.

After reading through making your own notes and questions, go back through with the questions below:

• Jesus has basically just come away from a meal where He says the people assuming they're in with God won't be.  So now many throngs of people follow Him.  What do you think these crowds are seeking from Jesus?
• Jesus says to "be His disciple" means to hate ones own family and even themselves.  First off, what do you think Jesus means by "disciple"?  Second, how do you understand this familiar but difficult statement?  How do you think this "hate" for ones family and self would look today?
• Jesus speaks to them as if the cost of being one of His "peeps" is very expensive.  So what do you think Jesus thinks the crowd is after Him for?
• Jesus has used the "cross carrying" motif before (Luke 9:23).  But here it's a bit different.  What do you think is the difference in Jesus' point here from before? (be sure to look at the context of both passages)
• In each element (hating family or carrying cross), the result is that if someone does not do it they cannot be a disciple.  Why do you think it's not possible without these two things?
• Jesus gives two examples of how to approach the desire to be His disciple.  Both advise making sure upfront that you have what it takes before venturing to be a disciple.  How do you think this applies to "missionary" or "evangelism" work? (Consider Matthew 28:19-20)
• Considering the use of the term "disciple" by Jesus, what should people think through before deciding to become one?
• Who comes to your mind when you think of a foundation but no complete building, in terms of people following Jesus?
• The king is already on his way and hasn't yet figured out what he's going to do when he meets the other king.  What sort of picture does this paint for you?
• Verse 33 is very much in line with Luke's theme of discipleship.  What does this do for you and the "cost of discipleship"?
• After discussing the cost of discipleship, Jesus then uses this illustration of salt.  In what way do you see tasteless salt relating to the cost of discipleship?
• How is the tasteless salt like either one of the preceding examples of a tower and going to war?
• Look up Matthew 5:13 and Mark 9:50.  How do you think these two other uses of the tasteless salt relate?  Same point or different?

The one having ears to hear, listen!

A Difficult Dinner Guest

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study meeting August 11 to study Luke 14:7-24.  This passage wraps up the banquet narrative begun in verse 1.  In it Jesus essentially makes sure He doesn't miss insulting anyone, host to guests.  Consider this passage as best as you can from the perspective of a First Century Jew.

The passage strings together an address to the guests as they pick places to sit, a criticism of the host, a 'depressurizing' comment of one of the guests, and a final parable denouncing the Jewish inclusion in the 'Kingdom of God'.  Read through these and imagine you are one of those around the edges of the event looking and listening in.  What do you hear?  What do you see?  Imagine the look on everyone's faces, and so on.

Read through the passage in a couple of translations.  I think you'll find they are mostly in agreement except for word choice.  Make some notes and jot down questions.  Think through the scene, starting at verse 1.  As you 'walk through', what do you notice?  After having gone through a few commentaries, go back through with the questions below:

• Luke calls Jesus' comment to the guests as He sees them picking spots a parable.  Do you see any 'story' elements here? What makes Jesus' response to them a parable?
• Jesus says to pick the spot at the bottom of the table, the least honor.  What do you think is risky about following His advice?
• According to Jesus, by picking the chief place you risk humiliation, if someone of greater honor shows up and all the other spots are taken.  What does that sound like to you?  Who's actually invited, and how do you imagine seating is arranged?
• Jesus claims that by taking the lower seat, the guest would be raised up.  What if he isn't?
• Jesus claims that there will be a reversal in verse 11.  So, do you think this is a general rule of life or something about 'end-times' or something about life in church, or what?
• Jesus then begins on the host saying he invited the wrong people.  Why do you think Jesus would start in on the host?  What do you think is the problem with not inviting those close to you to a banquet?
• Jesus recommends inviting those who cannot repay by reciprocating.  How do you think this applies to us today?  How can we follow this advice?  How comfortable are you with it?
• Jesus says the repayment for following His advice comes in the resurrection of the righteous.  Why do you think Jesus put it that way?  What do you think He meant by that?
• Some random guest takes Jesus final comment, and probably tries to relieve the awkwardness of the host and guests by declaring common ground.  Why do you think he would do that?  What do you see as his assumptions?
• Jesus begins another parable, this time of a host inviting guests.  The excuses given are very specific.  What are the odds that those at the table have used them before, and might see this as a very personal example?
• Jesus then says the host, having been rebuffed by the invited guests calls those Jesus has suggested to His host.  What do you think this meant to the guests and host hearing this parable?
• Then, there's still room, and the servant is told to go outside the city to get people.  What do you think this is a reference to?
• Jesus wraps up the parable by stating that none of those invited at first will eat of the banquet.  What do you think that means to the other guests and host?
• What do you see as Jesus' point with this last parable?

Keep in mind that so much of this is applicable today, and none of us would be or should be all that comfortable with the application.  Consider how the spiritual gift of "hospitality" is played out considering this passage.  It's a little or a lot disturbing.  What can we do about that?