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?