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?