Please read Chapter 13-24 of the Gospel of Luke. Look at the list of passages "special" to Luke, i.e., passages that occur in Luke's gospel only (Section VI of the outline here.). Choose one or two of these passages and speculate on why Luke chose to include this material while Matthew did not. If others have commented on this passage before you, say whether you agree with their suggestions or not.Sunday, January 25, 2026
Luke--Discussion II
Please read Chapter 13-24 of the Gospel of Luke. Look at the list of passages "special" to Luke, i.e., passages that occur in Luke's gospel only (Section VI of the outline here.). Choose one or two of these passages and speculate on why Luke chose to include this material while Matthew did not. If others have commented on this passage before you, say whether you agree with their suggestions or not.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In general, I believe the passage selection is due to purpose, audience, and method of obtaining information. We must not forget that Luke is from a different period of Christianity as well. The Christian mission of his time is mirrored through two particular passages in Luke 10 of the Apostles going out on missions themselves. It is only in Luke that we see these events, and that could be in part due to the 72 representing the Christianity of the time. We must also remember that Matthew was already written, and perhaps Luke wanted to expand the accounts of Jesus instead of repetition. The accounts he retells also help support his theme of human dignity seen across his gospel.
ReplyDeleteI think that this is an insightful interpretation and agree that Luke probably wanted to add some events that Matthew didn't. I wonder if the sending of such a great number of people could also show an openness of a previously closed off religion.
DeleteThe passage I chose was the one about Jesus healing the 10 lepers, and specification that the one who returned was a Samaritan. The reason why I think Luke thought it was important to include this passage is because of the part about the Samaritan. Luke and Jesus both emphasize the fact that he was a Samaritan (Jesus calls him a foreigner). I think this is one of the ways that Luke emphasizes that the Gospel is not only for the Jews, but for the Gentiles and foreigners alike. As for why Matthew did not include the passage, I find arguments for somebody excluding something rather dangerous, but maybe Matthew didn't include it because He felt like just another one of Jesus' healings wasn't important enough to include. Maybe Matthew felt he already got his point across when it came to Jesus' divine power, as this miracle presumably takes place in the latter half of Jesus' ministry.
ReplyDeleteThe parable of the persistent widow (unjust judge) conveys that even an unfeeling judge will eventually bring justice for a lowly member of society if petitioned enough. It is supposed to convey that if even a bad person will help the oppressed surely a just God will. I can understand why it would be included in Luke, as it conveys that no one is too insignificant in God's eyes and that they can come to him. I'm not positive on why it wasn't included in Matthew, but my best guess is that the Jewish audience wouldn't have the same kinship with the widow that the Gentiles would have. A widow on the outskirts of society would be relatable to the Gentile audience trying to enter the Jewish faith.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Luke took care to point out that of the 10 lepers that Jesus healed in Chapter 17, the only one that returned to thank Him was a Samaritan (a foreigner). In addition, in Chapter 10, Luke includes the story of the Good Samaritan, contrasting the actions of two Jewish men, a priest and a Levite, with a Samaritan man. The two Jews, both of whom were religious leaders, "passed by on the other side" of the road when they saw the half-dead man, but the Samaritan, "when he saw him ... had compassion." The Samaritan administered first aid and then continued to care for him at his own expense. As we talked about in class, Luke's primary audience is made up of Gentiles and non-Jews. Jesus told the story of the Good Samaritan in answer to a Jewish lawyer's question, "Who is my neighbor?" Luke is making it clear that anyone who loves the Lord with all his heart, soul, strength, and mind, and his neighbor as himself can inherit eternal life, Jew or non-Jew.
ReplyDeleteI also think it's interesting that the 10 lepers bonded together, even though one was a Samaritan. Apparently if you were excluded from normal society because of this terrible disease, you were open to accepting anyone who would accept you.
The story of the prodigal son is one of the most famous parables in my opinion, and I truthfully never realized it was only recorded in Luke. It's the third "example" Jesus gives in parable form to the Pharisees and those listening after they pointed out Jesus' welcoming of tax collectors and sinners. Jesus first gives the parable of the lost sheep, which Matthew also includes, then the short parable of the lost coin, and then the lost (prodigal) son. Perhaps Matthew didn't include it because the parable of the lost sheep may have done enough for him and didn't feel the need to include additional parables. Additionally, Matthew's section where he includes the lost sheep parable does not mention any judgement from the Pharisees about Jesus being with sinners - Matthew simply has the lost sheep parable inserted a bit after the disciples asked who the greatest in the kingdom of heaven is. Maybe Luke felt the need to drive home the point of Jesus coming for and rejoicing over His lost children to the Pharisees and therefore his (Luke's) audience. Luke also wrote his gospel after Matthew and seems to have gotten many more witness accounts than Matthew, so additional parables like this may have not found its way to Matthew.
ReplyDeleteThe parable of the good Samaritan tells us we should treat others especially those less fortunate with compassion. Lukes gospel is often directing us towards loving others and enforcing justice. The good Samaritan shows mercy for the man that was beaten, while two others had walked past him. By helping others we are following the law Jesus previously stated, loving God with all our strength and loving others as we would ourselves. This message is in Luke and not Mathew because of the differing audiences, the story is directed towards everyone. Luke also writes more about how we should treat others externally, and Mathew writes more about how we should act internally. The good Samaritan is a parable of following the golden rule. He saved the man and treated him as his neighbor even though he was a foreigner. This story tells us to treat anyone as our neighbor, and that anyone can follow Jesus.
ReplyDeleteThe story of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16:19-31 is one of the parables that Luke includes but Matthew doesn't. It seems like a very Jewish story to me, because of all the references to the law and the prophets, so it seems odd that Luke would be the one to include it in his gospel. But we actually don't know much about Lazarus other than he was accepted by God while the rich man who had access to all of the writings of the prophets ended up in hell.
ReplyDeleteEven though this story is well connected to the Jewish people, it applies to everyone. Everyone can follow God, like Lazarus did and the rich man could have, but those who choose not to have no excuse. The rich man's family had enough knowledge to base their decision on. God doesn't owe anyone miracles, but even if He gave them a miracle, they would choose not to believe because of their stubborn wills.
The story of the prodigal son really stood out to me. I think that because it is one of the most famous stories in Luke. I think that this is an important passage because it shows that god is welcoming to all of us and forgives us because we all have sinned. I also think that it shows gods unconditional love for us. The reason that I think that it is not in Matthew is because Matthew is going to a more Jewish audience that would already know these kind of things. I believe that the Jewish people he was writing to would know the rules Luke is getting at.
ReplyDeleteLuke's inclusion of the story of the Road to Emmaus, I think, could be to support this theme that the gospel is for the "lesser" or "unimportant." Much like how Luke notes that the first to hear Jesus had risen were women, who would have been less valued at the time. So also, these men, an unnamed disciple and Cleopas, would not be the expected first audience of Jesus' resurrection. One would think the twelve disciples should know first and yet they were not the first. This highlights again how the gospel is for all, and, as Christ says, the first will be last, the last first.
ReplyDeleteAlso, as Luke's goal was likely to give a historical narrative useful for those who would be evangelizing, the men on the road to Emmaus were a prime example of that. They were told how the scriptures were fulfilled by Christ and came to know that the resurrection had come. Then, they went to share the gospel with many, just as the disciples did, and had those with whom they shared the gospel do.
Reading both Luke and Matthew the story of the Prodigal Son was the one I thought of to write about for here. This passage talks about how Luke shows Gods mercy towards sinners and outside people. Luke talks more about repentance and restoration and not bringing them down like Matthew does in his gospel. Matthew talks more about Jewish law and not more about the ethical side of things so i think that's one reason why Luke talks more about this.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Daria and would say the Road to Emmaus story has always stuck out to me. This story is in line with Lukes scope for ordinary and culturally lowly people. These weren't the religious elite, but they were ordinary people. It also sets the stage for Lukes account in Acts, which is why he has a longer account of the post resurrection time. It shows that there was still confusion and peoples hearts needed to be soften to come to a saving faith. It wasn't as if Jesus rose from the dead and everybody was certain on who he was. People's eyes still needed to be open.
ReplyDeleteIn the story of the healing of the ten lepers, Luke shows that Jesus is for everybody. Only one of the ten lepers that were healed came back and gave glory to God for being healed, this man was a Samaritan. This shows that Jesus's message was for everybody, not just Pharisees or those of Jewish decent. Luke includes this to show that Jesus does not favor one group of people over another, and to show that it is your faithfulness and glory to God that will heal you not your social standing or regional differences. Luke shows this in other stories where he talks about Jesus helping and uplifting women and those of a lower social class.
ReplyDeleteI liked how Mia addressed how in the healing of the ten lepers, it shows how Jesus's message was for everybody. Clarifying indirectly how Jesus wasn't just for the Jewish sects shows why it is most likely found in Luke and not in Matthew. What I found interesting though was that after reading this story it reminded me of Matthew 7:13-14. 13 Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. Only one came back to Jesus and gave glory to God and that's a great example of how the gate is narrow.
ReplyDeletei know its generic but i would say and agree that the story of the prodical son is vital to the supposed gentiles reading Luke. The story teaches of radical forgiveness which as of them the gentiles would not yet be aware that they may be forgiven by the lord for whatever sins they may have committed. Certainly a great addition by Luke and a key difference between him and matthew.
ReplyDeleteLuke 11:27-28
ReplyDeleteI believe Luke included this passage to highlight that even women especially Jesus's Mother can hold a true place of blessedness by doing the will of God.
Road to Emmaus
This is a passage that I greatly love. I believe Luke included this passage to emphasize what a lot of early Christians believed. That Jesus is present not just in the words that he speaks and is made know to us in them, but he is wholely present in the Bread they break at the table and is made fully known to them in both.