In this post I share my thoughts on chapter 12 of Luke in the New Testament (KJV).
An ocean of artists
As far as art and design, I think I’m a pretty good oyster. I can turn out some nice pearls once I have a a few grains of sand to work with. But, about the time I start thinking I’m a decent artist, I take a look at Pinterest and realize I’m a tiny speck in an ocean of talent.
Straining at gnats and swallowing camels
There are many critics willing to closely examine, and cross-examine, the beliefs of those who have faith in Christ. Verse by verse and line by line they seek for contradictions and flaws. With great contempt and strong conviction they declare the folly of your beliefs. But, if you can get them to put forth some of their own beliefs, very often there is no study required to see flaws.
Luke 5 – Old wine and new wine – is the old better?
I saw a post on Facebook about the feasts of the Old Testament and how much we can learn from them. One commenter asked whether Christians are supposed to be celebrating these feasts. I thought how Paul spent a great deal of his ministry trying to convince Jewish Christians that it was not necessary for them, or for gentile converts, to follow the Mosaic law. It was something they just couldn’t give up easily.
This morning I was listening to Luke 5, and I thought of the scribes and Pharisees and their strong desire to continue in the observance of Mosaic law. Though it had taught them to look for a Messiah, the messiah they were looking for didn’t look like Jesus. They couldn’t ignore what Jesus was doing, yet they saw him as an interloper rather than their Shepherd.
Luke 5:27-39
27 ¶And after these things he went forth, and saw a publican, named Levi, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he said unto him, Follow me.28 And he left all, rose up, and followed him.
29 And Levi made him a great feast in his own house: and there was a great company of publicans and of others that sat down with them.
I really wish I could have heard the words he spoke when he taught them.
30 But their scribes and Pharisees murmured against his disciples, saying, Why do ye eat and drink with publicans and sinners?
31 And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick.
32 I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
The scribes and Pharisees appealed to tradition and questioned Jesus about it. They could clearly see the flaws of others, but they couldn’t see their own. Jesus was calling sinners to repentance and the publicans and sinners were responding.
33 ¶And they said unto him, Why do the disciples of John fast often, and make prayers, and likewise the disciples of the Pharisees; but thine eat and drink?
34 And he said unto them, Can ye make the children of the bridechamber fast, while the bridegroom is with them?
35 But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then shall they fast in those days.
Jesus was also not asking His disciples to follow after John the Baptist because He, the bridegroom had come. John the Baptist was a forerunner. He had prepared the way for Christ. His duty had been fulfulled.
36 ¶And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.
37 And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.
38 But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.
The Mosaic law had also been a forerunner to Christ. It was to point the children of Israel to the coming of the Messiah, and it was about to be fulfilled. Instead of building on the foundation of the Mosaic law, Jesus was creating a different structure. Instead of choosing his apostles from the groups who currently had stewardship over the law and the spiritual instruction of the people, Jesus was choosing his apostles from those who were humble receptive, and able to see that He was the promised Messiah.
39 No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.
Even the Jews who would become converts to the gospel of Christ would have a difficult time giving up the traditions that had become such a part of their culture.
The Man and the Goose – a fable – when are we justified to do wrong?
I first read this fable by Ambrose Bierce years ago in Mark Twain’s Library of Humor. Even as a child it impressed me, though my thoughts have changed about its meaning.
A man was plucking a living goose, when his victim addressed him thus:
“Suppose you were a goose; do you think you would relish this sort of thing?”
“Well, suppose I were,” answered the man; “do you think you would like to pluck me?”
“Indeed I would!” was the emphatic, natural, but injudicious reply.
“Just so,” concluded her tormentor; “that’s the way I feel about the matter.”
As a child I thought it was funny that the goose gave the man a reason to keep on plucking.
As an adult I see how this fable can apply to real life situations. The goose starts out by appealing to the man’s empathy, asking how he would feel if he were the victim. Instead of answering her question, the man pursues the other side of her hypothetical role reversal and asks if the goose would enjoy being the tormentor. The goose affirms strongly that she would.
With that reply the goose, unfortunately, puts herself on equal ground with the man. She isn’t any better than he. She just happens to be unable to execute her will. Knowing that she would do the same to him if roles were reversed, the man could proceed with a clearer conscience.
On the other hand, if she had replied that she had no desire to harm him, her original appeal to empathy might have had great effect. He might have seen the injustice of the situation and granted her pardon.
Some people will complain about the injustices dealt by others, but on closer examination they don’t really mind injustice as long as they get a turn at dealing it out.
Human nature and the purchase of a television set
Back in college (pre Internet days) I was rooming with 5 other guys and we were discussing the purchase of a TV. We did the math and found that, rather than rent a TV over the course of the school year, it would be cheaper to pool our money and buy one. It seemed so simple, but it wasn’t. I’m sure you can guess the question that invariably came next—Who gets to keep the TV in the end? We almost went with a rental because it seems most people would rather spend more money and give it away to total strangers than to see a friend end up “ahead” in the end. It boggled my mind, but this strong opinion seems nearly universal.
The solution to that problem was simple. At the end of the year we would sell the TV and split the money 6 ways. But, it wasn’t that simple. What if only 5 people are willing to put in money toward a 6-person venture? The 6th guy said he wouldn’t use it so he didn’t want to pay. Again, there was a strong emotion tied to the fact that he MIGHT use it, and end up freeloading off the other 5 guys. Again, our plans to purchase a TV were stalled.
The unexpected solution came in the form of a generous sister who visited one of my roommates. She saw we were in need of a TV and gave one to her brother as a gift. Problem solved. Or so it seemed.
You might wonder what happened to the 6th roommate who had said he didn’t want to pay because he wouldn’t be using the TV. He really WAS a freeloader. He and the remote were inseparable companions, and the rest of us were lucky to ever watch anything without his approval. Human selfishness has a way of hindering the best laid plans.