Luke’s Gospel indicates that the evangelist may have particularly appreciated good food – at least it shows clearly that he noticed and commented on food more than any other Gospel writer! But Luke does not simply mention food and meals – he draws lessons from them.
As a frame of reference, we should notice that Luke’s account of the life of Jesus really does have a noticeable focus on food. For example, while Matthew uses the word “eat” 18 times, and John only 15 times, Luke uses the word 33 times. Mark also uses this word quite frequently (25 times), but overall Luke uses a number of eating and food-related words twice as many times as Mark and the other Gospels, so his emphasis on this is clear. Within his Gospel, Luke also – uniquely – describes ten meals in which Jesus participated, and we will look at them all briefly.
Luke’s Gospel indicates that the evangelist may have particularly appreciated good food – at least it shows clearly that he noticed and commented on food more than any other Gospel writer! But Luke does not simply mention food and meals – he draws lessons from them. As a frame of reference, we should notice that Luke’s account of the life of Jesus has a noticeable focus on food. For example, while Matthew uses the word “eat” 18 times, and John only 15 times, Luke uses the word 33 times. Mark also uses this word quite frequently (25 times), but overall Luke uses a number of eating and food-related words twice as many times as Mark and the other Gospels, so his emphasis on this is clear. Within his Gospel, Luke also – uniquely – describes ten meals in which Jesus participated, and we will look at them all briefly.
1) Dining with the Despised. Luke 5:27-32 tells the story of how Jesus accepted an invitation to “a great banquet” at the home of Levi (Matthew) – one of the hated tax collectors employed by the Romans. We are told that “a large crowd of tax collectors and others were eating with them” and that the Pharisees and religious teachers who saw this complained “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” The first meal Luke describes immediately teaches us that eating with others is an important form of showing true acceptance. It’s a lesson we can all learn from. Is there someone we could eat with as a way to show our acceptance and love for them?
2) The Horrible Host. Luke 7:36-50 records how Jesus went to eat at the home of a certain Simon, one of the Pharisees who invited him but did not provide him with any of the normal forms of welcome and comfort. Dinners such as this were often eaten partially outdoors in the cool of the day, which meant that the woman who came to anoint Jesus with costly perfume would have been able to see and go to him. But the woman crossed an invisible social barrier in doing this and in her subsequent actions, and when the self-righteous Pharisee became indignant Jesus gently corrected him while showing support for the woman. Sadly, in many families, more arguments occur during meals than at any other time and Jesus’ actions teach a valuable lesson in the effective de-escalation of interpersonal tensions at such times. We can learn a lesson from this regarding keeping our meals and interactions positive.
3) Catering for a Crowd. Luke 9:10-17 tells how a large crowd of people followed Jesus to hear his teaching, and the disciples then urged him to send them away so that they could find food and lodging. Jesus felt empathy for the tired and hungry crowds, however, and performed the miracle of feeding the crowd of five thousand with only two fish and five loaves of bread. The story contains a symbolic lesson in that the twelve baskets of “crumbs” the disciples gathered up after the meal (vs. 17) doubtless represented the twelve tribes of Israel for which Jesus was providing spiritual food. But at the practical level, the story teaches us the need for an observant and thoughtful attitude that looks for and sees the needs of others, and that we should never hesitate to help those in real need because we do not have much ourselves.
4) The Hassled Hostess. Luke 10:38-42 describes a dinner Jesus attended at the home of his friends Mary and Martha. When Mary sat and listened to Jesus, Martha complained that she could not complete all the preparations by herself. Jesus, of course, gently rebuked Martha by telling her that sometimes listening is more important than eating, and pointed out that she was “worried and upset about many things, but few things are needed” (vss. 41-42). Meals can be an important part of our relationships with others, but they shouldn’t become an end in themselves. Less food may be better if it means more time together.
5) Consider Cleanliness. Luke 11:37-53 is a somewhat different meal story. When a Pharisee invited Jesus to eat with him, we are told “the Pharisee was surprised when he noticed that Jesus did not first wash before the meal” (vs. 38). We do not know exactly what the Pharisee said, but Jesus’ response was withering: “you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness” (vs. 39). Jesus then continued by detailing some of the Pharisees’ problems and showing them their hypocrisy. The dinner seems to have ended at this point, but Jesus doubtless knew this meal was doomed from the start (vs. 53). Of course, the lesson from this meal can be applied in our own lives if we are more concerned with details of physical cleanliness than with cleanliness of thought, speech, and attitude.
6) Principles with our Provisions. Luke 14:1-24 tells how “One Sabbath …Jesus went to eat in the house of a prominent Pharisee.” Jesus used this dinner as a teaching opportunity and told three parables, each with its own lesson – the lawfulness of healing on the Sabbath day, the principle of humility in not taking the place of honor at banquets, and the principle of inviting “the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind” to our feasts (vs. 13). The second two principles are certainly ones that we can apply in our own lives when we are invited to a meal or offer one to others. And if we think about them, of course, these principles can be applied in many other areas of life as well as meals.
7) A Salvation Stopover. Luke 19:1-10 gives the story of Zacchaeus, a tax collector at Jericho who wanted to see Jesus and hear his words. While Jesus had doubtless been offered dinner at a number of “respectable” homes, he had evidently declined as he was only planning to pass through Jericho (vs. 1). But seeing Zacchaeus’s receptiveness, Jesus invited himself to the man’s home (vs. 5), ate there, and brought the word of salvation to him (vs. 9). Sometimes we need to be willing to stop doing even the most important work or be willing to change our plans in order to fit in a meal or other activity that can make a difference in someone’s life – as Jesus certainly did with Zacchaeus (vs. 8).
8) Making the Meal Matter. Luke 22:14-38 is the account of the most memorable meal in the Gospels – that of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples. Although the meal symbolized and was spiritually all about Jesus and his coming sacrifice, Jesus explained this, but focused nonetheless on guiding and serving his friends (compare John13:3; etc.). Today, most of our big celebrations – birthday, anniversary, graduation, and other dinners – are about us, and it is natural to tend to focus on ourselves at such times. The Last Supper teaches the opposite of this and has many lessons we can learn in this regard.
9) A Supper Surprise. Luke 24:28-35 describes a post-resurrection event when the risen Jesus – unknown to them – joined two of his followers as they walked to the village of Emmaus outside of Jerusalem. Jesus talked with the followers and explained the Scriptures to them, but they still did not realize who he was until they stopped to eat supper together. As soon as Jesus gave thanks for the food and broke the bread, as he had done at the Last Supper, the two disciples’ eyes were opened, and they recognized him (vs. 31). The lesson here is simple but important – the story prompts us to ask ourselves if people would recognize us as Christians if we were to eat with them, and if so, how?
10) Proof in the Presence. Luke 24:36-43 is the final meal Luke records in his Gospel, occurring when Jesus appeared to the main group of his disciples after his resurrection. It was at this meeting that he allowed them to see and touch his wounds to prove that it was indeed him. But, in a fascinating turn of the story, as though it was unplanned, we read “And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, ‘Do you have anything here to eat?’ They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate it in their presence” (vss. 41-42). In taking a physical meal with his disciples, Jesus showed it was he – the one who had eaten so many meals with them in friendship and mutual acceptance. When we do meals right, we follow his example.
*This post is abstracted from our free E-Book, Lessons From Luke: Understanding More of the Message of the Third Gospel By R. Herbert. Download a free copy here.
Anyone who has read more than a few chapters of the Bible soon comes to realize that the Scriptures contain some things that are meant to be understood figuratively or symbolically rather than literally – as when Jesus said that he was a door (John 10:9). But sometimes it is not quite so easy to tell if the intended meaning of a word or passage is literal or figurative – how are we to know in such cases?
It is always an error to think that everything the Bible says is meant literally – or that it is all meant figuratively. The best underlying principle of interpretation is to take every word or passage in its normal literal sense unless we have an indication not to do so. Here are six simple rules to follow in applying this principle:
1. Genre: Words should be interpreted literally unless the literary type of the text suggests otherwise. When David wrote that “The Lord God is a sun and shield” (Psalm 84:11) or that the sun was like: “a bridegroom leaving his chamber, and, like a strong man, runs its course with joy” (Psalm 19:4-5) he was clearly speaking poetically and we interpret the words not literally but for the concepts they suggest. Prophecy must also often be interpreted symbolically as in the vision recorded in Daniel 5, where we find “a goat with a prominent horn between his eyes” who “came from the west” (Daniel 8:5), which clearly equates with ancient Macedonian Greece (vs. 21) and its king, Alexander the Great.
2. Context: Words or passages should be interpreted literally unless the immediate or wider context suggests otherwise. When Jesus spoke in parables he described himself in symbolic form, as a Cornerstone, a Door, a Vine, Bread, Light, and Water. The immediate context clearly shows these were parables, and we do not interpret them literally. In the same way, when we consider everything the Bible says, that larger context shows us, for example, that we should not think he meant it literally when Jesus said that we should “cut off our hand” if it offends us (Matthew 5:29–30).
3. Expression: The biblical writers used expressions and figures of speech in their ancient languages just as we do today. We may sometimes need the help of Bible translators to explain those expressions – as when Genesis 30:2 tells us “his nose burned,” meaning the man was angry. But often biblical expressions are similar or identical to ones we might use today – as when Revelation 7:1 speaks of “the four corners of the earth” and it would be foolish to think this was meant literally.
4. Impossibility: Words or passages should be interpreted literally unless such a meaning would imply an impossibility. For example, in the Old Testament we read “The cities are great, and walled up to heaven” (Deuteronomy 1:28), and in the New Testament “You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel” (Matthew 23:24). In such cases what is said would obviously be literally impossible and must be figurative.
5. Absurdity: Words or passages must be interpreted literally unless the result would imply an absurdity. When Jesus said “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up,” (John 11:11) this would not be an impossible situation, but it would be absurd to think Lazarus – who had been buried for days – was simply asleep.
6. Contradiction: Words or passages must be interpreted literally unless the sense would lead to a contradiction. This is often seen when someone says something sarcastically, while actually meaning the opposite – as when Job told his friends “Doubtless you are the only people who matter, and wisdom will die with you!” (Job 12:2).
Fortunately, the Bible often interprets its own symbols and figurative speech – just as in the book of Revelation we are told seven stars are symbols of seven angels (1:20), seven lamp stands represent seven churches (1:20), and bowls of incense represent the prayers of the saints (5:8). But when the Bible does not directly interpret its own language, we can most often figure out whether the intended meaning is a literal or figurative one by following the six simple rules given above.
*For more information on this and other aspects of effective Bible study, download our free e-book: Understanding the Bible: Three Steps to Enrich and Deepen Your Knowledge of the Scriptures, here.
“we ourselves boast of … your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that you endure” (2 Thessalonians 1:4 NKJV).
The Bible often speaks of faith and patience in combination – prompting us to ask, “Can we have true faith without patience – or even true patience without faith?” The answer to these questions is found in understanding the relationship between the two qualities.
Every Christian knows the importance of faith, hope and love (1 Corinthians 13:13), but sometimes we need to be reminded that these things are completely interrelated rather than existing in isolation. It is sometimes hard to see this, because different terms are often used, so we don’t always see the connection. An example is the way in which faith and patience interact. Biblically, patience is a form of hope. We see this fact in many scriptures: “But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently” (Romans 8:25); “We remember … your work produced by faith, your labor prompted by love, and your endurance [patience] inspired by hope …” (1 Thessalonians 1:3).
But patience can mean different things in the Bible. For example, the Greek word makrothumia, often translated “longsuffering,” relates to patience with people, whereas the word upomone is generally patience with regard to things or circumstances. It is this patience with the circumstances and conditions in which we find ourselves that ties into faith – supporting it and being supported by it.
Notice how the two qualities of faith and patience interact. Paul tells us: “… we also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance [patience]” (Romans 5:3). James tells us “ … count it all joy when you fall into various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience” (James 1:2-3 NKJV), and Peter elaborates: “In all this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. These have come so that … your faith … may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1 Peter 1:6-7).
These scriptures, and many others, show us that two things occur when we suffer as Christians. On the one hand, the sufferings refine our faith making it better, stronger (mentioned by Peter). Sufferings also produce patience in us (mentioned by James and Paul). The two qualities are both needed to withstand problems. Faith without patience produces Christians who may start off well, but who eventually falter in their faith and fall away or burn out. On the other hand, patience without faith produces individuals who experience suffering but do not profit from it in the way God intends.
It is to the degree that we employ both patience and faith in our suffering that we are strengthened and endure, and it is that endurance which is ultimately necessary to succeed in the Christian life (Matthew 10:22; 24:13; etc.). Simply put, patience needs faith and faith needs patience. As the Book of Hebrews confirms, we need both qualities in our lives if we are to: “Imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised” (Hebrews 6:12).
*For more information on this important topic, download our free e-book: Why Every Christian Needs More Patience (And How to Develop It), here.
“All you need is love, love, love is all you need, love is all you need …” – The Beatles.
It may have been a smash hit, but the Beatles’ 1967 song “All you need is love” is not exactly good theology! When we think of the biblical importance of love, many scriptures come to mind – ranging from “God so loved the world …” (John 3:16) to the apostle Paul’s great summary statement in 1 Corinthians 13:13 – “now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.” Love, of course, is of supreme importance because it is perhaps the central defining characteristic of the nature of God himself – “God is love” (1 John 4:7) – so its centrality in the Christian Faith cannot be argued.
But does the supreme importance of love mean that love is all the Christian needs? Many actually think this and go about their lives thinking that as long as they have love, they are “good Christians.” The Bible, however, shows that this is not really true at all. To imagine God as only as God of love is to limit his nature and to entirely miss the fact that the God of love is also, for example, the God of Justice (Isaiah 30:18, Psalm 33:4-6, Isaiah 61:8; etc.) as well as light or truth ( 1 John 1:5; etc.) and many other things. When we remember this, we can better understand what Paul had in mind when he wrote to the Philippian church:
“And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight, so that you may be able to discern what is best and may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ—to the glory and praise of God (Philippians 1:9-11).
Paul had already told these Christians he knew they had love (verse 8), but then he emphasized the knowledge they needed. The word “knowledge” that Paul uses in this passage is not gnôsis which connotes simply “knowing” but epignôsis, which is used in the New Testament to connote full discernment and spiritual knowledge. Paul echoes the need for this kind of knowledge that guides love in his letter to the Colossians:
“we have not stopped praying for you. We continually ask God to fill you with the knowledge of his will through all the wisdom and understanding that the Spirit gives, so that you may live a life worthy of the Lord and please him in every way: bearing fruit in every good work, growing in the knowledge of God” (Colossians 1:9-10).
These two passages both show that we need to grow in the knowledge of God and his will if we are to please him and bear the fruit of good works based in love. It is perfectly possible to have love in our lives – to be sincere, dedicated, loving – and still wrong. We can love mistakenly or unwisely and as Paul and many other biblical writers show, our love should be coupled with the spiritual knowledge that guides us in seeing how, when and where to show love.
If we were to believe the advertising of this world (especially around Valentine’s Day) we would believe that all a relationship needs is love (and perhaps expensive gifts to “demonstrate” that love). But any married couple can confirm that a healthy and strong relationship needs far more than just love. Our relationship with God is no different. We cannot be truly “one” with God by simply having love that we “demonstrate” through sacrifices, gifts, or other works. The Old Testament prophetic books are full of statements to this effect, and the principle is clear in the New Testament also.
When the Bible tells us that “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments” (1 John 5:5) it shows that we must come to know – and know deeply – how to love. Saying “all you need is love” is like saying “all you need is air.” Of course we need air, and of course we need love, but they are not the only things we need. As the apostle Peter summarized, we must “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (2 Peter 3:18). We must have love, but to be effective Christians we must always remember that love is not all we need.
Around the turn of our present era – just before and during the life of Jesus – two Jewish rabbis lived and rose to considerable fame. Even if you have heard of one or both of these teachers of the law, you may not know much about them – despite the fact they both had considerable influence on what we read in the New Testament today.
The first of these teachers, Hillel the Elder, also known as Hillel the Great (c. 110 BC – AD 10), lived in Jerusalem during the time of King Herod and became the most famous Jewish scholar of that era. The second scholar was Shammai (50 BC – AD 30), who tradition says was a Pharisee who became a leading Jewish teacher and whose influence was also considerable in the development of Jewish thought.
Although their lives overlapped, Hillel was about sixty years old at the time of Shammai’s birth; but some of their interactions are recorded, and their teachings were completely different. Generally speaking, Hillel’s teachings were more lenient and compassionate, while those of Shammai were more strict and severe. A famous example is that Shammai said it was wrong to tell an ugly bride that she looked beautiful, while Hillel said that all brides are beautiful on their wedding day. While Shammai and his followers believed only worthy students should be admitted to study the law of God, Hillel and his disciples stressed that the law may be taught to anyone, in the hope that the person would grow and become worthy.
Shammai’s strictness could be extreme. He and his followers said that if someone forgot to ask a blessing on a meal and had left the place where he ate, the person must return to that place to recite the blessing. Hillel said, however, that the person could recite a blessing in the place where they realized their omission. But While Shammai could be overly strict, sometimes Hillel could be overly lenient. For example, Shammai held that a man may only divorce his wife for a serious transgression, but Hillel allowed divorce for even such trivial offenses as burning a meal.
This is why Jesus said “anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery” (Matthew 5:32) – clearly distancing himself from the teachings of Hillel on this point. Jesus also phrased the “Golden Rule” of “do to others what you would have them do to you” (Matthew 7:12; Luke 6:31) in a positive way, in contrast to Hillel’s famous but more negative expression of the same concept. But in other ways, Jesus sided with Hillel over Shammai. While Shammai stressed the importance of the Jewish people and their temple, Hillel – and Jesus after him – was more accepting of non-Jewish people and looked beyond the temple (John 4:21).
But Jesus did not follow either of the major rabbis’ teachings exclusively, and in a sense, his agreement with them was often coincidental. This is seen in the fact that the discussions of the two scholars and their followers contributed to the belief that the oral law – as expounded by Hillel and Shammai – was just as binding as the written law of God. Jesus firmly rejected this approach of many in his day by citing Scripture: “They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules” (Matthew 15:9). Nevertheless, much of what we read in the Gospels is a result of Jesus rejecting or confirming what Hillel and Shammai taught on various points – the major theological views of his day.
The influence of these teachers on the apostle Paul was also extensive – especially because Paul had studied with the scholar Gamaliel (Acts 22:3) who was the grandson of Hillel. The book of Acts relates that Gamaliel intervened on behalf of the apostles of Jesus when they were seized and brought before the Sanhedrin – doubtless because many of their teachings agreed with aspects of his own and that of his grandfather, Hillel. Nevertheless, we see many instances in the writings of Paul where the apostle disagreed as well as agreed with the views of his celebrated teacher, and the views of Hillel and Shammai before him.
Ultimately, we can study and understand the New Testament without the teachings of the great rabbinical thinkers of New Testament times, but knowing something of their views can sometimes help us better understand what Jesus and Paul had in mind when they gave examples of how and how not to interpret the law of God.
* For more information on the historical background of the New Testament, download our free e-book Inside the Four Gospels: Four Portraits, Many Lessonshere.
Recent Comments