Matthew 12:15-21, Mark 3:7-19, and Luke 6:12-19

Alphaeus. As Jesus chose His apostles, …He appointed the twelve…, and James the son of Alphaeus… (Mark 3:16, 18a; Luke 6:13,15a). I thought I recognized that name. Sure enough, in Mark’s previous chapter: And as he passed by, he saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax booth, and he said to him, “Follow me.” (Mark 2:14) So we have both Levi and James (the Lesser) as sons of Alphaeus. Could they be brothers? Mark seems to be following his story chronologically, so mentions of “the son of Alphaeus” in consecutive chapters is surely strange! Yet another oddity on Alphaeus is that a number of Biblical scholars claim that Alphaeus and Clopas (whose wife was at the foot of the cross; compare Matthew 27:55-56 and Mark 15:40 with John 19:16) and Cleopus (whom Jesus met on the road to Emmaeus) are all one and the same Alphaeus. This discussion may be somewhat trivial, but the more we read and study Scripture, the more we make these interconnections!

See also: March 1 / Matthew 12:15-22; March 2 / Mark 3:7-19; March 3 / Luke 6:12-19

Matthew 12:1-14, Mark 2:23-3:6, Luke 6:1-11

Today, more verses (37) than our average 20-25, especially following on last week’s all in the teens. Three accounts of Jesus and the Sabbath on three days in 2019…

He said to them, “Which one of you who has a sheep, if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not take hold of it and lift it out? (Matthew 12:11) Matthew is the only writer who has Jesus asking that question in the context of this healing of the man with a withered hand. I was surprised to read here about a sheep falling into a pit. I have more often remembered a similar verse from Luke in the context of Jesus and a different healing on the Sabbath, And He said to them, “Which of you, having a son or an ox that has fallen into a well on a Sabbath day, will not immediately pull him out?” (14:5) John is the gospel where Jesus is the Good Shepherd; I was surprised to find this “sheep” item in Matthew.

And He said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.” (Mark 2:27-28) Again, one distinct item that appears in Mark but not in the other gospels. In fact, I could not find Jesus making this statement anywhere else. We talked a lot about “sabbath rest” last year when we were reading Hebrews. I find great joy in Jesus reminding us that He has given us this one day a week for rest – The Sabbath was made for man – and that we should take that rest. There are so many people today who are forced to work on Sunday, like medical people and first responders. However, our society has changed so drastically over the past many years that Sunday is like any other day. Sunday is probably a bigger shopping day at Kroger than any other day of the week except maybe Saturday. And other places are open too: restaurants and bars, museums and zoos, etc. Thank God for places like Chick-Fil-A, even though I’d love to get one of their sandwiches after church on Sunday…!!

See also: February 26 / Matthew 12:1-14; February 27 / Mark 2:23-3:6; February 28 / Luke 6:1-11

Matthew 9:14-17, Mark 2:18-22, and Luke 5:33-39

Another day with three short readings, parallel accounts of the “fasting” issue from each of the three Synoptic gospels. And again, as with yesterday, in our readings two years ago each of these Synoptic gospels covered three events together in one or two readings. We did not make the parallel “compare and contrast” readings like we are doing this year. In my own comments on these readings two years ago, I did not comment on this “fastings” issue that we discuss today, so no link below.

Each of the gospels has a different group asking Jesus the “fasting” question. In Matthew John’s disciples pose the question; in Mark it’s “the people” (who had observed John’s and the Pharisees’ disciples fasting); and Luke reports that “they” asked the question, with the Pharisees and scribes as the antecedent before the pronoun. But no matter who asked the question, I wonder if the real issue was some measure of jealousy over Jesus’ disciples “living the good life” while John’s and the Pharisees’ disciples were depriving themselves and living with a greater measure of self-denial. If so, their “jealousy” would defeat the whole purpose of fasting which should be focused on repentance, self-denial, prayer – activities in which one engages as he/she wants to grow closer to God. Ironic…!

And no one after drinking old wine desires new, for he says, ‘The old is good.‘ (Luke 5:39) (Only Luke makes this statement.) Jesus is making a true statement here, that people prefer old wine to new. However, my sense is that Jesus is extending that statement to reflect His new teaching compared to the old teachings of the Pharisees and scribes. There is naturally resistance by both the Jewish leaders and their followers to the change that Jesus is demanding. But aren’t we the same? We choose a church that suits our preferences, our needs. Then as our church grows, people come, people go, the church changes. For the most part we change with it, but occasionally those changes are more dramatic and we move on to where we believe we’ll find “greener pastures”. We saw this happen at St. Andrew’s when we went to the one unified service and saw a number of departures. Now we’re moving forward with David’s resignation and searching for a new rector. How will St. Andrew’s people handle this change? We need to pray for what lies ahead for us.

Matthew 9:9-13, Mark 2:13-17, and Luke 5:27-32

Another day with three short readings, parallel accounts of three events from each of the three Synoptic gospels. And again, as with yesterday, in our readings two years ago each of these Synoptic gospels covered those three events together in one or two readings. We did not make the parallel “compare and contrast” readings like we are doing this year. In my own comments two years ago, the only gospel where I discussed Matthew’s call was Matthew’s gospel. See the link below.

Matthew is called “Matthew” in Matthew’s gospel and “Levi” in Mark’s and Luke’s. Since the name “Matthew” stuck, it’s possible that Jesus changed Levi’s name to Matthew just as He had changed Simon’s name to Peter.

And leaving everything, he rose and followed Him. (Luke 5:28) I’ve always wondered at Luke’s account of Levi “leaving everything”. What about the money that he had collected? Surely he didn’t just leave the money on the table for the crowd to fight over? What about the tax books? Wouldn’t he have passed those on to other tax collectors? Simple questions. My guess is that Luke’s report of Levi “leaving everything” is more an indication that he immediately quit his job and followed Jesus, but that he did what was right in leaving his position.

Luke is more specific than the others in his account that Levi made Him a great feast in his house… (v. 29a) So Levi must have been quite wealthy, possibly from the corruption associated with tax collectors. There is no indication that the Pharisees were invited to the feast – all three gospels only mention (many) tax collectors and sinners / others. If invited, they likely would have turned down the invitation, not wanting to become unclean by association with these sinners. They knew that they were “the righteous” that Jesus mentioned: I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. (Luke 5:32) But even as Jesus said that, they must have suspected that He was talking about them. I wonder at their reaction to that statement. I’ve always identified with the Pharisees (mostly the “good” Pharisees). I wonder how I would have reacted. Even today, how much, how often do I see myself as more “righteous” than sinful?

See also: February 19 / Matthew 9:1-17

Matthew 9:1-8, Mark 2:1-12, and Luke 5:17-26

Two years ago we covered three events in Matthew 9:1-17, but only focused on the second, the call of Levi, the tax collector; I made no comments on Matthew’s healing of the paralytic, so only Mark’s and Luke’s accounts are covered in the links below.

I mention in the first link below that …Pharisees and teachers of the law were sitting there, who had come from every village of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem (Mark 2:17), and I noted that Jesus’ fame was spreading. However, there’s more to it than just fame. I hope Carol will post – she has enlightened me that the Jewish leadership in Jerusalem were always on the lookout for anyone claiming to be the Messiah or someone who was healing or teaching or recruiting followers. So the Pharisees and Scribes may have been there to check Jesus out – and probably with an eye to discredit Him. Unfortunately for them, Jesus was up to the task and the Pharisees got more than they bargained for!

My Study Bible had an interesting note on Jesus’ question, Which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven you,’ or to say, ‘Rise and walk’? (Mt. 9:5, Mk. 2:9, Lk. 5:23) Clearly Jesus is asking a question for which the Pharisees have no answer. Neither forgiveness nor healing are “easy” – only God can forgive sins and only God can perform miraculous healings. Having put these two actions on the same level, by instantly healing the paralytic Jesus was claiming to be able to do both, thereby claiming that He was God. Very interesting…!!

See also: February 20 / Mark 2:1-12; February 21 / Luke 5:17-26

 Matthew 8:1-4, Mark 1:40-45, and Luke 5:12-16

And Jesus said to him, “See that you say nothing to anyone, but go, show yourself to the priest and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a proof to them.” (Mt. 8:4) Yes, the Synoptic writers agree on a lot of material, but it’s rare that they all say the same thing. However, here in Jesus words they all agree on all five things that Jesus said:

1. tell no one
2. show yourself to the priest
3. offer the gift
4. as Moses commanded
5. for a proof to them.

All five phrases in each of these gospels… Intriguing.

The “proof” item struck me. It seems like the proof was intended for the priest, except that “priest” is singular and “them” is plural (in all three gospels). Or maybe the proof was intended for the crowd, a plural “them”, to establish Jesus’ commitment to fulfilling the Law of Moses? I don’t recall Jesus often seeking “proof” for what He is doing. So “proof” here is strange.

See also: February 16 / Matthew 8:1-4; February 17 / Mark 1:40-45; February 18 / Luke 5:12-16

Matthew 4:23-25, Mark 1:35-39, and Luke 4:42-5:11

RTNT 2021. And the people sought Him and came to Him, and would have kept Him from leaving them, but He said to them, “I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God to the other towns as well… (vv. Luke 4:42b-43a) Mark also reports one of the disciples saying to Jesus “Everyone is looking for you.” (Mark 1:37b) I’m wondering how much we keep Jesus to ourselves or how much we try to trap Jesus into our lifestyle or our way of worship. Here the Galileans are being selfish in their wanting to keep Jesus with them. I’m not sure that we’re selfish – we’re probably more nervous about sharing Jesus with others, but the outcome is the same. If we have Truth this good in our lives, how can we hold it in? Jesus wants out! I’m regularly reminded of Peter and John before the Sanhedrin, when they were ordered not to speak of Jesus anymore: “We can’t help but speak of the things we’ve seen and heard!” (Acts 4:20, slightly edited) Jesus wants out!

See also: February 13 / Matthew 4:23-25; February 14 / Mark 1:35-39; February 15 / Luke 4:42-5:11

Matthew 8:14-17, Mark 1:29-34, and Luke 4:38-41

RTNT 2021. Today we do something different – we read small sections from each of the three Synoptic gospels. Each of these gospels reports on Jesus healing Peter’s mother-in-law, in four, six, and four verses, respectively. This will happen quite often in our chronological read since two or three of these Synoptics often report on the same incident. Bible scholars believe that Mark was the first gospel written and that Matthew and Luke possibly had a copy of Mark’s gospel when they wrote their own. So where we see two or three of the writers reporting on the same incident, Mark will regularly be one of the gospels. We’ll seldom see Matthew and Luke writing about an incident with Mark’s account absent. There are also theories that another source was available to all three writers, but that source has never been unearthed or identified. I had suggested a few weeks back that you might want to have four bookmarks in your Bible(s) to help you find your place. But even so we see in our readings today that in Matthew we have jumped ahead almost four chapters, completely skipping the Sermon on the Mount (chapters 5-7). We’ll get back on track with him tomorrow.

I have a number of comments in the links below since we read these three sections on three days in 2019. Still, I noticed one thing that I hadn’t seen before. Yes, the people followed Sabbath laws and waited until after the sun had set before bringing the sick to Jesus. But Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law almost immediately as He entered the house, performing this healing on the Sabbath. There were no Jewish authorities present so He was not charged with breaking the Sabbath as we see later. There is also an interesting progression about this healing in our three readings. In Matthew Jesus sees the woman sick and He goes to her right away. In Mark the disciples inform Jesus of Peter’s mother-in-law’s illness and he goes to her. And in Luke, the disciples clearly ask Jesus to heal her. Each writer describes the incident a bit differently.

See also: February 10 / Matthew 8:14-17; February 11 / Mark 1:29-34; February 12 / Luke 4:38-41

Luke 4:14-37

RTNT 2021. And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit to Galilee, and a report about Him went out through all the surrounding country. And He taught in their synagogues, being glorified by all. (vv. 14-15) I like reading two or three translations – they often are quite different. Today’s NASB is different in these two verses from the ESV quoted above. First, the NASB says “…news about Him spread…, which sounds more “global” to me than “…a report about Him…”. Second, the NASB has “…was praised by all” whereas the ESV has “glorified”. To me Jesus being glorified would be something more connected to His deity, whereas being praised points to His humanity. (Nod to John S.) With either translation, however, these two verses sound to me like “transition verses”. I have led groups through Acts of the Apostles a number of times and have noted transition verses at the end of chapters 2, 4, and 5 (and probably elsewhere, but less prominent). These transition verses point to a longer period of time and imply a lot of unreported activity therein. I believe that’s what Luke is saying here about Jesus’ Galilean ministry – He has moved around to a number of cities and villages and visited and taught in a number of synagogues. We cannot expect Luke to be writing chronologically any longer.

See also: February 7 / Luke 4:14-30; February 9 / Luke 4:31-37