Here is the link to our 2nd quarter Sabbath School studies on The Book of Luke:

http://www.ssnet.org/lessons/15b/

Please discuss any of the lesson material for this 2nd quarter in this thread.

This is the central point of the lesson, IMO:

Read some of the things that Jesus had said about Himself. Why, then, is the idea that Jesus was merely a great man, a great prophet, or a great spiritual leader, logically flawed? Why must we either accept that He is what He said He is, or that He was a lunatic and someone who was greatly deceived about Himself? Why is there no other option for us in regard to the identity of Jesus? (Friday discussion question)

These passages jumped out at me:

Notice, too, that Jesus does not answer John's question directly; instead, He points to acts that cry out in witness: the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, the poor have the gospel preached to them (Luke 7:22, NKJV). One could argue that Jesus didn't need to answer John's question directly; His deeds and actions gave ample testimony of who He was.

Our knowledge of Jesus must never be at second hand. We might know every verdict ever passed on Jesus; we might know every Christology that human minds have ever thought out; we might be able to give a competent summary of the teaching about Jesus of every great thinker and theologian-and still not be Christians. Christianity never consists in knowing about Jesus; it always consists in knowing Jesus. Jesus Christ demands a personal verdict. He did not ask only Peter, he asks every one of us: You-what do you think of me?-William Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, (Bangalore: Theological Publications in India, 2009), vol. 2, p. 161.

First, His claims are verified by His accomplishments. Second, His accomplishments in your life are ultimately the only thing that matters to you. Therefore, unless His holy life is manifested in mine, all the wrangling over theological theories are clanging cymbals.

Lesson 6 - The Book of Luke - Women in Ministry:

Personally, I agree that it is important to consider the role of women in ministry. There is more that women could do!

But, when this guy mentions gender, there aren't any specifics given for me to address! But, if I mat mention one in particular, Jesus was never submissive to women in a spiritual way. Jesus never accepted women or treated women as priests in any way. And I believe this will come out in our study of Luke.

In Luke 6:5 Jesus claims to be Lord of the Sabbath! What a huge claim to make, but one He was worthy to make because He was creator of the Sabbath.

I do find the reference to David interesting, eating the showbread as well as those with him. Why was this tolerated by God?

"The Pharisee expected God to endorse him on the basis of what he had done, his works of righteousness. The publican threw himself at God's mercy and pleaded for acceptance on the basis of God's grace. God's acceptance comes to us not on the basis of who or what we are but through His grace alone. Only those who are penitent, humble, and broken in spirit can receive that grace."

Indeed, it is tempting to think that the transformation wrought in us by God somehow makes us worthy of God's blessings.

I agree with your comment Asygo. Sorry if I'm sidetracking the lesson, but this quote jumped at me.


Isn't the underlined sentence contradicting the definition of grace? Isn't it saying the same thing the Pharisee believes?

Right, Jesus never accepted women as priests, and neither do I, nor do I accept a male priest in our church today. Neither do I accept a Roman Catholic type of priest/father to serve on me in my church. A minister, according to Paul, is a servant to minister the word in teaching and proclamation.

Paul is clear, as you see in 1 Tim. 3:11:



Scripture tells us here that the same principles apply to male and female servants.