We all seem to be so confident in the fact that we know who Jesus is. And of course we do, right? Our study this week forces us to look way below the surface just as we have been challenged throughout this study. At first glance it appears obvious that the disciples clearly knew who Jesus was. They did confess Hm as the Christ, the son of God. But as we look further, it becomes obvious they didn't "really" know Him.
As we consider this passage I am hopeful we will do some critical self evaluation as to whether we have modified Jesus into someone we are comfortable with rather than follow Him as He has revealed Himself. I believe we are in for some exciting discussion and life-changing experiences.
Luke 9:1-50
Questions To Consider
1) How can you explain some of the “theories” about Jesus in 9:7-9?
2) In what ways are the statements of Herod contrasting or similar to the statements of the disciples?
3) What would lead the disciples to believe Jesus was the Messiah? In what ways did Jesus seek to clarify for them what it meant to be Messiah?
4) Luke 9:33 says Peter did not understand. What should he have understood?
5) How would you have reacted to Jesus’ statement about his martyrdom? Why do you think Luke omits the story of Peter’s protest to Jesus’ prediction of his death?
6) What are some of the examples given of the failure of the disciples to truly understand what it meant to be the Messiah and what it meant to follow Him?
7) In what ways are we like the disciples in this section and how can we become more like what Jesus called them to be?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This one's really bothering me. We didn't get through all of the questions in class, and there's one that I couldn't figure out AT ALL: Why do you think Luke omits the story of Peter’s protest to Jesus’ prediction of his death? So can you all please post your insights? I'll sleep much better at night! Thanks :)
ReplyDeleteGreat question.
ReplyDeleteI really don't know but possibly Luke felt he had made his point clearly enough that the disciples didn't understand what it meant for Jesus to be Messiah or that it would clearly discount Peter's confession earlier. Another possibility is that Luke had Mark's gospel in hand (which is actually Peter's gospel) and did not feel it appropriate to "pile on" Peter since it was included by Mark.
What do you think?