Tag Archives: book of Luke

Difficult Bible Passages

What Does The Parable of the Minas Mean?

59 Comments

Post Author: Bill Pratt 

Jesus frequently used parables to teach his disciples important concepts about the kingdom of God.  We, as Christians 2,000 years removed, often have difficulty interpreting the meaning of these parables.  Fortunately, with some effort we can recover the major thrusts.

The Parable of the Minas (Luke 19:11-27) is spoken by Jesus just before he enters Jerusalem for the last time.  There are five major characters.  The characters are: (1) the man of noble birth, (2) the subjects who hated him, (3) the servant who earned ten minas, (4) the servant who earned five minas, and (5) the servant who earned nothing.

Each of these plays an important role.  The man of noble birth is clearly meant to be Jesus, himself.  He is to receive a kingdom and then return.  The subjects who hated the man of noble birth represent the Jews who have rejected Jesus, and especially the religious leaders.  The servant who earns ten minas and the servant who earns five minas both represent exemplary disciples of Jesus.  The servant who earns nothing represents an unfruitful disciple of Jesus.

With the characters identified, we can piece together the meaning of the narrative.

A man of noble birth (Jesus) prepares to travel to a distant country and receive his kingdom (the kingdom of God).  Before he leaves, he gives a single mina (responsibilities, abilities, opportunities, gospel message) to each of his servants (disciples) and instructs them to put the money to work (be fruitful with what Jesus has given them).  A delegation of subjects who hate the man of noble birth (unbelieving Jews) protest his reception of the kingdom.

Upon the man’s return (Jesus’ second coming at the consummation of the kingdom of God) he finds two servants (disciples) who invested (used their God-given abilities and opportunities) wisely.  To these, he gives cities (heavenly rewards).  The servant (disciple) who does not invest the mina (use the abilities or fulfill the responsibilities Jesus gave him) is reprimanded and has his mina taken from him and given to the servant (disciple) who earned ten minas.  Finally, the subjects (unbelieving Jews) who hated the man of noble birth (Jesus) are executed (judged) for their rejection of the king (Jesus).

There seem to be at least five major points that the parable communicates.  First, Jesus will leave his disciples for an undetermined amount of time.  Second, Jesus will return to consummate his kingdom some time in the future.  Third, disciples of Jesus who are good stewards in his absence will receive incredible rewards from him upon his return.  Fourth, disciples of Jesus who are poor stewards in his absence will have their rewards taken away and given to the disciples who are good stewards.  Fifth, those who reject Jesus as the rightful king will face a terrible judgment upon his return.

That’s my take on it, after studying it for a couple weeks and reading some good commentaries.  Anybody see something different?  What are some applications that we can take from this parable?

New Testament Reliability

Did the New Testament Writers Record Fact or Fiction? Part 3

18 Comments

Post Author: Bill Pratt

In the previous post, we started arguing for early dates for several NT books, but we didn’t finish the discussion.  So this post picks up where we left off!

It is generally agreed upon by scholars that the gospel of Luke was written before the book of Acts.  Dr. Luke wrote both of them and most historians believe that Acts was the sequel to Luke’s gospel (read the beginnings of Luke and Acts to see this).  If this is true, then the gospel of Luke was written before A.D. 62, just as Acts was, but probably a couple years earlier.

Many scholars believe that the gospel of Mark was written before the gospel of Luke because Luke seems to use the gospel of Mark as a source.  This fact would then place Mark even earlier, say, in the mid-50’s.  Keep in mind that both of these gospels record the miraculous life, and more importantly, the resurrection of Jesus.  These events are recorded as facts.

There’s more!  Not a single book in the NT mentions the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70.  If, indeed, many of the books of the NT were written after A.D. 70 (as some liberal scholars claim), that would mean that nobody thought the destruction of the temple was important!  How could this be?  The temple was the single most important place in all Judaism.

When Jerusalem was sacked and the temple demolished, the Jews lost the geographical center of their religion.  Tens of thousands of Jews died in the war.  The books of the NT often refer to the temple and the on-going worship of God there (e.g., Heb. 5:1-3, Rev. 11:1-2), so it seems incredible that nobody would mention its demise, yet not one person does.

Can you imagine someone writing about the people of New York City and never mentioning the airplanes crashing into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001?  Ridiculous, right?  The best explanation for the events of A.D. 70 never being mentioned in the NT is that most, if not all, of the NT was written prior to A.D. 70.

We now have evidence arguing powerfully for early dates for Mark, Luke, and Acts (before A.D. 62) and early dates for most, if not all the NT (before A.D. 70).  Remember the time it takes for legendary development: it takes more than 2 generations.  We aren’t even one generation removed from the events, so the possibility of legend creeping in is virtually zero.

Hang on, though.  There are parts of the NT that we can date even earlier.  One of the most interesting passages in the NT is 1 Cor. 15:3-7.  First, we should note that the First Corinthians letter is dated by most scholars to A.D. 55 or 56.  Now, in the verses mentioned above, scholars have noted some peculiarities that indicate Paul is repeating an oral creed about the resurrection of Jesus that had existed for some time.

In fact, many believe that Paul received the information in this creed from James and Peter in Jerusalem around A.D. 36-38 (Gal. 1:18-19).  This would mean that we have information about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus within just a few years of the events themselves.  Even scholars who are unfriendly to Christianity admit this could be true.  If so, there is no chance that this creed could be legendary.

Let’s sum all of these facts up.  Early dates are important to establishing the historical truth of a document.  If we can establish that the documents were written before 2 generations had passed, there is very little chance of legend or myth sneaking in.  The historical books contained in the NT more than meet this criterion.

We have good reason to believe that Mark, Luke, and Acts were written prior to A.D. 62, well within one generation; we have good reason to believe that First Corinthians contains an oral creed that dates to a few years after Jesus’ death; and we have good reason to believe that most, if not all, the NT was written prior to A.D. 70.

Even if we grant that some of the books of the NT were not written until the late 1st century, it is still too early for legend to corrupt the core facts.  Now that we know the documents of the NT are early, we need to ask whether the writers of the documents are trustworthy and reliable.  We will deal with that in the next post.

New Testament Reliability

Did the New Testament Writers Record Fact or Fiction? Part 2

12 Comments

Post Author: Bill Pratt

Continuing from part 1, let’s examine the evidence for dating the books of the NT, especially the books of the NT which contain substantial historical facts about Jesus and his followers.  First we should note that three leaders of the early church – Clement of Rome, Ignatius, and Polycarp – quoted passages from 25 of the 27 books of the NT right around A.D. 100.  They could not have quoted from the books if they hadn’t been written, so the latest the books of the NT could have been written is A.D. 100.  But there’s strong evidence that many of them were written much earlier.

Several well-attested historical events occurred between A.D. 60 and 70.  First, the Jewish temple, the temple where Jesus and his disciples worshipped along with the rest of the Jewish people, was completely and utterly destroyed in A.D. 70 by the Roman army.  The Romans were extinguishing a significant Jewish rebellion and when they finally entered Jerusalem, they left no stones standing from the temple because they wanted the gold used in the contruction of the temple.

Second, both the apostles Paul and Peter were executed in Rome by the emperor Nero between A.D. 66 and 68.  Their deaths are recorded by church historians – Clement of Rome, in particular, who was alive when their executions occurred.  Their tombs are major historical landmarks in Rome to this day.  Third, James, the brother of Jesus, was executed in Jerusalem by the Sanhedrin (Jewish High Council) in A.D. 62.  This event was first recorded by a Jewish historian named Flavius Josephus in the first century.

Why are these three events important?  They help prove that the books of Acts, Luke, and Mark were written before A.D. 62.  Follow the logic.  Acts was written by the historian and medical doctor, Luke.  Luke was a companion of Paul and recorded many of the events of Paul’s life.

One odd thing about Acts is that it ends abruptly with Paul imprisoned in Rome; Paul is still alive at the end of Acts.  Luke also frequently mentions James, the brother of Jesus, and Peter, the apostle, in the book of Acts.  At the end of Acts, Peter and James are also alive (there is no mention of their deaths).

Now, if I were writing a biography of an individual, it seems like one of the most important events that would take place in the biography would be the death of the person.  It’s especially important because it ends the biography!  Luke mentions the martyrdom of Stephen, so he clearly has no trouble writing about the deaths of Christians, but we are left with the fact that Luke never records the deaths of three of the major characters in Acts.

There is only one good explanation for this fact:  they were all alive when Acts was written.  If they were all alive, then Acts must have been written before A.D. 62!  That means Acts was written within 30 years of Jesus’ death and not even a single generation had passed.

In part 3, we will continue to argue for an early dating of several NT books.