LUKE AND PRAYER

I. Introduction:

I picked up out guest speaker from her home. She had agreed, as a 75 year old woman to speak to 40 college and post college age students on the subject of prayer. As we drove towards the place of the meeting I asked her a question so I could introduce her and her topic. “Gladys, what is prayer?” I asked. Her reply was one I never forgot: “Why, honey, prayer is talking to Jesus”.

This study is about “talking to Jesus” or “talking to God”. It is drawn from the Gospel of Luke as Luke is often said to be the Gospel of Prayer. It will not present any fancy theories, but merely examine three areas: Jesus’ actual teachings on the subject of prayer, examples from His recorded prayers and examples of people speaking with Jesus.

Jesus did teach on this subject but Jesus was always demonstrating in His own behavior what He instructed others to do. Therefore the second part of this discussion will list and briefly discuss the times Jesus prayed in the Gospels. Finally, the third part is also typical of Gospel teaching. Important things are often taught by allowing the disciples to view the truth in the interactions between Jesus and those He encountered. Since Jesus is God and talking to God is what we call prayer, thus talking to Jesus is an example of prayer. We will look at all the instances in the Gospel of Luke where some one is found talking to Jesus and talking to Jesus is what we would call prayer. What is gained by doing the latter investigation is that we see how Jesus answered and therefore get a glimpse of how God will answer our own prayers.

II. Lukan Material on Prayer.

A. Teaching on Prayer: Luke 11:1-13, 18:1-14 and 18:15-19:10.

There are two major teaching blocks in Luke on Prayer: 11:1-13 and 18:1-14 (and 18:15-43 is related to prayer). Certain parts of these teaching blocks are unique to Luke (11:5-8 and 18:1-14), but they are not in contrast to the teachings on prayer in the other Gospels. The first block is in response to His disciples asking Him to teach them a “prayer” like John the Baptist taught his disciples. He does this, but typically, He goes on to give them more. The second block is unsolicited, where as the first block seems to have been initiated by the disciples observing Jesus praying: One day Jesus was praying in a certain place. When he finished, one of his disciples said to him, “Lord, teach us to pray, just as John taught his disciples.”

1. Luke 11:1-13.

a. The Lord’s Prayer: Who is God and what are we to ask for: 11:2-4.

We have all known people who pray often and yet are horrible to be around. It appears that prayer to God did nothing for their handling of others or their relationship to God. Prayer must be something different than what many have seen. Jesus would agree. The Gospel of Luke shows us that Jesus was very aware that for many people prayer was merely a religious exercise.

“Prayers” or an Example Prayer

We see something different when we look carefully at all Luke teaches us about prayer. For example, Jesus did not teach principles of prayer in the famous “Lord’s Prayer” passage but gave them an “example prayer”. He let them look at a prayer and thus they could construct their own on this model. It is fairly certain He did not want us to merely repeat the words as if they were magic. The difference in the reports of this prayer between Matthew and Luke testify to that. It was not the mere saying of an official set of words that was the essence of prayer.

The structure of the Lucan version of the Lord’s Prayer is similar to that of Matthew (6:9-13), but is shorter in several ways. In the invocation (the opening), it is missing part of the title of address (in the best manuscripts “who is in heaven” is missing) and the benediction in Luke is missing altogether (For Yours is the Kingdom and the power and the glory forever, amen). Also, there is additional material Luke does not have that Matthew gives us. There are a few verbal differences in the request sections primarily in the matter of parallelisms. Luke did not record for us the parallelism to the first and last requests (“your will be done” is added to the first request and in the last request, Matthew added “but deliver us from the evil one”). Still the structure is essentially the same in both Gospels: there is an invocation and a series of four requests.

“Father, hallowed be your name.” (NIV)

The invocation (or plea for God to hear us) carried two contrasting themes: God should be viewed as an intimate authority and yet as beyond our reach as He is holy. He is related to us for we belong to Him as a child belongs to his earthly father and yet He is “Holy Other”. He is an approachable and caring though respected authority as Fathers were viewed as such in the Jewish community, and yet His Name is to be known as holy with all that word implies in Hebrew thought. God was imminent and yet transcendent. The invocation seems to be saying that our concept of God must be correct if we are to pray correctly. He is an authority that loves us in an intimate and personal manner but is frighteningly powerful and beyond human control or ability to comprehend.

A Series of Requests.

What follows next in the famous “Lord’s Prayer” is a series of requests.

Your kingdom come,

Give us each day our daily bread,

Forgive us our sins for we also forgive everyone who sins against us,

And lead us not into temptation. (NIV)

Does this sound spiritually inadequate to you? If you are honest, is this not, at first sight, a very shallow view of prayer? Pray is mainly asking for things? This seems religiously crude. Where is praise and worship? Where is the call to fasting and a profoundly clean life so that our prayers are heard? And yet, Jesus seems to disappoint us and list a series of requests. So let’s look at them.

The requests are four in number: ask for His will to be done, for our own daily needs, for forgiveness and for help against temptation. God commands us to make these four requests. Heading the list is to seek His will in our lives or for His Kingdom or reign to come. Second, we are to ask for sustenance which is symbolized or spoken of metaphorically by bread. Bread not only meant all types of food, but also all types of daily sustenance as well (which could mean health, finances, emotional well being, etc.). We are to ask for forgiveness (and like Matthew) it is the only request with a condition attached to it. Our forgiveness is conditional on our forgiving our fellow human beings. Last we are to ask for help in not being lead into temptation.

Everything is cast in personal terms. It is “His” kingdom and we are to ask for “our own” needs. Yes, God is transcendent but still a “Father” and a father is always conscious and willing to attend to his children’s needs. Forgiveness from the Personal God of the Bible is not obtained by ritual but by cleaning up our own personal agendas with other humans. The second great understanding of what the Old Testament Torah teaches (love your neighbor as yourself) is operational in this request. The God of the Universe loves humans and to pray to Him as a person necessitates that we love what He loves: other persons, even if they have hurt us. The final request is to ask God personally for help from the dangers of sin (see Psalm 19:12-14).

In his Gospel, Luke will present many people making requests of Jesus on the issues of physical needs (for them the daily bread was usually in the form of health or healing), forgiveness, and God’s will or reign (how to have eternal life, etc.). Little is said about asking for help in temptation (seemingly the request that few make of God). Jesus encouraged them to make such a request in the Garden of Gethsemane but His words were ignored (Luke 22:40).

False Prayers and the Simple Rule

Jesus was aware of phony religion; however, human beings are free to do what they will with Jesus’ teaching. Jesus was trying to move them beyond such a state, but if people do their “prayers” instead of truly talking to God then they are left all alone. He does not want to experience such emptiness.

His opening attempt to help them avoid false religiosity is found in the opening words. It entails first and foremost an awe-inspiring and yet encouraging attitude (contained in the opening invocation and titles of address for God). God is our Father, and yet dangerous. If the person chooses to merely say words with no real appreciation to whom you are speaking then the intent of Jesus opening words’ is lost.

In concert with this, the opening request is actually an act of submission. One is commanded to request God’s lordship over their daily activities. If someone actually means that prayer, then their agendas are to be submitted to His agenda. This could be part of what is to be asked for and it will be given, sought and it will be found and the door will be opened when knocked upon (11:9, 10). He encourages us to seek His will, ask for it to be known and pound away until it is discovered and entered into.

I remember being in a staff meeting in a religious institution and we opened in a formal prayer. We did the religious thing, we said the opening prayer. When differences emerged as to the direction of the organization on a particular issue I was told to not question any decision, after all, the meeting was opened in prayer so all that was decided was God’s will. That did not set too well with me.

Jesus went on in His attempt to remove us from hypocritical, meaningless prayers. Perhaps, the death-knell to phony ritual prayers is the request for forgiveness (4 a). One could ask for it, but forgiveness would be refused if one did not extend it. In some cases this is a dangerous prayer. If we do not forgive, we could be setting up our own damnation. To truly mean these words or participate in the spirit of where Jesus’ model prayer is trying to take us could make prayer a very powerful exercise.

The fact that most prayers are just that, “prayers” and not real conversation with a Holy Being is caused by a simple omission. One has to remember a “simple rule” about talking to God if prayer is to be powerful as we will see below. By the way, they asked for a sample prayer so they could say “prayers” as John’s disciples did. They wanted guidance in their prayer life and that is a proper request, but Jesus went beyond what they asked for. He gave them something more.

b. Parable about Persistence: 11:5-8.

Jesus proceeded to tell them a parable. It too addressed the difference of prayer as a ritual and prayer to an alive active being. If we merely say ritual prayers, we can be viewed as pious or kind because we said a prayer for someone in need. If we do not get an answer from God, that is fine. We prayed and so we are automatically spiritual for saying pious words and doing the prayers. We are kind because we said “prayers” for someone. The fact that we did not enter into His reign (His kingdom) or get our daily needs met, receive forgiveness or gain help in the temptations that are destroying us is acceptable. After all, we prayed. Jesus’ next section about prayer emphasizes the “simple rule” about talking to God. We are to expect a response. When you talk to another human you expect a response. When you talk to God you should expect a response. Prayer must be dialogue. If there is no response then maybe you said “prayers”.

The parable that followed the model prayer demonstrates this aspect or “simple rule”. It must first be noted that the parable was also dominated by the concept of “request” and has two parts: the parable itself (5-7) and the interpretation of it (8). The parable itself centers on a villager needing help late at night who pleads with his neighbor because of his need to refresh and serve an unanticipated guest.

Suppose one of you has a friend, and he goes to him at midnight and says, ‘Friend, lend me three loaves of bread, because a friend of mine on a journey has come to me, and I have nothing to set before him.’ The one inside answers, ‘Don’t bother me. The door is already locked, and my children are with me in bed. I can’t get up and give you anything.’ Luke 11:5-7, NIV

It is a story about a request that is driven by need, and in this case, the needs of someone else. The request, like the Lord’s Prayer, is personal. One person wants to help a personal guest and asks another person, a neighbor, for help. It is not prayer as a formal religious exercise, but it is an extemporary vocalization of an immediate personal need. The whole story revolves around interpersonal relationships: one has a friend in need so he goes to another friend for help.

The interpretation of the parable is short and in typical fashion stresses only one aspect of the parable or story. The interpretation centers on the theme that we should expect to get a response. In fact, we should expect to get a positive response. If we do not get the response we are to be persistent until we do.

I tell you, though he will not get up and give him the bread because he is his friend, yet because of the man’s boldness (or persistence) he will get up and give him as much as he needs.

Jesus’ teaching anticipates how His audience is privately or maybe even unconsciously thinking. Jesus is not a talking head but a Person speaking to real persons who cannot usefully employ religious teaching if their own personal doubts hamper them. The interpretation focused or anticipated that we could be discouraged by not getting what is immediately important to us the first time we ask. It stressed persistence or not quitting because of temporary delay and the difficulties inherent in the circumstances. Prayers to a Person should be expected to get an answer. We are to persist until we are answered. Anything else is not prayer as it violates the “simple rule”: prayer is a dialogue.

There is another beauty to Jesus’ parable. Jesus was stressing that prayer might lead to something else besides the answer to our need. Prayer might lead to a development in our personality. Prayer could help us to become more persistent and not easily dissuaded. We could become stronger people. Additionally, the encouraged persistence was portrayed in the context of pursuing the needs of others. The friend was not asking for food for himself but for an unexpected guest. It is a parable about intercession on behalf of another. We are to be persistent in the quest for the hospitable treatment of another. To be sure our own ego is involved (as one does not want to look like a poor host), but that is not seen as a negative. Our own personal needs (our reputation with others) are not to be viewed as a detriment. We are to love others, as well as ourselves. We are to pursue with intensity the welfare of others and we are not to take no for an answer.

c. Command to Ask, Seek, Knock: Luke 11:9-10.

The section following the parable is a series of six commands in two groups of three again focusing on the issue of “prayer as request”.

So I say to you: Ask and it will be given to you;

Seek and you will find;

Knock and the door will be opened to you.

For everyone who asks receives;

He who seeks finds;

And to him who knocks, the door will be opened. NIV

In a sense all six commands are repetitively saying much the same thing. The first set of three commands opens with a word of emphasis: “I say unto you”. We are commanded to ask, seek and knock for what we want and each command is followed by a motive clause that promises success. If you ask you will receive, if you seek you will find, and if you knock it will be opened to you.

Then the three commands are repeated with little variation, except the second set opens with the words, “everyone who asks….” The repetition of the set of three is another form of emphasis (see 9a) and it seems to be anticipating that some might think they will not be heard because of who they are (remember the neighbor did not get bread from his friend based on friendship but on persistence). Jesus seemed to think that many do not pray because they might have a low opinion of their connection with God. After all the one making the request is not the mayor of the town. He is just a friend, but as a friend he succeeds.

Ritual prayers with no results are not enough. One is not pious, spiritual or kind for saying prayers. One is to get results according to Jesus.

We have all met the person who hates God because they prayed for a loved one and that person died and so the one who finally did say prayers to God is angry. Perhaps, that person is closer to the true meaning of what Jesus taught about prayer than the more pious person who says prayers but does not really expect anything to come of it.

d. Threefold Rhetorical Question about God’s Character: 11:11-13.

This last section is also in a set of three. This time a different teaching device or verbal form is used: rhetorical questions. However different the literary form this section is still focused on making requests and on the “simple rule”.

Which of you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead?

Or if he asks for an egg, will give a scorpion?

If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him?

Passive prayer is again precluded. In 11:1-4 we are directly commanded to request things of God, told a story in 11:5-8 to encourage us that requests will be heard and commanded in 11:9-10 to believe we will get what we ask for. However, in 11:11-13, the call is to think. The function of rhetorical questions is to make someone think. In part, Jesus is teaching us that thinking has as much to do with prayer as emotion, maybe even more.

In all three rhetorical questions in this section the pondering was to be about the character of the one who was petitioned. It could be that Jesus was anticipating that some would not pray because of a defect in their view of God. The parable in 11:5-8 and the repetition in verse 10 focused more on the doubts one had about one’s standing with God and how effective one’s prayers might be. The major emphasis of this section (11:11-13) addressed the doubts one would have (in most cases unconsciously) about God’s character. Verses 5-10 addressed doubts about the self whereas the rhetorical questions of 11-13 addressed the doubts one has about the Person being prayed to. One must remember the “simple rule”. Prayer is dialogue. If we are not consciously aware of whom we are talking to then prayer becomes a monologue.

The parabolic nature of the rhetorical questions centered on equating the actions of a good father with the actions of God. The teaching on prayer opened with contemplating the nature of God: He is our Father, and He is holy (11:2). The teaching on prayer ended with a focus on His nature as a good father. As our earthly fathers would never give us things that hurt us so it follows that God who is much better

would not give us what would hurt us. The prayer section opened and closed with seeing God as our father, a holy Father who does not partake of evil, but holiness.

The three questions crescendo in teaching the audience what the greatest good our good Father would give us: namely the Holy Spirit. He was to be petitioned with confidence because He would never give us what would hurt us, and He would give us the ultimate good, or the “better bread”.

All prayer seems to be involved with this: the better bread. We are told we address a holy and good God who is like a good father. Good fathers always give what the child really needs in addition to what the child perceives that they need. Thus the greater bread is to receive the Holy Spirit. If we have the Spirit of God we will want His Kingdom to come or His will to be done. His Spirit will be in us. Similarly, only a good Father would know that daily sustenance is necessary, but the greater sustenance comes from His Spirit. Only a good Father would know that our own spiritual health must necessitate our forgiving of others (it is as vital as our receiving forgiveness) and only a good Father knows we should ask for help and focus on not falling into temptation. If His Spirit is in us our success against temptation will be enhanced. We will think like He does about sin.

The whole teaching on prayer emphasizes the twin issues of who prays and who is prayed to. This is not about ritual but about communication between persons. Who God is and who we are (and our doubts about ourselves and Him), and what types of requests we are to make. Each of the four sections emphasized “making requests”. We are not to be discouraged by “who we are” (5-10) but encouraged by “Who He is” (2-4, 11-13). He recognized that we are people who can be discouraged or dissuaded from speaking to God based on our own low self-esteem or by an incorrect view of the Person of God. He wanted us to recognize that God is a Person, and we can talk to Him. You cannot petition doctrines or theological principles, but only a person can respond to a request. God is a Person and of a certain type of character.

Though the four sections have similar themes a variety of forms were used to teach the disciples: a model prayer, a short parable, commands and rhetorical questions. The variety seemed to be instructing them and us in multiple ways about the nature of God and attacking the fears that would inhibit approaching God for what we most need.

What was missing is what is briefly mentioned above. Though prayer can be stylistic or ritual in form (2-4) or spontaneously driven because of need (5-8), one must choose to pray which would include mentally struggling with misconceptions. The disciples were commanded to ask and think clearly. No mention was given to feeling, spontaneous emotions or sensing the presence of God in regard to prayer. Ritual was not stressed and feelings were not central to Jesus’ view of prayer.

2. Luke 18:1-14: Two Parables.

The second teaching section on prayer opened with the narrator telling us the reason for the following parable: that we should never give up, but we should keep praying (18:1). There is not an obvious context for a teaching on prayer as we have in 11:1 and there are other differences between the two teaching sections of prayer. Luke showed us the variety of Jesus’ teaching style in the chapter 11 section (model prayer, parable, commands and Rhetorical Questions) and chooses in this section to record only the use of parables.

There are similarities as well between the two sections. First, there is the brevity of explanatory comments. These are theologically rich and powerful passages but Luke only gives us a few words of explanation and set up (18:1, 9). Again, Luke seems to mirror Jesus’ style as Jesus only gave 4 verses of interpretation to the two parables (18:6-8, 14) compared to 8 verses that He used to tell the parables (18:2-5, 10-13). Modern preaching would have tilted the percentage to explanatory words, emphasizing much more heavily what the parable was intended to mean.

There is another similarity between these two teaching sections. Jesus is aware that we are driven by two very powerful false perceptions that keep us from truly praying as opposed to saying prayers. These false perceptions are about God’s character and about what makes us able or worthy to receive an answer to our prayers. These are universal problems but Jesus sees the problems as potential allies. Maybe the problems are good ones.

An Alarming Parable about a Widow and a Judge: 18:1-8.

Sometimes people will tell me they love to read negative things about the Bible that show it to be false. At first this would catch me off guard, but then I would slowly realize that they were reacting not to the Bible but to how they viewed God. Usually, they had experienced loss of a parent, or a child or a spouse, and they thought “the heavens were made of iron”. They had received no answer to their prayers. We can understand their reaction and similar to that reaction is the one this parable is addressing.

Many people around the world experience injustice on an intense scale. They are oppressed sometimes by their own government or they are a minority in their community and face constant injustice. They have no effective human advocate. This also is present in communities where governmental oppression is fairly rare, but it takes a more hidden form. Some women are marginalized by their husbands and treated physically or verbally with great brutality. For many children it takes the form of sexual abuse. They are victims, who often tell no one because they fear they would not be believed. It is their word against an adult. It is to such cases that this parable about prayer is addressed.

Then Jesus told his disciples a parable to show them that they should always pray and not give up.

This seems like it is going to follow in the same track as the earlier parable in Luke 11:5-8. Persistence will yield results. However, there are some differences. First, the earlier parable spoke about the neighbor coming at night and getting something for someone else. There is another difference; the second parable speaks of obtaining justice for oneself when one was oppressed. This parable has another difference. In chapter 18:1-8, this parable boldly articulates what many of us think unconsciously on numerous occasions, but would never verbalize: God seems uncaring. He seems to be unmoved or unwilling to help us when we are oppressed.

He said, ‘In a certain town there was a judge who neither feared God nor cared about men. And there was a widow in that town who kept coming to him with the plea, ‘Grant me justice against my adversary.’ For some time he refused. But finally he said to himself, ‘Even though I don’t fear God or care about men, yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will see that she gets justice, so that she won’t eventually wear me out with her coming!'” NIV

The parable told of a typically vulnerable individual (metaphorically represented by a widow) who was shunned by an uncaring, non-God-fearing judge (his two character traits are the exact opposite of Jesus’ summary of the Ten Commandments or Torah, Luke 10:25-37, especially 10:28).

We, of course, are to identify ourselves with the widow and God is the obvious person being personified by the unjust judge. The judge was persuaded to do the right thing, not because it was the right thing, but because he was harried or emotionally harassed by the persistent widow. We often think God seems to be unmoved by our experiences of injustice, and we believe we are as insignificant or powerless as the widow. As uncomfortable as this parable is to the religiously devout, it does strike a deep cord in the hearts of many.

Following the parable (2-5) is a short interpretation (6-8).

And the Lord said, “Listen to what the unjust judge says. And will not God bring about justice for his chosen ones, who cry out to him day and night? Will he keep putting them off? I tell you, he will see that they get justice and quickly. However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?

Jesus’ interpretation opens with rhetorical questions asking the listener to ponder whether God is not more righteous than such a judge and therefore would move quickly to dispense justice. The interpretation contains rhetorical questions indicating that Jesus wants His disciples to use their minds with regard to the issue of prayer. They are asked boldly to think on this issue and then told boldly that God is not like what we unconsciously suspect. God is not like the unjust judge.

Then a twist takes place in the last statement of the parable’s interpretation that is posed in a rhetorical question: “When the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on the earth?”

It seems that just like the earlier parable, where delay gave opportunity to the friend who came at night to gain persistence, an even greater issue than immediate justice for the oppressed is offered. It gave opportunity for faith. God wants to give us more than we ask for, even when what we ask for is completely legitimate (justice in chapter 18 and bread for a neighbor in chapter 11). The seeming barrier is not the last word and is there for a purpose.

It is true that the misunderstanding of God’s character could lead to despair or could be the opportunity for an act of faith. The problem of injustice arises from the delay between our experience of injustice and our being able to see a proper judgment rendered. The problem arises because of our human perspective that is highly influenced by our temporal and immediately perspective. However, the problem could be a potential asset. The problem is caused by the delay, but the delay opens the door to the possibility of faith. We could by faith, chose to keep praying.

Jesus told a risky parable. He opened Pandora’s Box. He brought up what many priests or ministers do not want to bring up: God seems indifferent to human tragedy. Jesus brought up the issue but did not do traditional apologetics. He also did not demean our pain by ignoring its presence, but offered an optional way to responding to the horror of injustice.

b. A Parable about Two Men praying and a twist: 18:9-14.

To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else, Jesus told this parable. (18:9) Again, Jesus taught on prayer by means of a parable. This time the agenda was not about “giving up” because of our misconceptions about God (see 18:1), but about the attitude of those who pray have towards themselves. Luke tells us in 18:9 that this parable was for those religious people who were confident in their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else. It is interesting how many people refuse to go to church because of this attitude on the part of many who regularly attend. The problem in the parable about the widow was about misperception of the character of the Who is prayed to, but this time the issue addressed was concerned with those who did the praying and their thoughts about themselves.

This story centers on two men with two opposite attitudes who go to pray. Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood up and prayed about (to) himself. ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men–robbers, evildoers, adulterers–or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get’.

But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’

One was a righteous man who boasted of both his self discipline and his extensive tithing. This religious leader requested nothing but instead verbalized his thankfulness. He was thankful he was better than others, especially the other man in his presence who was a traitor to his country for money: a tax collector. The second man was aware of his sin and did not boast about anything but rather hung his head and requested forgiveness.

The parable is in verses 10-13 and the interpretation is found in verse 14. “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted”. In the Interpretation there was again a twist. This time it was in who was forgiven: it was the tax-gatherer who received grace. The righteous Pharisee or the Bible believing church leader asked for nothing and received nothing. The key to praying in this parable is being humble. If you are arrogant you will not be exalted because God is against the proud (Luke 1:52-53, 6:25). If you are humble “you will be satisfied with good things” (6:21, 7:1-10, 16:25). Key to prayer is our attitude towards and conceptualization of who we are.

Two great barriers to prayer are anticipated in these two parables: our view of God and our view of ourselves. In the first parable, we unconsciously have a view of God that sometimes blocks our ability to keep praying. We think He does not care and the delay to answering our prayer is the indication of His indifference to justice. We seldom would voice this among other believers, but it is profoundly present if we have the courage to recognize it. The parable says we should keep praying and the real reason for the delay is His goal of building lasting faith, not a lack of caring. Despite our feelings towards God we ought always to pray and not faint (18:1). Our feelings may be legitimate, especially in light of our experience, but we are encouraged to not let them dominate us.

As in 11:5-8, prayer could build strength of character and move us away from seeing God as a vending-machine. If we view God as having to give us what we ask for because we gave the proper coinage (prayer) then our understanding of God has changed God from being a person to being a ritualistic machine. The right prayer, the right ritual and we expect God to deliver. He is no longer a Person but a force to be manipulated. God’s delay in 18:2-5 should be viewed as the conscious behavior of a Person who wishes to give us the something better (18:8).

In the second parable our view of ourselves may be low but may be accurate as the attitude of the tax-gatherer was. However, it is better to be like the man who knew he was a sinner than the man who was judgmental of others, especially if we want justification before God. If we are self-satisfied with our own righteousness it could be a barrier to effective prayer. We will not request anything. We will also be talking to ourselves (18:11) not God. Prayer is about communion between two persons, not between one. The Pharisee dialogued with himself about himself. He did not want anything from another Person but only wanted to speak about himself.

Jesus also wanted to encourage those who are aware of their sinfulness to not let their situation become a barrier to prayer. The tax-gatherer, as sinful as he was, did pray to another person. He spoke to God and not to himself. Jesus did not seem to see prayer as meditation, but dialogue, intelligent dialogue between persons, a “simple rule” to remember.

3. Stories that Define True Prayer: 18:15-19:10.

Immediately following the teaching via parables on prayer in 18:1-14 a series of encounters with Jesus took place. They are well known stories with messages in their own right but in the context of teaching on prayer they also serve as helpful clarification on the nature of true prayer. The stories are: the Little Children and Jesus (18:15-17), the Rich Ruler (18:18-25), the interchange with Peter about wealth (26-34), the Blind Beggar (35-43), and Zacchaeus (19:1-10).

People were also bringing babies to Jesus to have him touch them. When the disciples saw this, they rebuked them. But Jesus called the children to him and said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.”

In 18:15-17, Luke recorded the children being driven away by the disciples when their parents were seeking a blessing on them from Jesus. The passage seemed to teach us that we should fight the tendency to decide who God will desire to deal with. Who we think is unworthy of His attention may be the very ones to whom the Kingdom of God belongs (18:16). They should not be hindered but rather become our teachers on the proper attitude to have and their example was not merely praised but held up as necessary (18:17). It seemed to be commentary on the parable of the tax collector in 18:13-14.

Perhaps, prayer to God could elicit a rebuke from God. They spoke to Jesus (prayed to God) and He not only refused their request but criticized their entire understanding of the situation. This seems to bring to honest prayer an element of criticism. If we seek to avoid personal critique directly from God it would be safer to not truly express what we think. Of course, our timidity would leave us clueless about the true heart of God.

When young I had a coach who knew the sport well. After playing several years for him I noticed a pattern. He corrected the players he liked the most. If he yelled at a player then you knew that player was going to be on the team. If he said nothing to a player then we noticed that player was soon dropped from the team. The Bible puts this in a similar fashion: “Blessed is the man whom God corrects; so do not despise the correction of the Almighty” (Job 5:17).

Prayer in this instance is a dialogue. It is a disturbing exchange for the disciples because they are strongly and publicly corrected. It did not seem to bother the disciples and that seemed to be because they were used to being corrected. They did not fear dismissal for their error. Luke has presented the disciples as interacting with Jesus multiple times and of having been corrected multiple times. Perhaps, the more we pray, the more we truly interact in dialogue with God, and the more comfortable we are with facing our own short comings. This will not be the last time Jesus will correct or challenge the insightfulness of His staff.

There is confusion that runs through out the non-Christian world about the place of morality. Some people know that Christians are to be moral so if one is moral then that is the main way to please God. Therefore moral people would be the one’s favored in prayer, even if they are not Christians. There is some truth to this, but there is a subtle danger. Cornelius in Acts 10 is told by an angel: “Cornelius…Your prayers and gifts to the poor have come up as a memorial offerings before God” (Acts 10:3-4). He is then given further instruction as to how to get closer to God which he acts upon with haste (Acts 10:5-48). Here it seems that moral behavior (helping the poor) and religious behavior (an attempt at prayer) gets God’s attention. However, Cornelius is not merely religious, he is truly seeking God. It seems to be that if one begins to do the right things, it could become addictive and lead to more goodness.

In similar fashion, the Rich Young Ruler an extremely moral and polite man tasted goodness, and it made him spiritually hungry. However, this man failed in his talking (prayer-life) with Jesus. So much of what the young man did was correct (18:20-21) and perhaps that is reflected by both the praise and the penetrating critique that he received.

A certain ruler asked him, “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good–except God alone. You know the commandments: `Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother. `” “All these I have kept since I was a boy,” he said.

He was subsequently given insightful and potentially saving knowledge that would lead to his salvation, just as Cornelius had received (18:22).

When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

An Israelite knows that one cannot properly pray to the God of the Old Testament if one has an allegiance to another god (in this ruler’s case it was money). Who we are in society or our moral standing is not as important as simple obedience to God’s will: “no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:3, Deuteronomy 5:7). We cannot pray to the true God if we refuse to be loyal to Him and worship a false one (Luke 16:13).

When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was a man of great wealth. Jesus looked at him and said, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” (18:23-25) Cornelius obeyed while this man did not. The moral leader presented in this story was placed in opposition to the humility of the little ones in 18:17, or the humility of the tax collector (18:13).

The people who witnessed this exchange were scandalized and asked: “Who then can be saved?” If the moral leaders and the prominent members of society cannot be saved then what hope was there for anyone? Jesus followed this encounter with directly teaching that salvation was always impossible to humans and was always a miracle of God (18:28-30). Jesus replied, “What is impossible with men is possible with God.”

This prompted Peter to wonder about his own standing in regard to the question of eternal life. He had, in his own view, been the opposite of the ruler.

Peter said to him, “We have left all we had to follow you!” “I tell you the truth,” Jesus said to them, “no one who has left home or wife or brothers or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God will fail to receive many times as much in this age and, in the age to come, eternal life.” Peter, of course, misunderstood. He countered with stating he and the disciples had done exactly the opposite of the Rich Young Ruler in leaving all. Jesus responded by saying one cannot out-give God. Then Jesus began to teach about His death, His ultimate gift and the answer to our need (18:31-34). The impossibility of human beings being saved was answered in the Cross. Peter, at this juncture in the Gospel did not understand (18:34).

Jesus took the Twelve aside and told them, “We are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written by the prophets about the Son of Man will be fulfilled. He will be handed over to the Gentiles. They will mock him, insult him, spit on him, flog him and kill him. On the third day he will rise again.” The disciples did not understand any of this. Its meaning was hidden from them, and they did not know what he was talking about. Perhaps, Luke was saying prayer with God can leave us in suspense between wanting to know something and receiving the answer. The problem is with our limited understanding. More experience and time was necessary before Peter was capable of understanding the answer to his request. He may answer our prayers and yet we do not understand the answer He gave us.

In the next vignette, the Blind Beggar (in 18:35-41) demonstrated what the parable in 18:2-5 and 11: 5-8 spoke about: persistence. He would not be dissuaded from getting to Jesus and making his request, and he succeeded. Whoever asks will receive (11:9). Even penniless blind beggars will receive (11:10) if they persistently ask.

As Jesus approached Jericho, a blind man was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard the crowd going by, he asked what was happening. They told him, “Jesus of Nazareth is passing by.”

He called out, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”

Those who led the way rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!”

Jesus stopped and ordered the man to be brought to him. When he came near, Jesus asked him, “What do you want me to do for you?”

“Lord, I want to see,” he replied.

Jesus said to him, “Receive your sight; your faith has healed you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus, praising God. When all the people saw it, they also praised God.

The story of Zacchaeus the tax collector also illustrated the opposite of the Rich Young Ruler. Zacchaeus did this by giving up his wealth to obey God’s will (see 19:8 as opposed to 18:23). He was not the person we would expect to be someone that God would desire to fellowship with (19:5), but his life was an illustration of the parable about the two men who prayed at the Temple (18:9-14).

Jesus entered Jericho and was passing through. A man was there by the name of Zacchaeus; he was a chief tax collector and was wealthy. He wanted to see who Jesus was, but being a short man he could not, because of the crowd. So he ran ahead and climbed a sycamore-fig tree to see him, since Jesus was coming that way. When Jesus reached the spot, he looked up and said to him, “Zacchaeus, come down immediately. I must stay at your house to day.” So he came down at once and welcomed him gladly.

All the people saw this and began to mutter, “He has gone to be the guest of a `sinner.'”

But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”

Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost. Zacchaeus was humble enough to climb a tree to get a mere a glimpse of Jesus and was willing to pay extraordinary fees in order to protect Jesus’ reputation (19:7-8). He was much like the Centurion in 7:1-10 who was very concerned about what His approach to God could cost the reputation of God. Zacchaeus, the Blind Man, and the Centurion learn that they were the very ones to whom the Kingdom of God belongs (7:9, 18:16 and 19:9-10). They served as illustrations of what it means to be like a child and demonstrated the necessary conditions to have successful dialogue with God (18:17).

What is interesting is during all of this the disciples were clueless. “The disciples did not understand any of this. The meaning was hidden from them, and they did not know what he was talking about” (18:34). They were the holy apostles of God who drove children away (18:15), key leaders who did not understand (18:34) but all around them tax-collectors and blind people were successfully getting to God. “For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted” (18:14). The disciples would learn, but it would be a humbling failure surrounding Jesus’ death that would teach them how to be children (18:17). Prayer was talking to the Lord of the Universe and having the proper attitude was essential. How to teach true prayer is more than communicating correct data. Perhaps a proper attitude can only be gained through experiences of failure or intense need.

There is another way to look at these four stories of 18:15-19:10. They could all be the description of one individual. We at times approach Jesus in all four ways in different times in our lives. We could at times come humbly and child-like and receive His blessing and acceptance (18:15-17) or we could come at other times in our lives with a moral arrogance that precludes our own salvation. We come with flattering words (18:18) and a sincere hunger but in our attempt to flatter God and our own self image, our self praise renders us unaware of our own duplicity. We come to God, but with conditions. We want answers to our spiritual hunger but want God to serve us and give us what we desire. We have unwittingly precluded our serving Him and giving Him what He wants. We approach God with high spiritual self esteem not aware of our own secret idolatry. It is in the periods of wealth (youth, good looks, educational promise, skill, or money itself) that we are the most blind. The blind beggar had no such illusions of either piety or morality. His need drove him. There might be later times in our lives that our prayers take on a heightened sense of urgency because we realize we truly are sinful and in need of grace. The tax-gatherer of Luke 19 knew he must get to God and once he was accepted he responded without being asked to respond in a financial manner. Zacchaeus became the opposite of the Rich Young Ruler. The moral pretence was gone (tax-gatherers were known to be scum) and willingness to get rid of false gods (money) and to help the poor was willingly done.

B. Examples of Jesus Praying.

1. Overview of the Fifteen Passages.

There are fifteen times in the Gospel of Luke that record Jesus as praying: 4:42, 5:16, 6:12, 9:16, 9:18, 9:28-29, 10:21-22, 11:1, 22:19, 22:41-42, 22:44, 22:45, 23:34, 23:46, 24:30. Jesus was fully man and as a man He prayed to God. He not only told us to pray, He modeled it for us. There are some patterns to be found in these references. Five of the fifteen are concerned with struggle: three times in the Garden of Gethsemane (22:41-42, 22:44 and 22:45) and twice on the Cross (23:34, 23:46). Three times Jesus was recorded as praying before meals: 9:16, 22:19, and 24:30. And five times He prayed either after or before important decisions made in ministry: 4:42, 5:16, 6:12, 9:18 and 10:21-22. Often prayer seems to be occasioned by thankfulness before meals, in times of supreme crisis and in the midst of ministry.

Jesus prayed privately and publicly. The first three records of His praying are careful to show Jesus went alone to pray: in 4:42 He goes to a lonely place and in 5:16 we are told “Jesus often withdrew to lonely places and prayed” and in 6:12 He went off into the mountain to pray and spent the whole night in prayer to God. In the Garden of Gethsemane “He withdrew about a stone’s throw beyond them, and knelt down and prayed” (22:41). The prayers at meals are obviously public (though we do not know what He said), and He only looked to heaven in 9:16. He took along Peter, John and James when He went to the mountain to pray and though we are not told what He said, they witnessed Him praying and then saw the Transfiguration (9:28-29). Also in 9:18, 10:21-22 and 11:1 we are told that He was with the disciples when He prayed.

2. The Four Recorded Prayers: 10:21-22, 22:42, 23:34, 23:46.

We have only four examples of what Jesus actually said when He prayed. Luke’s selection of what to record for us is rather telling. Only in 10:21-22 do we have a record of what He actually said outside of the Passion Week. It is during that crucial time of Jesus’ last week that Luke chooses to record the other three examples of what Jesus actually said in prayer. We are allowed to hear what He said in the Garden in 22:42 confirming what He decided in the desert in Luke 4:1-13. Next we have two statements in the midst of His pain on the Cross: 23:34 and 23:46.. He publicly forgave His tormenters in 23:34 demonstrating what He taught in Luke 6:27-49 and submitted His spirit to His Father as He breathed His last breath in 23:46 again demonstrating what He taught others to do in 11:2 about seeking the Kingdom of God. This statement on the Cross also goes back to 22:42 confirming what He prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane.

There is an intimacy to these examples that go beyond ritual prayers. In all four accounts Jesus addresses God as “Father”. Jesus addresses God as His Father in 10:21-22 when He allows the disciples to listen in as He expressed His joy in the humble selection of the disciples. In 22:42, when dealing with the great dread of the coming Cross which He knew was His Father’s will, He still called God His “Father”. Like a good son He expressed His submission to His Father’s will but also felt free enough to express His desire to avoid the “cup of suffering”. “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me, yet not my will, but yours be done.” Though He suffered on the Cross because of the will of His Father, He still forgave those who crucified Him. Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” Then gently, He submitted His spirit back to His Father with His last gasp of breath. The closest thing to a ritual prayer is the final example of His prayer life with the words: “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit” in 23:46. Many believe this was a “child’s prayer” made by Jewish children before they were put to bed. This stylized prayer is beautifully, creatively and intimately adapted by Jesus when in excruciating pain. This prayer gave us the last spoken words by Jesus that Luke recorded before Jesus’ death.

As a master Teacher, Jesus’ four prayers model a great deal about how to teach a spiritual practice such as prayer. First, in the prayer recorded in the Garden Jesus teaches that leaders should be open with God about their desire to avoid pain (“Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me”, 22:42). Jesus did not tell His disciples to be vulnerable with others and with God about personal pain, but demonstrated it. We may with endless energy and skills try to impact others with our teaching, but we fail if others cannot see the truth modeled. Second, in similar fashion, Jesus teaches by example in 23:34 that the disciples are to forgive their persecutors. Third, Luke allowed his readers to see Jesus demonstrate trust in God as His Father, despite His horrible experience of rejection, humiliation, and torture in the final prayer recorded in Luke’s Gospel (23:46).

Finally, Jesus as a good master teacher was said to have joy when His students succeeded (10:21-22). As sinful people we humans usually only find joy in our own success, but by His demonstration we see a deeper way to live. This is the only prayer that was said to contain joy. His joy as a teacher was due to their learning and because of their ministry, not His own. Good leaders are honest (and therefore vulnerable), forgiving, trusting and explode in joy with the success of those they teach. There is an intimacy expressed here. He calls God His “Father” four times in this prayer and calls the disciples his “little children”. At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure. All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows who the Son is except the Father, and no one knows who the Father is except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.”

I have never forgotten the look of joy on my former teacher’s face when he first saw me after hearing I had succeeded in obtaining a higher degree. I saw in the flesh true piety and true spiritual greatness. I saw the truth incarnated and modeled for me. I saw that my role was to emulate my former teacher’s joy when I encounter the success and insight of my students.

3. The Effects of Prayer.

Luke gave us some of the effects of Jesus’ prayer life on Jesus Himself. Luke seems to be saying that prayer affects us as well as connects us with God and obtains things for others. Jesus prayed alone after some initial success in ministry in chapter 4 and after praying decided to change locations from where He was already successful. He reaffirmed His commitment to the “better bread” of the Word over that of healing. Following Luke’s record of His praying in 5:16 we are told that the “power of the Lord was present for Him to heal the sick” (5:17). In 6:11, He reaped the angry rage of the religious leadership for healing a man. This anger would eventually lead to His death, but He subsequently spent all night in prayer and then expanded the ministry by calling the apostles (6:13-16). Then He continued healing others (6:18-19) and then boldly preached about forgiving your enemies (6:27-28). I believe Luke wanted us to see the correlation between these actions. Prayer buffeted Jesus from the dangers of success in 4:42 and from the discouragement or fear of deadly opposition in 6:11.

He went back to God whether He was successful (4:42, 5:15) or experiencing rejection (6:11). It seems that direction came from His seasons of prayer: the changes of ministry location after praying in 4:42, calling of the apostles, continuing to heal and modeling how to respond to hatred after praying in 6:12 and the decision to begin pressing His disciples to think out Who He was, after praying in 9:18. Insight into how to handle the emotional roller coaster affects of praise from success or rejection from confrontation and how to proceed came to Him after He prayed.

There are other effects from His prayer life: His body and clothes were transformed in 9:29, the bread was multiplied after He looked up into heaven in 9:16, and the disciples, watching Him pray, seemed spurred to ask Him to give them a lesson about prayer in 11:1. Twice He prayed before meals: at the Last Supper (22:19) and He prayed before He broke the bread after the walk on the road to Emmaus (24:30). After the meal in the Upper Room He gave the disciples the ceremony of the Eucharist and after prayer before the meal in the latter case it opened their eyes to all that ceremony meant. In the Garden of Gethsemane it helped Him submit to God’s will, though the struggle was intense as the reference to the sweat pouring from His body in 22:44 indicated.

Finally, the struggle in the Garden seemed to have born fruit in His very spirit. He was very other-centered in 22:45 as He commanded the disciples to pray that they did not enter into temptation. He graciously forgave others in 23:34, and finally graciously puts His life into His Father’s hands in 23:46. The effects of that prayer time were both inward and outward. Prayer seemed to be associated with His amazing calm demeanor before the shameful and unfair trial and brutal treatment before death. He was amazingly other-centered, calm, witty and at peace with God. His inward peace allowed Him to respond with acid clarity to His interrogators. His clear mind was outwardly demonstrated by His responses. The prayer time in the Garden and the decisions made there seemed to be part of the cause for His inward disposition and His outward demeanor.

In the earlier prayers Luke showed his readers that inward and outward results came from times of prayer. Prayer seemed tied to directions taken in the early chapters describing His ministry. Inwardly He knew what course to follow. Outwardly, prayer seemed to be tied to the miracle of the loaves being multiplied, His appearance at the Mount of Transfiguration with His clothes changing, and in chapter 11, prayer was the outward stimulus for the disciples to ask Him how to pray.

4. His Recorded Prayers match what He Taught.

He seems to model all that He taught His disciples in the model prayer of Luke 11:2-4 that contained four types of request. He sought the Kingdom of God first (4:42, 9:31, 22:41-42 and 23:46). He asked for daily sustenance but often for the sake of others 9:16, and 5:17 where the sustenance was physical healing. He did not ask for forgiveness but gave it in 23:34. Finally, He did pray for deliverance in temptation in 22:41-42.

C. Examples of People talking to Jesus.

Since we have many examples of people talking to Jesus, it would make sense to view these texts as subtle examples of prayer. It could be helpful to look at the various results of talking to Jesus recorded in Luke. Prayer is by necessity dialogue and so what responses are recorded by Luke when someone spoke to Him will give us insight into how this dialogue would look today.

Jesus was approached in a variety of ways. The form often taken was that of request (much like what is taught in 11:2-4). Other approaches or speeches made to Jesus were not requests but rather intercessions for others. In other words, a person or group made a request on behalf of another person. Additionally, Luke recorded for us many instances of people questioning Jesus’ validity. Finally, a series of statements made to Jesus in the recorded interactions with Him give us some alarming but potential insight into how God will respond to us if we engage Him in a similar manner in prayer.

1. Requests Made of Jesus for Help: There are 37 requests for help made in Luke’s Gospel. Since the Lord’s Prayer and all the other teachings on prayer stress making requests to God, then it seems reasonable to investigate how Jesus responded to the requests made to Him. If Jesus is God, then talking to Jesus would be an example of talking to God. What is helpful is that these requests are followed by answers Jesus gave. These answers could then be seen as types of answers we would receive if we made similar requests to God. We can watch the stories and learn what to expect from our requests to God by watching how Jesus responded to these individuals.

a. Requests by the Disciples: Thirteen of these requests are made by the disciples. In 8 of the cases what they asked for received a positive response and five of their requests were denied. Let us look first at what requests were denied.

1) Requests Denied by Jesus:

The first refusal was experienced by Peter, when Peter asked Jesus to leave him because he was a sinful man in 5:8. Instead, Jesus commissioned him. In 9:12 the disciples asked Jesus to send the crowds away because they were tired and the people had been listening to Jesus in a desolate place. He answered no and instead challenged the disciples to feed the crowd in this sparsely populated area when they had little or no provisions. In 9:49-50, John wanted Jesus to stop ministry that was going on in Jesus’ name because they were not part of the apostolic band. In 9:54 James and John were rebuked when they asked permission from Jesus to call down fire from heaven on a Samaritan village for refusing to grant them provisions on their journey (reminiscent of Sodom and Gomorrah who denied hospitality to the angels in Genesis 19). Finally, in 17:37 the disciples asked for insight into something He had said and requested a special type of answer. Their question proved they had not really listened to what He said (see 17:21) and Jesus basically refused by retorting with a vague metaphor that in essence sarcastically meant “whatever” (17:37).

These refusals could be seen, at first glance, as alarming. In Luke 11:9-10 the disciples were told to ask and were promised that they would receive, and they were promised if they sought they would find and if they knocked it would be opened up to them. However, in 11:11-13, Jesus also promised them that He would not give them a snake if they asked for a fish. The disciples asked for incorrect things and like a good parent Jesus refused to give them what would hurt them (11:11, 12). Jesus would not abandon Peter due to his sense of guilt, nor give into selfish requests by the other disciples prompted either by weariness (9:12), jealousy (9:50) or anger (9:54).

Neither would He continue to instruct those who refused to listen in 17:21 (as evidenced in 17:37). He would not coddle His disciples but demanded that they listen carefully. He would not allow His disciples to be mentally lazy, to do so would be to give them a scorpion instead of an egg (11:12). To allow them to be consumed with selfishness or mental laziness would be to give them something harmful instead of what would nourish them spiritually.

I think all of us know people who complain that God has abandoned them or they pray but He refuses to respond to their requests for guidance. We are often sympathetic to this and rightly so, but the issue in Luke 17:37 might be of help to us in certain situations. Maybe our lack of answer has in some cases a different cause. We might have been taught or instructed by the Holy Spirit (17:21) but did not obey. So if God kept speaking He would be giving into our laziness and He would be captive to our disobedience. Paul reminds us that if we obey what we know then He will lead us into further truth. Oswald Chambers puts it well when he says: “If things are dark to me, then I may be sure there is something I will not do. Intellectual darkness comes through ignorance; spiritual darkness comes because of something I do not intend to obey.”

These refusals are instructive in understanding our own situations, but Jesus is also teaching us about Himself (i.e. about God). First, we are taught how God’ wisdom and patience is manifested. Jesus taught us that, for our benefit, certain prayers would not receive a positive answer. We could ask for what we wanted and do so with the confidence that God would not hurt us due to lack of wisdom or knowledge when we asked for the wrong things. He might even respond with a rebuke, but that request would not sever or harm our established relationship as a disciple. Jesus could refuse our inappropriate requests but not dismiss us for asking for the wrong things.

Second, the denied requests taught that God was a sentient, intelligent Person who could discern between legitimate and illegitimate requests. He was a God who was like a good Father. He was not like electricity where we could with proper religious actions plug into the socket to get what we wanted. God was a Person and as a person could not be manipulated by religion because prayer was then reduced to a form of magic. God was an alive and thinking Being and not like a vending-machine that could be manipulated with the appropriate religious quarters (prayer) to gain a treat (the answers we wanted).

Jesus also modeled for us how to deal with requests from those who ask us as teachers or authorities. Part of good leadership whether as parents or as teachers is to know what requests should be answered in a positive manner. Jesus never focused on pleasing people but on blessing them. We can all remember when a good teacher or when our parents refused to give us something we wanted, because they knew it would hurt us. On later reflection, we saw their wisdom. Had I obtained my way as a child I would have eaten nothing but candy and thankfully my parents refused. It is incorrect to make requests when over whelmed with guilt (5:8), weary from ministry (9:12), jealous because we believe our “turf” is threatened (9:50) or filled with anger, even when stirred by our passionate loyalty to God (9:54). God loves us and knows in a more rested state we would not necessarily make such requests.

One final aspect should be noted despite its obviousness. To hear an answer of “no” is still an answer. Hearing a rebuke or a refusal still constitutes a response. These examples of Jesus refusing their requests still constitute dialogue and imbibe of the “simple rule”.

2) Requests that were granted a positive answer:

In the eight requests that are positively answered there are also patterns. Several times the disciples ask for information like the meaning or application of a parable (8:9, 12:41), how to pray (11:1), how to increase their faith (17:5), about the future implications of some of His teaching (21:7) and information on how to accomplish a task (22:9). All of these requests were answered. In 8:24 they asked Him to awaken and save them from drowning. He did awake and did save them though later rebuked them for their unbelief. Finally, He was asked to accept hospitality in 24:29 and in humble fashion He said yes to their request and accepted their gift (the disciples were in contrast to the Samaritans of 9:52-53).

Jesus encouraged the disciples to ask about what they did not know or understand and to ask for help when in stress. One of the stories about the disciples particularly stands out. They were practically forced into a situation that compelled them to make a request for help when they thought they were going to drown in 8:24. Their problem was seemingly orchestrated by Jesus. He told them to go into the boat and cross the lake and He then went to sleep. He seemed to set up their situation of stress.

What could have motivated this decision by Jesus to stress them? There are possibly three reasons and all of them had to do with the disciples’ special position. They were elected to be leaders, and leaders need to be trained. The first reason He could have induced this crisis was because the disciples were never in need of exorcism or healing as were many others who approached Jesus. They lived comparatively stress free lives in the matter of health or demonic attack. The disciples were deliberately stressed so they could know the panic illness or demonic possession brought into the lives of others they would later minister to. The situations and feelings others had that motivated requests made to Jesus could now be related to. They were to be leaders and needed to know how those they led felt.

John Chrysostom gives us two more reasons: lest they be high minded, and so they could develop strength. When facing trials and terrors He takes none but the “champions of the world, whom He was to discipline”. He wanted them to be strong, and He wanted to keep them humble. To be both strong and humble requires awareness. Stress can be a great revealer.

They panicked. In their panic they saw their lack of faith and were rebuked for it. Luke would record their failure in the midst of six stories where others facing stress had the faith that the disciples lacked. They were humbled. But failure when faced can make one strong. They never buried this story as three of the four Gospels record this episode. Their failure was not hidden. They prayed, they made a request but it was made in panic, and they were rebuked for it. This rebuke was neither forgotten nor suppressed.

b. Requests for Healing: Many other requests came from a variety of people. Many were requests for healing. Jesus was asked by implication by the friends of a paralyzed man when they interrupted His teaching session in 5:18. He was asked by a leper for cleansing (5:12), by a father for his dying daughter (7:41), by another father with a demon possessed boy (9:38), by ten lepers for cleansing (17:13) and by a blind man for his sight (18:38, 39, 41).

There is a pattern to the first five of these healings. He said yes to the healing but gave them more. Jesus decided before He started His public ministry to seek the higher things. In the desert He was tempted to make bread (4:3) but He responded with man does not live by physical sustenance alone (4:4). These people needed more than the healing they requested. They needed something eternal. He gave them the “better bread” (4:4 and 4:43) in that He gave them a word from God. The paralyzed man received forgiveness when he was obedient to a command in 5:20 and the leper was given a task to obey a word from the Torah which became a potential part of his healing (5:14). With the two parents of sick children He allowed the stress to build and asked one to have faith in 8:50 despite the fact that all seemed lost (8:49) and He challenged the father of the demon possessed boy to believe (9:41). The ten lepers were commanded to show themselves to the priest (a word from Torah) and as they obeyed they were healed (17:14). It was more important that they heard the Word and obeyed it (11:27-28) than that they were impressed with a miracle.

It takes great thoughtfulness and discipline as a minister to give to parishioners or for teachers to give students more than what they ask for. Jesus modeled for us that just getting the gift of healing that they wanted was not enough for their ultimate well being. Asking Jesus for something could lead to receiving more than was ever anticipated. They asked legitimately for a temporary physical healing and also received through the unique challenges He gave to each the means to establish an eternal relationship with God through faith.

This similar aspect was also in the last healing that was requested in 18:38-41. The blind man encountered many obstacles in his quest for his sight. It was the blind man’s persistence (see 11:5-8 and 18:2-8) that was so highly prized by Jesus. He learned persistence and therefore the depth of how deeply he was willing to struggle to obtain the healing. Jesus gave him the better bread as well. He gave the blind man a deeper character through his struggle as well as his sight.

c. Requests for Forgiveness: Surprisingly few ask for this (11:4) despite it being a major aspect of the Lord’s Prayer. It is also surprising that in both of the situations Luke gave us they did not directly ask for forgiveness but did so by implication. The sinful woman who cried at His feet and washed them with her tears did not actually verbalize her need of forgiveness but she was certainly seeking it by her actions (7:37). In similar fashion the thief on the cross defended Jesus from the rebukes of the other thief and asked to be allowed in Jesus’ kingdom and did admit he had sinned (23:40-42). Both requests were granted even without the actual verbalization of the people involved. Both were self proclaimed sinners and both acted in some fashion that displayed their desire to be accepted. Saying the right words is not the issue in Luke but acting in the right manner is. Prayer has nothing to do with magical words.

d. Requests for His Presence or Absence:

Several times Jesus was asked to come to one location or to leave it, and He acquiesced to their requests. He was asked to come to dinner in 7:36 by a Pharisee and Jesus granted his request, He was asked to come to the house of the Centurion to heal his slave by Jewish elders and Jesus again agreed (7:3). He was also asked not to come but to just heal from a distance (7:6-7) and again Jesus did as the Centurion requested. In 8:37 the pagan crowd that witnessed the exorcism of the demon possessed man and the death of their herd of pigs requested that Jesus leave their territory and He left (8:37).

If we are open to His presence and ask for it He will come as the Pharisee in 7:36 learned (see also 14:37 and 24:29). Whether the Presence of God is spiritually efficacious is another matter. It is what we do with the words He will speak that are all important and that will prove whether we are good ground (8:2-8). If we receive that word (like in 24:29) or do not receive it as in 14:37 ff and 7:36 ff we demonstrate what type of soil we are. Just because He speaks in our streets and we eat and drink with Him is not enough (13:24). We must choose to cease from evil and strive to enter the narrow gate (13:24, 27). We may feel His presence in a Communion Service as we eat and drink with Him but still perish. We came to church to feel good, not to hear the Word of God and obey it (8:20-21 and 11:27-28).

Jesus is also demonstrating that He will not force His presence on anyone, but will be patient and wait to be asked as in 8:37 with the crowd from Gerasene. Their request for Him to leave was potentially damaging to them but Jesus would not force Himself or His truth on them. However, He took notice of their understandable fear because of the matter of the death of their pigs and in the matter of their shock at seeing the demoniac healed and in his right mind. Jesus was not irritated for He commissioned one of their own, the healed demoniac, to go back to them, his own people, and proclaim what God had done for him (8:39).

e. Requests for Information:

There are four times when Jesus was asked for information and Jesus complied with their requests. In 13:23 Jesus was asked about the difficulty of obtaining salvation under the guise of “are just a few going to be saved?” He was then asked by the Rich Young Ruler the way to eternal life in 18:18 and 18:21 and finally Jesus was asked by those who heard His words to the Rich Ruler about “who then can be saved?” (18:26). In all four cases Jesus did answer their request for information but not in the manner in which they were expecting. In all four cases the answer was coupled with or contained in it a challenge. Jesus was not going to merely answer questions about religion and pass on good intellectual content. That was not the better bread. Jesus was not willing to pass on information about salvation as if it could be obtained like one was down loading a file from one computer to another. Salvation is not in information alone, but tied to faith and faith to action.

In the first instance about the number of those to find salvation, Jesus responded with a command to strive to enter the narrow gate (13:24) and connect “striving” to stopping the evil they were doing (13:27). Finally, He challenged them with the irritating truth that God would accept Gentiles as well and perhaps that some of them would supersede the place of the house of Israel (13:28-30). Just being in Jesus’ presence or taking communion was not enough (13:24). The challenges had to be accepted as well: strive to enter, cease to do evil and be open to seeing Gentiles in God’s embrace.

The other three requests for information about salvation center on the plight of the Rich Young Ruler. All the requests center on the aspect of inheriting eternal life (18:18, 21, 26). Jesus again did not merely give information. He fed the man His answer slowly. He first let the man verbalize where he had done well with the commandments about human to human interaction (the last half of the Ten Commandments) but then challenged the man to realize that peace with God also required loyalty to God. The man had another God, namely money and was challenged to remove the idol before he could come and follow Jesus.

This answer shocked those who overheard the conversation (18:26) and prompted them to question who could possibly be saved if the rich could not be saved. Jesus’ answer was again to challenge them to move beyond mere doctrinal information. His answer was to challenge them to realize that removing the grip of materialism required divine intervention. God had to divinely intervene in Egypt to release the Israelites from slavery and Jesus was saying some type of divine intervention like what was given to the Israelites had to be given to them (18:27). Some today are receiving divine intervention through financial reversals, loss of a job, etc.

f. The Refusal of Requests:

Like the refusal of several of the apostles’ request, Luke presented Jesus saying “no” to other requests made to Him. Like the apostles others were taught in Luke 11:11-12 that there are reasons for God not saying yes to all of our requests. Jesus will not give someone a snake if they ask for a fish. Some prayers would be inappropriate to answer in the positive.

1) The Individual Examples of Refusal to Requests.

The first example of another “no” to a request came from the story of the demoniac. This refusal of a request of the demoniac was preceded by a request from the demons that were in him. They asked Jesus to explain what their relationship was to Him: “What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God?” It was almost a challenge that quickly morphed into a request for leniency or to not be tormented. Jesus was exorcizing them from the demoniac. The ensuing dialogue does not concern our investigation of His teaching on prayer because prayer is for human beings. However, we do learn that whatever evil the demons did to the herd (whether to prevent the townspeople from hearing Jesus when they were frightened by the power of the exorcism’s results) or that He was destroying the devil’s habitation (in new bodies and thus caused them to descend to the abyss they sought to avoid), the demons could not stop the agenda of release Jesus had intended to grant to the demoniac. Jesus healed the man, put him in his right mind and restored his humanity (8:35).

It was at this juncture that the demoniac made a request to accompany Jesus. He obviously wanted to be near the source of his healing. His request is a good one and one we no doubt would have made. The request was refused. The answer to his prayer was a “no”. This is surprising in that the request, in itself, was a good one. He wanted to be near Jesus, to be near God. He did not request riches, revenge, power or prestige, but merely wanted to be near to God.

It is the Desert Fathers who remind us that all spiritual growth begins with the word “no”. This man had not been exorcized by faith; he had made no choice or exercised his will in submission to Jesus to gain the release from his demonic possession. It was a gift. Now the man was challenged to let God decide what was good and what was evil. He had to trust, by faith, that Jesus had both his best interests in mind and the authority to decide what was good and what was evil. His counter parts in Adam and Eve had chosen to usurp that prerogative and the demoniac who was now free again to choose was given the choice we are all given as human beings.

The demoniac chose to accept Jesus’ definition and accepted the challenge (8:39a) to return to his family and describe to them what God had done for him. He obeyed (8:39b) and spread the word to the whole city. The death of the herd which was filled with demons and plunged into the sea must have served as a dramatic physical proof to the demoniac that he was no longer possessed. He was free. His freedom had cost Jesus the opportunity of preaching and teaching to the city as his freedom created fear in the hearts of the other villagers. Now Jesus gave the man an opportunity to say thank you. The freed man took advantage of the opportunity that his prayer had created.

Jesus did not give him a snake or a scorpion (11:11, 12). He did not create a spiritually selfish man, but a greater man by the refusal of the man’s request. Jesus gave him the better bread. Even greater than the healing from the demons was the gift of a word from God and the man listened. He had become a son of the Torah (Deuteronomy 6:4). Jesus was teaching His disciples a great deal about answers or the lack thereof to prayer. He did not merely teach about prayer with propositional statements but also by His actions to a request.

The next five refusals all have a similar aspect to them. The request was refused and the refusal functioned as a rebuke. The first two rebuke/refusals were addressed to men who wished to join the apostolic band on their own terms (9:59, 61). The first man wanted to delay following Jesus’ command (Follow Me) because he felt he first needed to bury his father. The second man wished to delay the command (which is implied) because he first wanted to say good bye to his family. What the true reason for the man wanting to bury his father was we are not told. We are not told why saying goodbye to one’s parents is so wrong but what is clear in both stories is that their willingness to become a follower of God had limitations or attachments to it.

Jesus said no to their requests to qualify the nature of the call. We do not know what happened to these men, but they were rebuked. They were in contrast to the demoniac. That man let Jesus define what was good and what was evil in how the man did his ministry or demonstrated his loyalty to God. Jesus seemed to be teaching that prayers of commitment can be refused if we define discipleship on our own terms. They would not be well served had Jesus acquiesced to their request. They would be Christians who controlled the definition of the nature of Christianity. They would not have grown spiritually. The “no” they received could have begun a life time of discipleship in a positive manner.

Martha’s request concerning her sister Mary is another example of an individual receiving both a “no” to their request and a rebuke. In 10:40, Martha was understandably frustrated by the lack of help her sister Mary was giving her when she had a room full of rabbinical students and the rabbi Himself to feed. Mary had chosen to listen to Jesus’ words. She had chosen the better bread, the Word of God, to the good bread of hospitality. She had prioritized between two different “goods”.

Jesus’ response to Martha was rather remarkable and a good example of prayer. Jesus did not merely say “no” by refusing to get involved with the siblings’ dispute but went further. First of all, He called her by name, twice. This was not a standard answer, but a personal answer by someone who knew her name, and who knew her weaknesses. She was a worrier and Jesus confronted her with her slavery to anxiety. She had not made a wrong request. We have every right to expect others to carry their fair share of the load, but Martha was served with a better good by Jesus’ refusal of her request. What is also remarkable was Jesus gave her a reason for His refusal to chastise Mary in verse 42. He respected Martha and thus gave her the reason why Mary was not inappropriate: “Mary has chosen what is better”.

We are encouraged to ask because we will receive and to knock and the door will be opened (11:9). Martha did ask and was not rebuked for requesting but blessed by an answer that had the potential of relieving her of a plague of what seemed to be excessive anxiety. She had knocked but perhaps at the wrong door, and so Jesus opened a potential door. He gave her the option of entering a better door.

The next requests that were refused were done so because the request itself was suspect. Both refusals were also rebukes. The first instance of a wrong request was made to Jesus at a banquet in chapter 11. The setting was a tense one and a surprising one. Jesus had been teaching from the incident of an exorcism in 11:14. He had been criticized in two ways (11:15, 16) and His answer to those criticisms seemed to have satisfied a female listener (11:27). In addition, a Pharisee who heard him address the criticism (11:17-26) as well as the woman (11:28) and then the crowd (11:29-36) was so impressed he invited Jesus to dine with him in 11:37. What the Pharisee heard in all three responses were tremendous challenges, and this did not seem to put off the Pharisee. Rather, he must have been the quality of individual that saw that Jesus’ challenging words were much like the words of the prophets. His request for Jesus to dine with him was an invitation to intimacy and therefore was a sign of respect.

What Jesus did next was to deliberately startle His host by not ceremonially washing His hands before the meal. The man no doubt regarded his adoption of a rule reserved for priests in the Book of Leviticus (which was a practice in vogue among the Pharisees) as a sign of his excessive and therefore laudable devotion to the Torah. The response Jesus made was both seemingly rude and confrontational to His host. It was rude in that one does not usually insult your host’s religious associates at his own table. It was confrontational in that Jesus pronounced judgment on them using the well known prophetic phrase “Woe to you…” This phrase in the prophets indicated an indictment for disobedience to the Torah. The Pharisees certainly did not see themselves in that light. Jesus pronounces three woes on pharisaical practices and this prompted the request from the lawyers (or the Scribes or experts in Mosaic Law or in modern terminology, PhD’s in Religious studies).

A scribe or lawyer present remarked that Jesus’ pronouncements of woe against the Pharisees insulted his class as well. As scholars, the Scribes were usually much more in line with the position of the Pharisees. In essence, the scholar asked Jesus to reconsider His critique. Jesus’ response was, in essence, to refuse the man’s request. He did this by a stinging series of three more woes aimed at the lawyer or PhD’s in Bible of that day and age.

Was Jesus’ refusal to retract His critique an indication of the rudeness of God or was it an example of a loving response to prayer? In the first case, the lawyer may have benefited from the righteousness of the host. The man who invited Jesus to dinner must have been a serious follower of the Scriptures and wisely offered hospitality to Jesus whom he no doubt regarded as an insightful rabbi. Perhaps, the thanks he received for his hospitality was to be shown where his present course of devotion was taking him. He dutifully followed his tradition, but it had taken a wrong turn and Jesus wanted that man to know a higher way to follow the intent of the Giver of the Torah.

The scholar who asked for a retraction had wisely made a personal, one on one, request. He had asked, and he had received. He too was given the privilege of knowing where his devotion had been misplaced. The man was in danger of judgment and causing or contributing to the judgment of those he instructed (11:52). They were a hindrance not a blessing to their community. Jesus had attempted to bless the Pharisee. He told the man “no”. Jesus’ definition of what was good and what was evil was different than what the highly educated man thought. To be in line with God he had to receive a “no” to his highly prized points of view. The man was given ample and substantial reasons for why he was wrong (46b, 47b-51, 52). The scholars were accused of a lack of compassion on the laymen they instructed. Their hypocrisy had caused harm to others by their teaching and thus deprived people of the Word (the key). The people could not find the better bread from their teaching.

We know that their choice was different than the formerly demon-possessed man’s choice. He obeyed and took the better bread, but the religious leaders and religious scholars refused (11:53-54). Jesus had come to bring sight to the sightless, but the Pharisee refused to be those to whom the favorable year of the Lord belonged (4:19). We learn that prayer for relief from God’s displeasure is not wrong, but when we ask we will receive an answer. We will be responsible for that answer, no matter how hard it is to receive due to our felt need (8:39) or pride (11:53). We are also warned by the difference between the response of the demoniac and those who knew the Bible well. Many tortured people off the streets might wind up closer to God than those who attended Seminary (see the parable of 20:9-19).

The following chapter contains the final refusal and rebuke. Jesus had been teaching on fear in the shadow of death that hung over Him in Luke 12:1-12. His teaching was filled with courageous words to men He hoped would become like Him. Next, someone in the crowd demonstrated that he was not listening. He asked Jesus, as a Rabbi, to pronounce a judgment on an inheritance dispute in his family. Rabbis did make such judgments as the people properly understood that their knowledge of Torah gave them insight into the heart of God’s commitment to justice among humans and how to adjudicate it. This man wanted an answer to a problem and received a rebuke. This could be taken as another example of Jesus’ rudeness or as another example of His amazing kindness to a misguided man who was filled with the wrong priorities.

The man asked and he did receive. He asked for item “A”, financial justice, but received a different item or agenda. Jesus spoke about “B”, the freedom that comes when one sees this life’s possessions in the light of eternity. The man asked to receive a fair share but Jesus’ answer was to let the man know that his whole system of what was important was in need of repair. We were not told by Luke how the individual making the request responded but we do know that his request bore some fruit. Jesus took the interruption and used the change of subject by the man to address financial worries that He knew His disciples would encounter.

The man’s individual’s request (his prayer) provided the one making the request an opportunity to receive the better bread. His actual request was not granted as Jesus did not offer to interfere in the inheritance squabble. Much like with Mary and Martha and with the Scribe in the earlier chapter, their request revealed a lack in themselves. Their asking was potentially beneficial to a degree they had not even conceived of and Luke seemingly records such requests for his readers’ benefit. Prayer is a two way dialogue. Again, God is not like a vending-machine or an inanimate program that awaits the proper data entry or password. In prayer, we are talking to a Person and when we speak to a person that person can answer. Requests can lead to dialogue and the dialogue can be efficacious, but to be so it sometimes has to be turned to a different agenda.

The final negative answer to a request made to Jesus in Luke is found in 19:39 where the Pharisees told Jesus to rebuke His disciples because of their words of praise: “Blessed is the King who comes in the Name of the Lord; Peace in heaven and glory in the highest.” Jesus’ refusal to stop such words could be interpreted as an example of His need for praise and lack of humility. It could also be interpreted as another example of a wrong request.

Jesus’ response is to say they are in tune with all of reality and nature herself would cry out if they became silent. If the Pharisees present at the occasion had gone home and contemplated Jesus’ response it could have led them to see that they had witnessed the fulfillment of prophecy and the hopes of their nation. They could have seen that they had missed the chance to rejoice in the presence of their true King. They could have been led to repentance and therefore to life. To not have answered in the way that Jesus did would have been to shut off that avenue of their redemption.

Finally, it appears that God will not listen to prayers by religious leaders who do not understand the enthusiasm of some of Jesus’ followers. He was teaching leaders that God understands things better than we do. God will not accept certain requests that are made if the granting of that request would violate what is truly appropriate. Perhaps, what is truly appropriate is only seen with a determined humility to listen to others besides those of our own class and persuasion. Almost every revival in the past century where we have extensive records shows that the enthusiasm of the new converts was found offensive to the religiously established.

2) Summary of Refusals to Requests.

I still vividly remember coming home in the 8th grade and going into the garage attached to our house and throwing my baseball cleats against the wall. I yelled loud and bitterly: “Thanks God!” I had just been “cut” from the Junior High School baseball team, and I was devastated. My hopes and dreams had been crushed. Playing on that team was my ticket to social acceptance. I thought that if I was on that team then I would join the ranks of the “inner circle” of the more popular students at school. God had let me down. God had refused my request. God was a poor manager of the universe. I am sure others have thought the same about Jesus in their encounters with Him.

In each of these cases we the reader are allowed to see by Luke (sometimes only after reflection) that the requests were denied with good reason. The demoniac needed to obtain a greater good, the men wishing to join Jesus needed to learn what it meant to truly follow God lest they become phony, and Martha needed to perceive she was consumed with anxiety. Jesus would have had to deny the truth to acquiesce to the request of the scholar in chapter 11, and Jesus would have been reduced to a genie if the unhappy man in chapter 12 had got his way on finances, which would have left him with a bankrupt view of life. Then Jesus would have had to deny the truth of the situation of His Triumphal Entry in Jerusalem in chapter 19 if He had done as the Pharisees asked. These texts seem to say it would be illegitimate to answer some prayers and God will not do that as Luke 11:11-12 tells us. Instead, what the refusals show us is that Luke 11:13 is part of a valid prayer life. What we need is the best, not something that would be wrong or would harm us. What we need is the Spirit of God, the better bread (11:13), a true life in line with God or being filled with His Spirit. His very vitality, His Spirit, needs to be inside of us.

What dominates the refusals to requests made to Jesus is not a lack of concern but reveals a deep concern for the betterment of the one making the request. It was not a rejection of these people but actually an attempt to bless them. The demoniac of chapter 8, the candidates for discipleship in chapter 9, Martha in chapter 10, the scholar in chapter 11, the disgruntled inheritor in chapter 12 and the Pharisees of chapter 19 were all granted an opportunity to obtain something better than what they asked for. The “no” was an opportunity for growth, for a higher agenda than what they had originally sought, but the gains could only be seized by handling the refusal of their requests. The refusal of one’s request to God in prayer is an opportunity that would lead to greater blessing than what we sought.

The gains were significant: the opportunity to be God’s prophet to your people in chapter 8, to understand the true nature of the discipleship that they sought to obtain in chapter 9, to conquer a crippling weakness in chapter 10, to see the error of your spiritual trajectory in and thus be saved from spiritually destructive actions in chapter 11, to realign one’s whole value system in a crucial area in chapter 12 and to be open to the reality of God’s active work in their very midst which they had missed in chapter 19. These are not minor gains and would be accessible only by God’s refusal to their prayers.

What these examples all contain is a challenge. It is hard to receive a “no” to what we truly perceive as a good thing. It takes effort to overcome the natural revulsion of what we perceive as “jilted by God”. Such experiences demand a decision on the part of the individual that is refused. It appears that the demoniac and Martha took advantage of the situation the refusal presented to them and others did not. What inward mountains must be conquered is also significant. In a real sense a destruction of one’s false pride was necessary.

However, there was another aspect to each of these incidences. There is an element of risk involved. They had to risk losing something they perceived as valuable and what is more they risked the loss of what they perceived as safety. The demoniac had to overcome the loss of the safety and acceptance that Jesus’ physical presence represented to him. The discipleship candidates of chapter 9 had to give up their control of how they perceived the cost of discipleship. They truly would lose such control by letting Jesus define the terms of their following after Him. In Martha’s case she had to conquer sibling rivalry, her anxiety and her need to define the roles of others in her own pressing needs. In chapter 11 the scholar would have to leave the safety of his colleges and tradition. He had to leave the safety of his perception of what was theologically correct. In chapter 12 the man who wanted Jesus to see that he got the fair share of the inheritance had to leave his perception of what was important and had to leave the world’s perception of the safety and happiness that wealth would bring. To some degree the challenge to the Pharisees in chapter 19 was similar to the scholar in chapter 11, but perhaps with the added nuance of accepting that those less educated than them had perceived a truth they had missed.

In my own case, my being “cut” from the baseball team was later seen in a different light. I was on my way to being captive to the expectations and shallow view of life so many students of that age group experience. I was on my way to seeing God as a convenient helper to get what I wanted out of life. I did not want God to be God, but I was a god, who wanted divine help to advance my life. I was on my way to typical shallow and therefore false Christianity. It was a view of the Christian faith so false that I would no doubt have rejected it for what it was in due time. God was merciful and loving and gave me the “better bread”. He said “no”.

In the next few months God began to come in powerful ways to claim His son. I was shown that I was heading towards hell and before the year was over I had been powerfully brought back to God. It was a painful ordeal both in the rejection from the baseball team and the terrifying look into my future. However, it was not long after, from a heart of gratitude, I thought of those words: “Thanks, God!” I said them again with a deep smile on my face.

2. Request of Intercession.

There are several passages in the Gospel of Luke that contain requests that come not from individuals attempting to gain something for themselves but for others. In some circles this is called the great prayers of “intercession”. We pray not for ourselves but for others. Some think this the safest of prayers if one wishes to remain spiritually healthy. In four examples of this behavior in Luke people received what they asked for. Perhaps, such requests are better because some of our selfishness is gone.

All of the examples are group efforts and three of them are both effective and are praised. The men who carried the paralyzed friend to Jesus and destroyed Jesus’ teaching session as well as destroyed private property were perceived by Jesus as having faith in chapter 5. Twice in the opening story of Luke 7 Jesus agreed to come or not to come to the home of the Centurion who was concerned for the welfare of his employee. The Centurion, Jesus claimed, had greater faith than anyone in all of Israel (7:10). Later in Luke 7 in the story of John the Baptist dealing with his doubt of Jesus’ identity as the messiah, John’s request was mediated by his two disciples. They sought an answer for another and received more than what they asked for. They got a remarkable answer for John. In addition, they garnered remarkable praise for their teacher (unbeknownst to them as they had already left) when Jesus turned to the crowd and praised John in a great series of rhetorical questions. He then concluded with His pronouncement of John as being greater than any man born (7:28).

There is one remaining example in chapter 8 when the crowd tried to help Jesus’ family members gain access to Him. What they received was insight into their own acceptance into His true family. These intercessors in the crowd were blessed in their attempt to bless Jesus’ family. All of the other cases carry this theme that blessing comes on the one praying as well as the one prayed for. The men carrying the paralyzed man learned the majesty of Jesus’ ability to forgive sins, the Centurion was awakened to the majesty of God’s power and the knowledge of what true faith was because of his concern for a slave and the men who carried the message to John had the opportunity to perceive the very fulfillment of the great prophecies of Isaiah.

Jesus was an intercessor as well. He prayed for Peter in Luke 22:32 and for His persecutors in 23:34 and thus mirrored the prayer life of the Old Testament greats: Abraham, Moses, David, Nehemiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel. This aspect of prayer does not dominate Luke’s presentation of prayer but it is significantly present.

3. Questioning Jesus: or Questioning God.

a. Expressing Doubt or Questioning God’s Knowledge.

There is a surprising body of texts in Luke that express doubt or question Jesus and they have their complements in the other four Gospels. The majority of these texts were not sincere questions asked of Jesus, but questions of criticism or questions that attempted to test or foil Jesus. To view these statements as examples of prayer is unusual, but these speeches were examples of talking to Jesus and therefore could be a model for interaction with God. This is especially significant if one focuses on how Jesus (and therefore by extension how God) responded. Before we go into these texts there are three questions that could be said to be on the border between questions and requests: 5:5, 7:19, 20 and 9:13.

The first of these is a question from Peter to Jesus in 5:5 when he was asked to do what he believed was unreasonable. Jesus told him to put out his nets again after he had fished all night and caught nothing. No doubt Peter believed he knew his own craft and his questioning of Jesus was more a statement of protest but followed by acquiesce. Peter called Jesus “Master” and told Jesus that they had worked all night without any positive result but since He asked they would do it. The response was that their fishing efforts were tangibly blessed and they gained in a physical manner an understanding of Jesus’ connection with the divine.

The second example, in 7:19 and 20, is when John the Baptist’s followers expressed John the Baptist’s doubt with the question: “Are you the One or do we look for another?” The question verbalized John’s confusion but did not meet with a negative response from Jesus. Jesus told the men asking the question in John’s behalf to look at what He was doing and then instructed them to quote John a text from Isaiah. We do not know how John understood or received the answer, but we are told that Jesus began to praise John extensively (see 7:24-27 and especially 7:28) when the two men left.

The final example is an implied question by the disciples in 9:13, but it takes the form of giving Jesus information He needed to know. The intent was to help Jesus realize the ridiculousness of His command: “You give them something to eat”. They told Him of their lack of adequate resources (a few loaves and fish to feed a crowd of thousands). They were tired and Jesus’ command frustrated them, and they let Him know what they felt. His response was to give them an easier command, which was to seat the crowd in groups of fifty. Then He performed a miracle by breaking the few food items they had and having the disciples distribute them until the enormous crowd was fed.

In all three examples Jesus’ knowledge or perception was challenged or questioned, and yet it resulted in a miraculous blessing in Peter’s case, a powerful statement of praise in John the Baptist’s case, and an extensive miracle in the case of the disciples. It seemed that Jesus did not mind honest questions or honest expression of doubt or frustration. These texts are very similar to the laments in the Book of Psalms, which are clearly encouraged. God understands our limitations as we are tied to this earthly life and are supposed to be reasonable. The people questioning or doubting are sincere and are open to further communication and dialogue.

This openness is missing in the texts dealt with below. The people making these statements are of a more caustic frame of mind and thus the questions are not made to receive an answer that could lead to a positive exchange.

b. Questions Designed to Voice Criticism or Test Him.

1) Rhetorical Questions by Closed Minds.

The first of these questions from a negative tone have seldom been seen as models of prayer because we as believers from our advantage see how wrong those who questioned Jesus were. Jesus was God and “those” people during Jesus’ life time were wrong. If, however, we take seriously other texts as a guide for our present interactions with God then these too should be used as such. Often, we today in the believing community, have real doubts about God, especially before we have committed ourselves to Him and especially when we first encounter His presence. Early in His ministry Luke recorded that Jesus was asked a series of rhetorical questions that called into question either His person or His actions.

The first rhetorical question was asked by the crowd during Jesus’ first sermon in Luke 4:22. They were shocked, maybe even impressed, that such gracious words could come from a simple carpenter’s son. They did not question Jesus directly but talked about Jesus. As the story progressed we notice that their relationship to Jesus did not improve but went down hill. If they were impressed at first, any positive regard they had for Him due to His speaking skills, changed to outright anger because of what He proceeded to say. He basically called their attention to the fact that the God of the Bible was the God of all people and would favor the non-churched over the churched (the non-Israelite over the Israelite) if the latter did not have faith. Their understanding of God’s exclusive attachment to the believing community was wrong. In contrast to their point of view, Jesus was very much in line with what the stories of the Pentateuch or the preaching of the Prophets recorded. Their opening rhetorical question gained nothing. If we talk about God, even if we speak positively about Him, but do not speak directly to Him, when He begins to speak further about our lives we might close down. A distant rhetorical question has to be followed by remaining open to what He wants or we could be affronted by what God says. The skeletons we have in our mental/spiritual closets would remain, and the result could be similar to this story’s outcome.

All the other rhetorical questions Luke recorded in Jesus’ early ministry came from religious leaders of that day. Jesus seemed to have behaved outside of what they considered to be the proper boundaries of piety. He ate and drank with sinners (5:30), did not stress fasting enough (5:33), did not honor the Sabbath to their satisfaction (6:2 and 6:7) and seemed to take on the prerogatives of deity by pronouncing forgiveness of sins (5:21 and 7:49).

Jesus responded to their questioning of His behavior even though it was not always directed towards Him in person. In the first five questions He gave brilliant answers that gave them the means to figure out logically on their own that His behavior was not only acceptable but it contained the seeds to understand God’s true will and where the basis of true piety was to be found. In the final question of 7:49 the religious leaders were ignored but that was because Jesus saw the situation demanded that He not defend Himself or instruct them because of the vulnerable state of the prostitute in their midst. What all six situations have in common is that those questioning Him did not seek to learn or question His behavior with an open mind. They had already made up their minds. The result was that they were left without edification. This could be true of some prayers made today.

This seems to bring up a major theme Luke wished to portray. Luke wanted us to see that the attitude present in one who questions God was extremely important. If we truly question God because we are genuinely baffled we can gain much. If we come with a preconceived mind set that will not allow discussion as to whether our own perception can be challenged then we are set up to miss anything God wishes to say to us.

They could have learned much that would have enriched and deepened their understanding and brought them to a position much closer to what is in the Old Testament. Their present views were impoverished views that did not reflect the spirit of their sacred texts. On the Sabbath issue, they did not see that people were more important than rules. Numerous stories in the books of Samuel or the Pentateuch reveal such a view. In the fasting issue they did not perceive the rule behind the rule as fasting in and of itself has no meaning. The prophets were constantly bringing to mind the importance of motive, even on fasting itself (i.e. see Isaiah 58). On the issue of dealing with others who had bad reputations or had made mistakes they clearly did not ponder correctly the story of Jacob in Genesis or the metaphor in Ezekiel 33:10-20. On the issue of forgiving sins the Pharisees had every right to be defensive and wary of what Jesus seemed to claim. A man does not forgive sins. However, there was an attesting miracle in chapter 5 following their questions and the woman certainly had repented in Luke 7 and so to pronounce her sins as forgiven following repentance is what the Old Testament Scriptures stress.

2) Questions that are Tests, not real Questions.

There are a series of questions asked of Jesus that do not come from a sincere desire to learn or grow but rather to stop the disturbing probing of their religious practices and views. These words spoken to Jesus were not always in question form, but were certainly calling into question Jesus’ views on their behavior. This seemed to show the reader that this negative attitude was present in those who claimed to be followers of true Israelite piety.

An example is found in Luke 16:14. Jesus had just taught on the dangerous trap of letting money become their God and the Pharisees were lovers of money and so scoffed at His teaching. His response was disturbing and no doubt devastating for them to hear. It basically spoke of their eternal damnation in the story of the “Rich man and Lazarus”. In this instance Jesus forcefully responded to their criticism and questioning of His views (as evidenced by their scoffing when He spoke of finances in 16:1-13). He did not get angry nor try to punish them for their opposition, but He did let them know how and why they were wrong (16:15-18) and why they needed to adjust their views (16:19-31).

There is a direct question in Luke 17:20 where the Pharisees asked Him when the Kingdom of God was coming. Their desire is unclear. It might have been a partially sincere question or it could have been to trap Him and to draw Him into articulating His views in such a way as to open Him up to charges of unorthodoxy. What was remarkable was that His answer was tremendously insightful. They asked “when” the Kingdom of God was coming, and He responded that the Kingdom of God would not come with signs that could be observed or in a specific physical locality, but would be “in them”. The kingdom or reign of God was to be in their hearts.

We the readers are not told how they responded. They did not ask follow up questions, and it appears they were not interested in spiritual insight but only in obtaining a statement that could be used against Him. The Pharisees seemingly rejected His teaching so Jesus began to teach the disciples on this subject.

In Luke’s Gospel, the first “test” came in Luke 6:7 where the man with the withered hand was present on a Sabbath day and this Sabbath test was repeated in 14:1-4. In these two cases (as also in 13:10-17) Jesus’ view of healing on the Sabbath disturbed them, and they thought to trap Him in some display of behavior they could hold against Him. His response that compassion for human suffering trumps a quasi-legalistic view of Sabbath law did not impress them. Although they did not formally question Jesus in all three cases they implied a questioning of His behavior. In all three cases they were left unsatisfied. In the stories above they lacked an openness of mind that left them in their impoverished position.

The testing took other forms than Jesus’ view of the Sabbath. Jesus was questioned in Luke 10:25 about His view of obtaining eternal life. Jesus passed the test brilliantly but the man only followed with a weak question about who was his neighbor and then followed that with a weak answer avoiding saying the word “Samaritan” because to do so would go against his preconceived ideas of the status of Samaritans. In chapter 11:14-16 the testing was about His giving them a sign and His disturbing power over demons. In chapter 20:2, it was the issue of His criticism of their misuse of the Temple and their refusal to answer counter questions in 20:7. This interchange again demonstrated their refusal to be logically engaged in an open minded discussion. If they had an openness to look at the issue rationally, it could have lead to their salvation. In 20:19-22 the testing was about paying taxes and in 20:27-33 it was on a more partisan religious debate concerning resurrection. Finally, He was questioned in His trial in 22:64 and 22:67 about His being the Messiah or the Son of God. In all of these cases He had disturbed their religious viewpoint, and they questioned Him. But the speaking with Him did not lead to them getting better. Their interchange with Jesus or if you please, their interchange with God was not fruitful. Not all prayer is helpful. Luke showed us not all dialogue or interaction with Jesus was a spiritually fruitful experience.

There was one question asked of Jesus that challenged His identity, and Jesus’ response was listened to and heard. The question was posed by Pilate: “Are you the King of the Jews?” Jesus’ response was brief: “You have said so.” Pilate saw clearly that what he was looking for (a leader of a political rebellion to Roman rule) was not represented by the prisoner before him. He listened to Jesus and then pronounced to the multitudes and the religious leadership that Jesus was innocent. Pilate was an example of someone who honestly questioned God and so heard an answer from God (which he received and accepted). He then made a good decision based on the answer he obtained. The only sad thing was that as the situation continued Pilate’s good and proper resolve was tested and as the testing endured and became more intense Pilate’s resolve caved in. It is perhaps, instructive that when Pilate received his answer and made his decision he should have followed through. Instead he sought a way out by transferring Jesus’ case to Herod’s court. If we receive an answer from God through prayer we need to quickly act on it. The quick action could help us to keep our resolve. We are held responsible to stay the course. “No man who puts his hand to the plough and looks back is worthy of the Kingdom of God”.

There are five final prayers to God, or speeches to Jesus that complete this type of interchange between people and Jesus. What characterizes all five of these episodes, in part, is that the type of response they received was similar. The response to their question was silence.

There are speeches made to God today (as in all ages) that are similar to the statements in these stories. Such prayers meet with no answer but only the silence of heaven. The prayers like these today have a similar attitude that matches what was recorded by Luke. Luke gave us five examples of people questioning Jesus and receiving no answer but the questions had an aspect of taunting or disrespect to them.

The first question given to us by Luke was on the lips of the soldiers who had a hold of Jesus in 22:64. They blindfolded Him and struck Him and then asked Him to tell them by prophetic ability who had struck Him. He answered nothing. Herod, the one who killed John, questioned Jesus at length but again total silence reigned till Herod gave up. To Herod it seemed a game and Luke recorded (23:8) he had hoped to see a sign or a miracle. The entire time Herod’s questioning was taking place the chief priests and scribes intensely denounced Him. When Herod encountered Jesus’ refusal to respond, Herod and his troops followed suit with the Temple soldiers and treated Jesus with contempt and mocked Him (23:9-11).

The final three speeches to God by those who questioned with a sneer are by the religious leaders in 23:35, the soldiers in 23:36-37 and one of the thieves on the cross in 23:39. All taunted Him to come down from the cross and save Himself. In all three cases they asked Him to prove His messianic validity. He had faced such challenges before and had answered the Devil in 4:12: “Do not put the Lord your God to the test.” While on the cross His answer to these statements was silence. When our own attitude is one of demand and taunt there is nothing God can meaningfully say to us. Time and maybe sorrow (8:3-8) will have to pass before any real dialogue can be possible.

It appears that the condition of the soil (8:3-8) or the condition of the heart of the one speaking to Jesus will in part determine the efficacy of prayer. Some of the questioning was answered brilliantly but the answer went unheeded and some questioning was greeted by silence because it was filled with contempt. Some of our frustrations with Jesus or God’s actions do not suit our preconceptions of what God should be doing. We can pose our questions and they will be answered but always the questioning has to be done with an open mind. The above texts are all examples of soil that is hard (8:5) and Pilate is an example of soil that starts well but was shallow or got chocked by the cares of this world (8:6-7). It is only the three questions of Jesus’ actions that were made sincerely (5:5, 7:19-20 and 9:13) that led to fuller and deeper relationship to Jesus. Though these three sound so similar to the questioning in other texts the result was so dissimilar. They were good soil (8:8).

4. Other: Higher Ground and Giving Information.

a. Interaction not Ritual:

There is another group of texts that record interchanges between Jesus and various individuals who approached Him. They involve episodes recorded between Jesus and a variety of people. The majority of the recorded interchanges are with the disciples, but it also included religious leaders, unnamed women, a crowd member, a Samaritan leper and Zacchaeus. As we look at these they do have an underlying theme or aspect to them.

Some of these interactions were between people who were positive in their orientation towards Jesus. There were the women in Luke 23:27 that wept and mourned in sympathy as Jesus trudged towards the cross. He did respond to their sympathy. It may seem odd to offer God sympathy but from our limited point of view we naturally feel bad for God as He is often denigrated in the press or has His Name used as a cuss word. Jesus’ response is instructive. We are not to weep for God, but for ourselves because of the coming judgment that we will experience or our children will experience because of what our society (like those in Jerusalem did) does to God. Earlier in chapter 19:38 the crowd responded to Jesus with praise. It was accepted as 19:40 lets us know that it was correct to praise God because of His presence. There was also the positive response of the Samaritan leper who in 17:16 received healing and then came back to Jesus and offered thanks. Jesus’ response was to articulate two things. First, He rebuked the other 9 lepers who did not offer thanks stating that this non-member of the Jewish community (church of that day) was more appropriate and polite than those of the believing community. Second, He gave the man a further gift. He gave him insight into what he had done in the eyes of God. He was told to go his way and he had learned of his part in his healing: his faith had saved him. What the leper did was appropriate just like the crowd in 19 and the women in 22. It was also appropriate that Zacchaeus declared his obedience to Torah by giving to the poor and paying back the appropriate penalty that the Law prescribes for harming another financially (Exodus 22:1). Here too the man received more. He was told that he and his whole household had received salvation and then went on in the following verses to use Zacchaeus’ actions as a springboard for declaring His mission on earth (19:11-27).

All of these people were positively disposed towards Jesus and communicated that to Jesus. They became examples of prayer or interaction with God. In all of these four incidences they received a response. Prayer in Luke, (and talking with Jesus), seems to be not the recitation of formal religious phrases. Luke recorded people speaking not the language of prayer but articulating genuine sympathy, praise or thanks. It was rewarded with a response that contained insight into what could bless them. They learned about God or His plans, His evaluation of their actions or their future. What was modeled here was not a formal religious exercise but an exchange.

There was another comment made to Jesus in 13:31 by some of the Pharisees that was intended to scare Jesus into leaving their area. They gave Jesus information and told Him that Herod wanted to kill Him. This did not seem to be the case (see 9: 9 or 23:8) and the response of Jesus was to call Herod a fox. Jesus refused to be intimidated. He focused on His own agenda and thus would not respond to threats. However, after articulating His freedom from such threats He surprisingly predicted His own coming death. He opened up His heart and predicted His passion (13:33-35). He also predicted the danger that lay ahead for Jerusalem because of their attitude. This is similar to the situation recorded in 20:16 when Jesus told a parable to the leadership that clearly indicated that they would be judged for refusing to acknowledge God’s Sovereignty. They did respond, “May it never be”, but He continued to follow up with a quotation from the Psalms that assured them of their coming doom (20:17-18). Their rejection of His prediction did not stop judgment.

Again, the interaction was just that, interaction. When we pray we are speaking to someone and should be ready for a response. As negative as these two responses were they were responses. It seems that only ritual prayers do not receive a response. Perhaps that type of prayer is not real prayer at all.

b. Higher Ground:

Luke recorded a series of interactions with Jesus that could be viewed under the rubric of moving someone to higher ground. These interchanges took place both with the disciples and with others who approached Him and spoke with Him. People often approached Jesus, and He saw that the level of exchange was not leading toward a place of constructive change or redemption. With the disciples it was often a matter of taking them to a higher agenda than the one they were stuck on.

1) In Luke 9:57 someone said to Jesus: “I will follow you wherever you go.” The person had seemingly made the best of all possible responses to Jesus. They had prayed the perfect prayer. Jesus’ response was unsettling, as He almost seemed to be dissuading the person from discipleship. He told the man animals and birds have homes but the Son of Man has no such refuge. The world is littered with people who made grand professions of faith not realizing the cost involved. Jesus wanted to take them to a higher agenda that helped them see that good intentions were not enough. Nothing clears the mind better than a good look at potential lack of comfort. To be a disciple one had to go outside of one’s comfort zones and enter into realms where the individual is no longer in control. It seems to be a constant process. Peter had to leave his employment and was promised further insecurity and lack of control in John 21:18 with Jesus’ prediction of his future: “…when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.” As Jesus did with Peter in John 21, Jesus in Luke 9 elevated the man’s understanding of the cost of discipleship. In this particular situation it was what this particular individual needed.

In 11:27 a woman listened to Jesus’ answer to a difficult challenge in 11:17-26. His answer was brilliant and assuming she was an insightful person she was impressed. She gave an understandable response for that culture. His good performance was a positive reflection on his parents and so her statement to Jesus reflected that: “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.” Again His response was startling as He responded: “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”

It could be that her word of praise was again the perfect prayer: praise of Jesus and therefore praise of God. Technically, this is an appropriate prayer, but that prayer by that woman to God was inadequate. Perhaps, for much of her life she had been inspired and then verbalized her approval. She had basically said: “Amen”. However, just merely verbally agreeing with the truth is not enough. Perhaps this is similar to people who clap after the speaker has preached but do little to implement what they heard in their lives. It has to be acted upon and so Jesus’ response to her speech to Him was to challenge her to act on what she heard. The truly blessed person is one who hears and obeys. He wanted her religious response to move to a higher plane.

Verbalization of proper religious sentiment as in 14:15 would fall into the same vein as the woman’s statement. In that situation a man had heard Jesus’ challenging words about inviting the poor to dinner. His response to Jesus was to appear to take the discussion to a higher, spiritual plane: “Blessed are those who will eat at the feast in the kingdom of God.” Essentially the man was saying that fellowship with God, which is what a banquet or meal implied, was the greatest position of intimacy obtainable. Again, this seemed like a verbalization of high spiritual priorities. This man too made a perfect prayer. Jesus’ response was to tell a parable about a banquet given by a man who sent out many invitations. The guests made excuses and did not attend so the host went and invited what we would consider today to be rabble or the homeless. His parable seemed like a slap in the face to the man who professed that true blessing went to those who attended the banquet of God in His Kingdom. Jesus seemed to be saying, “O, but maybe you will not even use your opportunity.” Being invited is not enough one must actually act on the invitation. This man might have been used to saying pious religious statements, and Jesus called him on it. Perhaps we have all made too many pious religious statements that we did not really mean. This response by God is disturbing.

In 13:1, we do not know the name of the persons present in the crowd but we do learn that they informed Jesus about a current event. Pilate had killed some people, and they were possibly seeking either condemnation of Pilate or condemnation of those Galileans whose actions got them killed. Jesus again surprised them and began to tell them that if they did not repent they would suffer brutal judgment themselves. Perhaps, we often want to discuss the religious implications of current events but that does not necessarily get us closer to God or His will. Personal repentance for our own sins would make possible spiritual gains much more efficiently than discussing the errors either of fellow believers or non-believing politicians. Jesus was seemingly rude but His direction if followed would have advanced His hearers in obtaining true favor with God.

Finally, in 20:39 the Pharisees complimented Jesus on His answer to their theological rivals the Sadducees on the issue of eternal life and the doctrine of the resurrection with the response: “Well said, teacher!” Often our prayers are filled with affirmations of good theological truths. We say, “Amen” to good doctrine. Jesus’ response to their acceptance of His view of the resurrection was surprising.

He told a riddle based on Psalm 110 that pointed by metaphorical reference to His divine status. His use of the Psalm was vague but not what followed in 20:45-47. It assured the Pharisaical audience that more was needed than correct doctrine on this hot topic under debate in the religious community. He flatly insulted them. He said they sought respect and honor and made lengthy prayers but would be punished because they hurt the weak. Good doctrine was not a high enough agenda to bring one to a proper relationship with God. For these men, the issue was their lack of taking care of the poor. They were theologically correct but unredeemed.

In all five of these responses Jesus was anything but pleasant. True prayer, actually speaking with God (as opposed to lengthy prayers: 20:47) will bring a response from God. The response they heard was not welcomed. Perhaps, we make prayers and say religious statements and God is speaking back but we dismiss it (as they dismissed Jesus’ words) because we do not like what was said. These people did not know they were speaking to God, but God was speaking to them. Perhaps, God is speaking to us and we do not hear. Perhaps, bad news is good news if we can but recognize it. It was once said: “If you are being convicted in church, be glad, at least God is still talking to you.”

There are a number of prayers made by the disciples that partake of this similar theme of moving them to a higher ground or to a higher and therefore efficacious agenda. In all of these passages, Jesus was moving them up to a better place. He wanted to give them the better bread. He was not uniformly rude or trying to play “spiritual one-up-men-ship”. He truly wished to bless them more fully.

In 9:10 and 10:17 the disciples gave an account of their successful ministry experience. He did not disparage their efforts but in the one case the pressure of the crowd was used by Jesus to push them even further in understanding the possibilities of God’s ability to use them. They had done healings by prayer earlier in chapter 9, and then He challenged them to feed, by a different type of miracle, the large crowd (9:13). He seemed to be complimenting them for a master teacher only challenges his best students to go higher after they have accomplished some degree of competence. In 10:17, He rejoiced with them and even let them know that their work had cosmic significance (10:18). Then He reassured them of their safety in such dangerous encounters with demonic forces and then showed them the real place of safety and of success: being rightly related to God. He taught them that their true source of joy was not in ministerial success but that they were in His book (10:20). Then in typical fashion He went further and spoke of the true nature of His relationship to His Father and some of what that implied (10:21-24).

Is it a model for proper prayer to tell God about how well we have done His work? It seems rather arrogant to tell God of our success, but maybe this is a valid model of prayer because we think it whether or not we say it consciously to God. He knows what we think, and He is not afraid of our success. The text seems to encourage such thought. Perhaps, we should ask Him about our ministry and speak to Him about it knowing that He will respond and bless us further as long as we are willing to keep learning. It could lead to a freedom from the tyranny of the constant pressure to succeed.

Peter Verbalizing His Faith

Luke gave us several examples of Peter verbalizing his beliefs. He was speaking to Jesus and therefore to God and doing something we often do in our public prayers. We pepper our prayers with confessions of faith. In 9:19-20, Jesus asked who they thought He was. Peter answered that Jesus was the anointed one of God: the Messiah. In 9:33, Peter had experienced the transfiguration of Jesus and was allowed to view Elijah and Moses. His response was to let Jesus know that he appreciated this high honor and then offered to build three shrines in their honor. In 18:28, Peter declared to Jesus his past obedience to Him in the financial realm. Finally, in 22:33, Peter offered to go to prison or to die for Jesus. All four seemed to be examples of good prayers: confessing Jesus as the Messiah, offering to honor God because of a religious experience, affirming financial commitments to God’s ministry or being willing to suffer or be a martyr for Christ’s honor. All four were no doubt valid expressions of what Peter truly believed.

Jesus’ responses to these verbalizations were interesting. He gave the better bread in all four cases. To Peter’s confession of faith, Jesus expanded Peter’s knowledge of what the true messianic mission entails: the cross (9:21-22) and expanded Peter’s knowledge of what true discipleship meant (9:23-27). He took Peter higher. In the offer to build a shrine after the theophany or the experience of the transfiguration a cloud over shadowed them and Peter was told: “This is my Son, whom I have chosen: listen to him” (9:35). This was in the context of what Elijah, Moses and Jesus were discussing about the future events to take place in Jerusalem (the cross). In 18:28, Peter’s past performance was not denigrated but rather responded to by expansive promises of reward (18:29-30). You cannot out-give God. However, Jesus then took Peter back to the cross and reminded the disciples of the difficulty and further suffering that lay ahead (18:31-33). Peter and the other disciples were clueless as to what He meant (18:34). Finally, in Peter’s profession of loyalty, he was contradicted and told of His coming failure (22:34). It was not the only thing Jesus said to Peter as Jesus gave a word or promise of hope in 22:32, but Jesus was taking Peter into a higher knowledge of himself. Peter would fail and that failure would, in the long run, strengthen him. It was also comforting and challenging to be aware that Jesus always knew who Peter was. Jesus saw Peter’s actual spiritual incompleteness but still had high hopes for his future.

In all of these four episodes Jesus took statements, which were good in themselves, and used them as a launching pad for a higher agenda. Jesus gave Peter the better bread. As good of a condition as Peter was in, Jesus took him higher. Jesus opened up to him the centrality of the cross; the highest agenda of all in looking at both the actions of God and of the pentacle of discipleship. The higher view of discipleship was to see one’s task of bearing the cross. All of this was begun when Peter spoke with Jesus. The event of prayer was understood by Luke as a dialogue between persons not merely the speaking of humans to God. It was a two-way communication. Our prayers open the door for such an exchange to take place.

Four Rebukes

We end our investigation with four statements made by the disciples to Jesus: Peter, John, two of the disciples at the Lord’s Supper and finally two disciples on the road to Emmaus. They were all statements that elicited a rebuke or correction.

In chapter 22:35-37, after the Lord’s Supper, Jesus attempted to prepare His disciples for the coming storm that His arrest would create in their lives. He knew that some of their protection would be taken away. In their experience as His disciples so far He had never allowed them to be directly attacked but bore the brunt of criticism (i.e. 6:1-5), the death threats (6:11, 11: 53-54), the attacks on His views, etc. Something new was to begin. He was going to be taken from them and presently they would be directly attacked. He used the metaphorical comparison of not needing a bag for their travels (God would provide) to needing a bag and sword (being able to provide and protect themselves from conflict) as their situation was changing into a more dangerous one, as the Book of Acts shows. Their response in Luke 22:38: “See, Lord, here are two swords” indicated that they had misunderstood the metaphor. He told them that two swords were enough (which was hardly the case) because He chose to let it drop. No doubt He was discouraged with their lack of understanding but still took them along with Him to the Garden of Gethsemane where He would pray.

At times we do not understand what God is doing or trying to say, and it appears that it is allowable to verbalize how we see His will (as wrong and as misguided as it is). He trusts that in time the metaphor will work on our minds, and we will eventually gain proper understanding. It is comforting to know that our lack of insight and our lack of awareness when we do not understand His warnings will not disqualify us as His servants. We may suffer for it, but not be totally destroyed because He has asked on our behalf (22:32).

In Luke 9:49 we have another example of the disciples not having understanding. In this case, John did not understand the nature of Jesus’ ministry. Preceding this interchange the disciples had either failed or had displayed their lack of understanding multiple times. They lacked faith to heal the demon-possessed boy in 9:37-42, they did not understand what He had to say about His coming crucifixion in 9:43-45 and they misunderstood the nature of true power in the Kingdom of God in 9:46-48. John then reported that he had stopped the deliverance of people from the horrifying grasp of demon-possession because their exorcisms were done in Jesus’ name but not done by a member of the apostolic band.

John was articulating to Jesus, therefore articulating to God, his ministerial decisions or why he was stopping ministry to those in need. John got a response and from that response gained further insight, necessary insight, into God’s attitude toward ministries that were not under their own auspices. John was learning something about the nature of appropriate ecclesiastical control. Jesus’ response was to tell him to desist from his actions and understand that if someone was not against them, then they were for them. It is not necessary that we control all ministries, and we need not look for enemies.

It is good to tell God what we think and what we are doing and why. Of course, God already knows what we are doing and why we are doing it better than we do. John was modeling for us a valid prayer. Perhaps, telling God in prayer what we are doing and why (perhaps asking Him for input) could lead to further insight. Luke seems to indicate that Jesus would like to speak to us (a critique or further training) about our actions of ministry. Perhaps, we would feel more comfortable with asking Him for such a review. This type of prayer opens the door for dialogue, as true prayer is to partake of that. If we never talk to God about what we are doing and why we are doing it, we might not be aware consciously of what we are doing and therefore it would be harder for God to correct us.

In Luke 8:42, Luke says Jesus was surrounded and pressed upon by the crowds. He was on His way to heal the daughter of a prominent synagogue official who was at the point of death. It was here that an interruption occurred brought about by a poor sick woman. She evidently believed that if she could touch the hem of Jesus’ garments she could be healed. She was healed and her hemorrhage stopped. Jesus asked who touched Him and Peter answered. His speech to Jesus consisted of telling Jesus the obvious. Peter was clearly frustrated and told Jesus: “Master, the people are crowding and pressing against you” (8:45). Jesus responded with: “Someone touched me; I know that power has gone out from me.” Jesus then went on to deal with the woman by demanding that she come out into the open and confess what she had done. It was terrifying for her, but her terror lasted only a moment. As she recounted to the audience what she had done she learned directly from Jesus that her interruption (though it ritually defiled Him) had not angered Him. He called her “daughter” a term of endearment. He then told her how she had obtained her answer from God (it was her risk or faith that healed her), and that she and He were on good terms: she could go in peace.

In this story Peter had prayed a valid prayer. In his frustration he had lamented (51 of the 150 Psalms in the Psalter are Psalms of Lament, and in the narratives of the Old Testament people were encouraged to tell God their hurts, confusions, and frustrations). He had, without realizing it, stepped into a great Old Testament way of praying and speaking to God. His lament brought Peter into immediate involvement with what Jesus was doing. Jesus’ irritating question about who touched Him had triggered Peter’s response. Peter’s response opened the door for Jesus to respond, and that led to the woman’s confession and articulation of what had happened to her. Peter’s lament brought, as seemingly rude as it appears to us, what was necessary to both the woman’s higher well being and his own understanding. He learned how to help someone in need of healing in more than just a physical manner. She had received the better bread, and Peter now saw how to help others by watching Jesus.

Holding our frustrations from God, which He often has caused, could hold from us a valuable learning experience and limit the depth of healing that could take place for others. We should not be constantly worried about how we are perceived (even in our own eyes) but be open with God in prayer about our frustrations due to His probing.

The final example of prayer that we will look at comes from the last chapter of Luke. It took place on the road to Emmaus and was at best an unconscious prayer. The two disciples who spoke to Jesus did not know whom they were speaking to. They were prevented from recognizing who Jesus was and that He was walking in their midst. Similar to the last episode, Jesus triggered the dialogue by a question. He asked them what they were discussing as they walked along the road. They responded with a rhetorical question: “Are you only a visitor to Jerusalem and do not know the things that have happened there in these days?” Jesus responded with a follow up question by which He pretended to be unaware of recent events. This response triggered their pouring out information about the life, ministry and significance of Jesus and the more recent events surrounding the resurrection. This allowed Him to take their own words and begin to put all of their verbalized experience into perspective.

They had talked to Jesus, and thus they had prayed. Again, they had lamented and expressed their frustration to God (though they were not aware of doing so). Jesus had triggered a dialogue in which they were allowed to do the majority of the speaking. However, their words to Him brought a response: “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken!” He opened with a rebuke. They had misunderstood a lot since they had been disciples and so this was not behavior out of character for them. He continued with a rhetorical question: “Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” Then He began to show them from the Old Testament how the Scriptures were all pointing to Him. It was a window on reality.

This final example of prayer was again a dialogue where one did not just pray, but one heard. God patiently listened to them and then dignified their speech with an answer. They were confused and puzzled about their Christian experience and were encouraged to articulate it. That articulation led to their being able to see into the heart of the Old Testament and into the heart of the Gospels. They did not know they were speaking to Jesus and therefore to God, perhaps the same is true for us. As we express our frustrations perhaps we should be aware that He would like to speak back.

Prayer has to include listening. The men on the road to Emmaus heard a rebuke in the beginning. After the rebuke they were challenged to think (the purpose of a rhetorical question) and after that came the teaching that led to the key insights into all of life. If God does not speak to us in our prayers then we might not be praying true prayers at all. We could be talking to ourselves only and not to the active, powerful and decisive God that exists. He could be speaking through people we do not recognize as the voice of God, but He speaks none the less.

Sometimes, I am puzzled about what God is doing, or angry at what I think He is doing in the world. Luke would encourage us to ask Him directly or confront Him directly and then be willing to be instructed. He may speak to us and we know it is God and therefore we should listen and obey. At other times, we may not know that our verbalized anger or frustration is heard by God (as the Pharisees or on the road to Emmaus) but we should expect that the God of the universe who sees all things and hears all things will answer.

Conclusion:

Luke has been called the Gospel of Prayer and Luke seems to have modeled for us some excellent pedagogical techniques for teaching subjects like prayer or some other spiritual activity. We should teach in a straight forward manner but do so creatively. Give examples of what is good spiritual behavior (The Lord’s Prayer or model prayer) use probing, mind stretching challenges (Jesus’ use of rhetorical questions), use commands and use metaphors that we can picture in our minds or even small parables (extended metaphors). We should also pray or practice proper spiritual behavior ourselves. Others can learn by watching us and how such seasons of prayer affect our lives and the lives of others. In addition, others should be able to hear (at least at times) the content of our own prayers or our own spiritual activities.

Finally, Luke would encourage us to do the activity ourselves. People could learn from us in two ways. First, they could watch us make requests but receive answers that take us into whole different realms than what we expected. They should watch us pray for what we want, but then watch those requests become much more about opening a dialogue than ordering from a catalogue. Second, they could learn a lot about prayer by watching how we respond to their requests, questions, and proper religious statements. We could teach in an amazing way how God will respond by how we respond. If we are filled with His Spirit (11:13) we could be the message in the flesh: we could embody the nature of God.

If we are to teach like Luke has shown us Jesus taught we should teach people to speak to God about a variety of things but do so with an intense sense of humility and willingness to learn or to change the very core of our lives and some of our beliefs. We should teach that God is an active Person willing to correct us, willing to interact and speak back to us about the very things and issues that concern us. We should teach that we will not always know that what comes to us is from God but truth is truth and our minds should be mentally and logically prepared to listen to arguments and points of view that are not pleasing to hear. We would teach this the best if people could watch us confess our interactions with Him and where He has been correcting us and our theology. We should teach and portray that if we are not being regularly corrected Luke’s Gospel would indicate that God is not speaking much to us at all or if He is we are not listening. We should join with Luke and warn those we teach that great and catastrophic loss will occur if we wind up in a state of close mindedness to truth.

One final word, a great deal of Luke’s examples of people talking to Jesus is from the Pharisees or the conservative right, people like myself. Jesus agreed with their theology, but not with their hearts. So many Christians (even conservative Christians) get an idea on a religious subject but it becomes readily apparent that God has had little access to their demeanor, attitudes or disposition. Their religious views or spiritual exercises have made them like the Pharisees: full of good doctrine and full of bad behavior. They speak about God and even think they speak to God, but God has not been allowed to speak back to them. If we are not careful we can become fools and be those who have “taken away the key to knowledge”. We could become as those who have “not entered, and … hindered those who were entering” (11:52). Luke presented Jesus as loving the Pharisees and as willing to debate with them extensively, logically, and brilliantly. He loves the conservative Christians of today and our great danger and our great hope hinges on how we listen.