Luke 9:51-56

 The Journey to Jerusalem – 1 

Conversion – Its Shape and Its Need

Context – External Opposition

Luke’s narrative to date had followed in large part the order of events of Mark’s gospel. It had dealt with the mystery of the Kingdom and had centred on Jesus’ activity in Galilee. Beginning with the following incident Luke introduced a further literary image: The Way to Jerusalem, where Jesus would deal largely with issues of personal conversion. The events and teachings would be drawn principally from Luke’s own special source and from the source that he shared also with Matthew. The actual geography of the journey was irrelevant. The incidents narrated on the way could have happened anywhere, not necessarily on any of the Galilee-Jerusalem pilgrimage routes. The way served simply as symbol of the Christian’s way through life.

Luke 9:51-56  -  Samaritans Refuse to Receive Jesus

Jesus would be raised up in two senses: he would be literally raised up on the cross, and he would be metaphorically carried up to new life through resurrection and ascension: to glory through suffering and death. (The theme of the Jesus’ ascension would be unique to Luke. The other evangelists found different ways of imaging the broader mystery of Jesus’ absence and the outpouring of his Spirit on the Church.) The ongoing conversion of the Christian disciple – the way to Jerusalem - would involve sharing in the death of Jesus as prelude to participating in the new life of resurrection and to receiving the Spirit.

Setting his face expressed powerfully the determination of Jesus, whatever the cost.

The Christian “Exodus”

In treating of Jesus’ Transfiguration, Luke mentioned that both Moses and Elijah spoke to Jesus of his coming “Exodus”: “They appeared in glory, and were discussing his exodus that would climax in Jerusalem” (verse 31).

Luke had placed the account of the Transfiguration between two different references made by Jesus to his pending death in Jerusalem, where Jesus’ death and resurrection would mark his “Exodus”. 

In the earlier one he had made the point that the disciples, too, would follow the same “journey”: “If any wish to come after me, let them deny themselves, take up their cross every day and so follow me.  Whoever wish to save their life will lose it; but whoever lose their life on account of me will save it” (verse 23-24).

In the chapters that follow, Luke would gather the sayings of Jesus that had relevance to the requirements of this journey (Exodus) to Jerusalem. Like Jesus, disciples would travel an inner journey. They would move from the closed, self-interested self, towards genuine liberation. The journey would involve authentic self-discovery and self-giving. It would climax ultimately in their discovering the heart of God. The journey would entail total commitment.

Luke’s community faced a different situation from that faced by Jesus during his life in Galilee. Jesus had hoped to bring Israel as a whole back to its authentic roots, to challenge its present structures and to call people to growth in freedom. Jesus did not succeed in this mission. In the second phase of his own public life he confronted the likelihood of failure, and so began to concentrate on the formation of his disciples who would carry his vision into the future. Luke’s community, struggling to survive in an Empire hostile to religious autonomy, had little hope of changing structures in line with the mission of Jesus. Their need was to be faithful to the spirit of Jesus and to live authentically within the constraints of their culture. With clear insight Luke developed the teachings of Jesus on the subject of ever-deeper conversion. 

The way of the disciple follows along a path of general misunderstanding and even hostility. That is its constant, even if sometimes low-key, context.

The shortest way from Galilee to Jerusalem passed through Samaria.

Samaritans were descendents of two diverse peoples:

• survivors who had been left in the southern part of the Northern Kingdom of Israel after that Kingdom’s destruction by the Assyrians in the eighth century before Christ 
• and Semitic non-Jews from other countries conquered by their oppressors. 

On the return to Judea of some Jews of the Southern Kingdom, exiled over a century later in Babylon, they had first made overtures of friendship that had been generally rebuffed; and they replied to that rejection with hostility. Mutual opposition, mistrust and contempt deepened over time, and were still strong during the lifetime of Jesus. Though Samaritans accepted the first five books of the Jewish canon, the Pentateuch, Jews tended to hate them more than they did Gentiles.

James and John mirrored the general hostile reactions of the day. Offended honour called out for retaliation. The suggestion of James and John echoed the reaction of Elijah to an officer of King Ahaziah, king of Samaria, centuries before:

Luke made no comment on the assumption of James and John that they could emulate Elijah. Perhaps they felt it part of the commission to confront evil, which Jesus had given them when he sent them on mission around the villages of Galilee.

Jesus’ response was an unequivocal condemnation of violence. Enemies might hate him: he would not hate enemies. Nor might disciples of his.

Luke did not care whether the village was still in Samaria or over the river in the Decapolis or Perea. Location was not his interest.

Next >> Luke 9:57-62