Luke 5

There are an awful lot of facts presented in the Bible. They assail us in a constant flow; we find it difficult to keep the newer information in context. For instance, as being in the fifth chapter of this book, we feel confident about the status of Jesus' disciples. In Luke 5:11, after a miracle on the sea, it is said that they forsook all and followed him. But wait – weren't they already disciples?

Before the miracle, Jesus was staying in Simon's house. It was in the city of Capernaum. Jesus had preached in their Synagogue, after which, he departed to Simon's house and healed his mother-in-law – chapter four, verse thirty-eight. Before that, Jesus was in his hometown of Nazareth, and before that, Jesus was at the place where John baptized him.

According to the gospel of John, Jesus was still in that same place where John the baptist did his baptism thing. It was the day after the baptism when two of John's disciples left John to be disciples of Jesus. One of them was Andrew, Simon's brother, who went and told Simon and brought him to Jesus. We were all under the impression that it was there, at the place of baptism that Jesus accepted Simon as a disciple, naming him Peter.

However, the gospel of Luke changes that all around. No doubt, they attended the Sabbath service in which Jesus exorcised the unclean spirit. He took Jesus home with him and witnessed the miraculous healing of his mother-in-law, but still, it took the miracle of the fishing trip to make them forsake all.

Let us look a little closer. Whose ship did Jesus enter to preach? It was Simon's ship, one of two in a fishing partnership. It is a safe bet that fishing was the family business. When Simon had cast out at Jesus behest, he had been up all night fishing without success. He was tired and sleepy. Why would he go to all that trouble for a stranger? It appears that Jesus' word was good enough – indicative of experience drawn from a relationship. Perhaps the early disciples needed to fully commit.

So Simon and Andrew were disciples. There was the one other mentioned but not named from the gospel of John. What about the fishing partners? James and John were just as amazed by the miracle on the sea. That brings the number of disciples to five, with at least four of them definitely known to come from Capernaum. Then, Jesus picks up Levi in the same city. That's half his disciples from one place.

It takes but a brief perusal of available documents to see that all but one of the disciples was from that general area of Galilee. Most of them were related to each other. Bartholomew (Nathaniel) was from Cana, with a possible connection to the wedding Jesus attended, and Judas was from southern Judea near the lower end of the dead sea.

Speaking of disciples, was discipleship some willy-nilly everyday commonplace occurrence, or was it a more controlled and restricted practice? Who had disciples back then? We note this indicative question in Luke 5:33, “Why do the disciples of John fast often, and make prayers, and likewise the disciples of the Pharisees . . ?”

It seems to me that discipleship was a practice restricted to accredited religious groups and personalities. If Pharisees had disciples, was John a Pharisee? If Jesus prayed at his own baptism, after the practice of the disciples of John, was he also a disciple up til then? If discipleship was limited by accreditation, was Jesus a bonafide Rabbi of one of the accredited religious orders? Mark 5 has so much food for thought, we might have to loosen the belt.

Let us return our attention to the multitudes. Mark 5 presents the reader with a time in Jesus' early ministry in which he was swamped by literal throngs. News of him had gotten out. He was famous. People knew that he had healed infirmities, so they gathered all their sick folk and flocked to him. Even in his preaching, he had to sit in a ship that sat at a distance from the shore. On top of this, we see that many Pharisees and doctors of law had come from surrounding areas to hear him.

Luke 5:17 tells us that there were “Pharisees and doctors of the law sitting by, which were come out of every town of Galilee, and Judaea, and Jerusalem . . .” That's a lot of people. So then, how do we reconcile the fact of Jesus preaching from inside a house. Was it the house of Simon Peter? The multitudes, in their attempts to set their infirm loved ones before the healer, let them down 'through the tiling into the midst.' That speaks clearly of an interior. Perhaps Jesus sat just inside the doorway with the crowds gathered outside. Standing room only.

It is in this context that we must read the things Jesus said as he spoke to the people, and to the Pharisees, and to the doctors of the law, emphasizing the points he wished them to understand. Points like:

“They that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

“Can you make the children of the bridechamber fast while the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then shall they fast in those days.”

“No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.”

These are not stand-alone sayings, but they must be filtered by the context in which they are found. I came not to do 'this but 'that.' Why? No man puts this on that. Why was that said to these particular people at this particular time? Seekers have great minds. What would you find if you really applied yourself?