Luke vs Matt & Mark

Whoever wrote this 'Luke' section of the bible sure is better than those other hacks. This guy even has an introduction, says it's the straight dope on what was handed down by the eyewitnesses. That sure beats starting out with two pages of 'begats'.

He writes better too, with adjectives, and character development, so you can actually read this—as opposed to trudging through it with a bottle of scotch after tying yourself to a chair.

He kind of overdoes it, his characters keep bursting into song like West Side Story. Most of page 125 is Mary erupting with a speech about how her Lord is the greatest, bestest, awesomest, most ass-kickingest, do-goodingest dude EVER; then two pages later Zech goes off for twelve verses how god is gonna kick ass and take names, and his new baby's gonna be Da Man. It doesn't make much sense, but
you know it's important because it has wider margins.

Outside of that, it raises ghosts. Some lines, like “there were shepherds ... keeping watch over their flocks ...” gave me cold chills and memories of my Catholic upbringing, that I've tried hard to forget (Thanks, Luke) but it makes sense they'd quote this guy instead of the hacks. All in all, Luke looks promising.


Andy said...

I always hated all those begats.

uzza said...

You're not the only one. They're in the KJV, though, and I've got the NIV, it says "father of". Probly blasphemous.