A Trinitarian Interpretation of Luke 7

I've been considering the interpretation of Christian Scripture lately. John Frame asserts that because truth emanates from God, truth, by nature, is trinitarian. From this, Tim Keller and Ed Clowney explain (I'm sure along with many others) that (all?) Scripture can be interpreted in three ways, directly corollary to truth's trinitarian nature. We interpret Scripture doctrinally (Father), pietistically (Son), and as restoring culture (Spirit).

I'm going to attempt applying this truth to Luke 7.

Faith—one of the significant themes in Luke, and probably the most significant, is faith. For our purposes, we will consider faith in Christ as the peak of Luke’s narrative. Luke’s seventh chapter pictures Jesus in the midst of his teaching ministry (4:14-21:38). The author gives us four events:
The Faith of the Centurion 1-10 (see 2 Kings 5)
Jesus Raises a Widow's Son 11-17 (see 1 Kings 17)
Jesus and John the Baptist 18-35 (see Isaiah 35: 5-6)
Jesus Anointed by a Sinful Woman 19-51
We must consider these four narratives in Luke 7 holistically (this approach is especially necessary, yet somewhat difficult, when attempting to study a single chapter). We need to understand how each story’s message fits this particular section of Luke, asking “what it the common thread weaving through Luke 7?”

Faith—it's not difficult discerning Luke’s theme and message of faith in Christ in Luke 7. Undoubtedly, the centurion (1-10) shows great faith in Jesus. But where is faith found in healing the woman’s son (11-16)? The woman apparently does not know that Jesus is even to attempt raising her son, so it seems a stretch to suggest that she has faith that he can. John the Baptist surely demonstrates faith (18-35), but this story suggests empirical belief more than faith. Much like the first scene, the story of the sinful woman (36-50) indeed presents faith. So this chapter bookends with stories of strong faith, and fits well into Luke's broader message. We can also see three themes specific to this chapter (though obviously not exclusive). But which one is correct?

Jesus’ authority—the four stories presented coalesce around the reality of Jesus authority, in both the spiritual and physical realms, pointing to God’s glory in salvation. Jesus shows authority over sin, sickness, and even death. Thus this chapter strongly testifies to Christ’s deity through his authority.

Jesus’ compassion—rooted in his sinlessness, Jesus' compassion for the centurion’s servant, the mother’s loss, all who are healed (and saved!) in 18-35, and for the sinful woman provides a quintessential example for the church.

Jesus’ restoring culture—this view is least comfortable in our context (conservative evangelicalism), but nonetheless, we see Jesus reaching out to the poor and oppressed with a message that all have equal worth in Christ; “the good news is preached to the poor” (22). We see Jesus accept and even commend the sinful woman, a societal outcast. In this way, we indeed see Jesus correcting a culture saturated with Pharisaism.

All three interpretations are fully correct. I summit the matrix below, arguing for a trinitarian interpretation of the passage as one meaning:
Father: the doctrine of Jesus' authority
Son: Jesus’ compassion gives an example for the pious Christian to follow
Spirit: correcting injustices and promoting equality (he promotes that all are equally unable) pictures Jesus restoring culture (source)

The Gospel Coalition provides some helpful material on this passage (here). I particularly benefited from sermons by Alistair Begg, Mark Dever, and Kent Hughes.

Semper Reformanda