I asked my former coworker who is born-again Christian, back when the question came up about the division of the family in this passage, if it was actually about an undermining/erasure of the cultural programming to which we all are respectively privy. She most tactfully responded today:
In the first couple of verses, I believe Jesus is speaking of facing suffering on the cross and bearing the wrath of God for all humanity. This way, those who accept his bridging that gap between God and mankind will have peace with God. The division aspect comes from a greek word meaning 'disunion of opinion and conduct' - so it's similar to erasing the programming of the culture but going further to replacing it with his kingdom in our hearts as the Holy Spirit comes to dwell in/with us. I saw a lot of other worldly kingdom versus heavenly kingdom contrasts throughout the chapter.
If you enjoy tracking through the labyrinth of the "scriptures", here is a good site:
http://biblehub.com/luke/12-49.htmNote that the Directories at the top provide Verses, Translations, and Commentaries.
I always like a good whodunnit, and for that reason it might be enjoyable to parse through it all, but I suspect it's anti-climactic in the end, for non-christians as myself.
I was on the wrong track there, according to the believers. I read quite a bit of it, through the maze, and it seems that many are of the mind that the whole thing is about the spreading of the Gospels. Long story short, when I come up with my own interpretation, which I might find palatable, I find that I am in error in comparison to the prevailing, purist theories. Often, it's just as bad as it looks, and sometimes, it's even worse than it looks. ~Just my experience.
(I'll never forget pouring over the erotica of
Song of Solomon in the St. Joseph's (Catholic) Bible, in my early 30's. At the head of one of the steamier chapters, there were these words italicized, by the authorities who rendered that edition:
Christ's Love for His Church. Which struck me as absurd. So I don't know how much more seriously one can take the commentaries, over the actual text.)