Sunday, May 24, Anno Domini 2009
Introduction
We come today to the third of the four Gospels, the Gospel according to Luke.
I mentioned last week that the first three Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) are frequently referred to as the “synoptic” Gospels. “Synoptic” comes from a compound of two Greek words: (1) the preposition su>n (syn), meaning “with,” and (2) o]ptikov (optikos), which has to do with “sight.” The synoptic Gospels, then, are Gospels that are looking together—or looking with each other—at the life and ministry of Christ. That is, they record many of the same events and discourses.
If you have spent much time in the Gospels you will have noticed this about the first three Gospels. As we will see later, John’s Gospel differs from them in a number of ways.
Author
I also mentioned last week that all four of the Gospels are anonymous, meaning they don’t give us the names of the authors. We know who wrote them, however, by the testimony of the early church.
As for the Gospel according to Luke, perhaps one of the first things we should mention is that it is part one of a two part work, the other part being the book of Acts. How do we know this? By comparing the first few verses of each book (see Luke 1:1-4 and Acts 1:1-2). These passages tell us that we have book one and book two by the same author; but they don’t tell us who the author is.
There are some hints in the book of Acts, however, that help us to narrow the possibilities. These hints are included in the “we” sections of the book. The “we” sections of Acts are those sections that describe the work and travels of Paul, using the first person plural pronoun: “we.”
For instance, consider Acts 16:6-10. Note the transition from “they” to “we.”
The author of Luke/Acts, then, was a companion of and a fellow-worker with the apostle Paul. Some of these companions are mentioned in the book of Acts in the third person, so we must eliminate them from the list of possibilities. Some are listed in Paul’s letters. One companion, who is mentioned three times, is Luke (Col. 4:14; 2 Tim. ; Phil. -24).
All the church fathers from the second century are unanimous that the author of the third Gospel and the book of Acts is this man Luke.
Now, one of the interesting things about Luke is that he was, of all things, a Gentile. He has the distinction, in fact, of being the only Gentile to have been used by God to write a book of the Bible (two books, actually). How do we know he was a Gentile? Because of what Paul says in Colossians 4: 10-14.
We see in this passage another interesting fact about Luke, and that is that he was a physician, which provides us with some secondary confirmation that our conclusion about Luke being the author of the third Gospel and the book of Acts is correct. The author of these books, when he has occasion to speak of a miracle of healing, tends to use more detailed and technically correct terminology with respect to people’s illnesses. In other words, he speaks in such a way as a doctor might speak.
Purpose
Luke states his purpose in the opening verses, which we have already read; but let’s look at them again (1:1-4).
v We learn from this that Luke was not himself an eye-witness, but that he had “followed all things closely.” That is, he investigated everything carefully. This seems to mean that he had interviewed those who were eye-witnesses (the 12 apostles and no doubt many others, as well). He had probably also read Mark’s Gospel and other reports that were circulating (cf. “many have undertaken to compile a narrative”)
v Second, notice that he followed all things closely “for some time past.” He wasn’t a novice in the things about which he was writing. He had spent considerable time researching them.
v In the third place, we learn that the work was written for a man named Theophilus. Luke addresses him as “most excellent Theophilus” (v. 3), a means of address which is used later in the book for high ranking officials (; 24:2; 26:25). This indicates that he was probably a highly placed himself.
v Luke writes in order that Theophilus might be convinced of the certainty of the things he had been taught.
Characteristics
Luke gives us the longest and most detailed Gospel.
| Number of Words |
Matthew | 18,345 |
Mark | 11,304 |
Luke | 19,482 |
John | 15,635 |
Matthew is considerably longer than Mark and John. But Luke is more than a thousand words longer than Matthew.
It’s interesting that only Luke gives us an account of the birth of John the Baptist, and he does so in some detail.
Luke also gives us by far the fullest account of our Lord’s nativity. Neither Mark nor John tell us anything at all about the birth of Christ. Matthew tells us the story from Joseph’s side, and the account is fairly brief, only 192 words (in the ESV). Luke’s account is nearly five times longer, weighing in at 936 words. And he tells the story from Mary’s side. And he includes things—details—that we can only suppose he only came to know by way of personally interviewing Mary.
Of all the Gospel writers, Luke writes in the most polished form of Greek. His vocabulary is far more expansive than the others; and his style is more intricate and involved. But yet he also accommodates himself more to the situation he’s writing about. It’s like if you were spending some time in the South you might find yourself kind of unconsciously picking up some of the lingo (ya’ll). Or if you went even further south…down under…you might find yourself greeting your friend by saying, “G’day mate.”
All this to say that Luke writes in a way that is appropriate to express the way the different people might speak.
Theme
Behold the Man!
Let me remind you once again of the different portraits that are painted of our Lord Jesus Christ by each of the Gospel writers. In each Gospel God seems to be presenting Christ with a different emphasis:
Matthew—Behold Your King!
Mark—Behold My Servant!
Luke—Behold the Man!
John—Behold Your God!
As I have mentioned before, only Matthew and Luke give us the genealogy of Christ. Matthew traces it back through David to Abraham, but no further, because it’s his purpose to show that Jesus fulfills the prophecies and the promises of God to Israel concerning a coming Messiah.
Luke, on the other hand, traces Jesus’ genealogy all the way back to Adam because it’s his purpose to show that Jesus is the universal Man. He is the Man for all men.
Jesus and the Outcasts
Luke has long been my favorite Gospel. There is something compelling about it. You can’t read his book without coming to have a greater love and appreciation for Christ, because Luke presents him in such a winsome way. When you’re done reading the book, you think, “What is there not to love about Jesus Christ?” He is held out to us as the merciful and compassionate One. He is the Friend of Sinners. He is held out to us as the Savior for all men, that is, for all classes of people. There is an emphasis on this…that Jesus offers himself to everyone, regardless of their position in society. Everyone has access to him: rich and poor, men and women, young and old, Jew and Gentile, free men and slaves. And there is a particular emphasis on those classes of people that have a tendency to be overlooked, forgotten, disenfranchised, and taken advantage of: the elderly, the very young, women, widows, the poor, etc.
Let’s work our way through the book and point some out some particular instances.
First, Jesus was born to poor parents. God didn’t pick out some well to do aristocratic family, but a poor young couple. How do we know they were poor? Because Mary offers the poor woman’s sacrifice at her post-childbirth cleansing according to the law (cf. Lk. -24 with Lev. 12:6-8).
Second, God is pleased to reveal the birth of his Son to two elderly saints, Simeon and Anna (-36). He didn’t reveal these things to the privileged, to the highly placed, the recognized leaders of the religious establishment; but he revealed them to these two humble saints.
Third, when Jesus first preached in his home town after his baptism and period of temptation in the wilderness, he read a passage from Isaiah that specifically pointed out Messiah’s concern for the oppressed (Lk. 4:16-21).
We find Jesus ministering to a leper, actually reaching out to touch him. There were few things that were thought more frightful than leprosy. Lepers were deemed to be unclean by Levitical standards and had to live apart from society. People did what they could to avoid them, partly from fear of being struck with the dreaded disease themselves, and partly because of the horror of what leprosy symbolized: sin and death. We find an account of it in -13. The account is not unique to Luke’s Gospel, but it fits in with the emphasis he places on Jesus’ ministry to the outcasts.
Jesus not only calls Levi (Matthew), a tax collector, to be one of his disciples, but does the unthinkable by accepting an invitation to eat with him in his home (5:27-32).
We find Jesus showing compassion toward a Roman centurion and his slave (7:1-10). Not only is this significant because it is a slave that he heals, but also because it is the slave of a Gentile, and not just any Gentile either, but a commander in a foreign occupying force, a man whom many in Israel would regard as an enemy.
Immediately after this we find Jesus raising the son of a widow from the dead (-15), again showing the attention he paid to the weak and vulnerable.
Consider what Jesus says to the two messengers sent to him by John the Baptist (-23). “The poor have the good news preached to them” (cf. ). This he points to as one of the signs that he was the Messiah.
There is hardly a more touching incident in all the Bible than what we read in -50.
And then Luke mentions that there were several women who accompanied Jesus (8:1-3). Special notice is taken of this because this was out of the ordinary, for a rabbi to admit women into his circle of disciples.
We have another incident involving a woman in chapter eight. It’s the healing of the woman with an issue of blood (-48). This is significant because of the holiness code of Leviticus. He who touched or was touched by a menstruating woman was rendered unclean by Levitical standards. But Jesus not only allowed himself to be touched by her, but healed her of the flow of blood. She feared she would be rebuked; but he said, “Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace.”
Jesus healed a girl—raised her from the dead, actually (-56).
In chapter 9, he delivers a little boy from demon possession (-43).
Many of the parables of Jesus which Luke records, has to do with the mercy which God is pleased to show to sinners who repent:
Parable of the Great Banquet (-24)
Parable of the Lost Sheep (15:1-7)
Parable of the Lost Coin (15:8-10)
Parable of the Lost Son (-32)
Several incidents are recorded having to do with Jesus and the Samaritans, who were the traditional enemies (rivals) of the Jews.
He rebukes James and John for wanting to call fire down out of heaven to consume a Samaritan village that would not receive him (-56)
Parable of the Good Samaritan (-37). The Samaritan is the good guy in the story. A Jewish priest and Levite are portrayed negatively. The Samaritan is the hero. He’s the one whose actions Jesus says should be imitated.
The healing of ten lepers, only one of which (a Samaritan), returned to give thanks (-19)
Let the little children come: -17
The Widow’s Offering: 21:1-4
The Reversal of Fortune Motif
Related to this concern for the weak and poor and those of low estate, we often find the theme of a reversal of fortune, as it were. The first shall be last, and the last first; the high shall be low; and the low, high.
Mary’s hymn of praise: -53
Concerning rich and poor: -26
Who is the Greatest? 9:46-48
The Rich Man and Lazarus: -30
The Pharisee and the Tax Collector: 18:9-14
Conclusion
Throughout the book, Luke presents Jesus in such a way as to reach out and grab the heart of the reader that he might come to love Christ. If a person can read this book and not love the Savior, it must be because he has no life at all in him. You read it, and you think, what is there not to love in him. Who would not follow this man?