|
Logos Ministries Incorporated
|
|
This is an inductive study of the Gospel of Luke. THE BACKGROUND THE IDENTITY OF LUKE There is some debate about whether Luke was a Jew. Most scholars agree that "Luke" was a Gentile name. There are several possibilities concerning his origin:
Ramsey, a twentieth century scholar, felt that Luke could have been "The man from Macedonia," whom Paul saw in his vision, in Acts 16:6-10.2 That, of course, cannot be verified. Someone has said,
Either Luke personally mastered the Old Testament and Jewish tradition, or else he was a Jewish Christian who brought with him an extensive knowledge of these things. Herbert Lockyer reminds us of a possible origin of Luke's understandings:
One of 16 cities by that name, Antioch was located in a mountain valley not far from Tarsus, the birthplace of Paul. It was a luxurious city, the center of culture with a debauched social climate. This city of 500,000, called "the queen of the East", was a free city, and the third largest city in the Roman empire.5 There was a large Jewish population in the city. When Stephan was martyred, the Christians fled to Antioch. This is the first place where believers in Christ were called "Christians." It was a prosperous commercial center from which Christians sent famine relief to the Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 11:27-30). We assume that this took place in approximately 45 A.D. The city was also the origin of the dispute over whether to apply Jewish ritual law to the Gentile converts in the city. The apostle Paul speaks of Titus, in II Corinthians 8:16 and in 12:18 also speaks of "the brother", (ton adelphon - toVn ajdelfovn). The appearance is that Paul was using "brother" as a way to identify a fellow Christian, but not to identify a relative. There are several scholars who believe that this "brother" was Luke. Whatever his background, Luke probably was a man of some means. Wherever The New Testament mentions Luke there is no concern for his provision. He could spend what appears to be several years with Paul without noticeable financial concern. In Colossians 4:14, Paul speaks of "Luke the beloved Physician." This profession would make such financial independence possible. We know less about Luke than any other New Testament writer. THE GOSPEL OF LUKE There is some debate about the authorship of the Gospel of Luke, but I am convinced that Luke wrote this beautiful account of the life of Christ. There is an exactness in the document which belies the precision of his medical training and experience. This is a source of real help as we attempt to do a study of the book. The salutation of the book, addressed to Theophilus, is an early hint that this is an account written for the benefit of the Gentile understanding. The Gospel of Luke contains the most literary, the purest expression of the Greek language in the entire New Testament. Some would say it is the best written book in the world. Whatever one's stance, this is a use of the language of the highest order. The Gospel of Luke contains some emphases which other Gospel records do not have. You will find a strong emphasis on prayer. This Gospel contains at least three parables about prayer, which the other Gospel records do not contain: 1. The friend at midnight, 11:5-8 2. The unjust judge, 18:1-8 3. The Pharisee and the Publican 18:9-14 Notice that there are at least 15 parables that appear in Luke which do not appear in either Matthew or Mark. This is vital to the message Luke is writing. There is an emphasis on the teaching of Jesus in this Gospel, which was not as strongly described in the other Gospel records. In 21 of the 24 chapters of this Gospel, Luke portrays the teaching ministry of Jesus. Between the time of the Temptation, in chapter 4, and the Ascension, in chapter 24, Luke lists at least 81 separate instances of Jesus' teaching. This does not count the places where Luke said, "And he taught daily in the temple." On the other hand, Matthew's Gospel, though longer, records only 73 teaching experiences. In these situations, it is helpful to observe just what teaching situations both Luke and Matthew chose to report. This chart should prove helpful.
Chart 1:1 - A Comparison of Matthew and Luke Concerning Jesus' Teaching From this information, apparently Luke is focusing upon Jesus' teaching of the Disciples and less on the teaching of the crowds and religious leaders. The chart also makes it clear that Matthew had an even greater focus on Jesus' teaching of the disciples and considerably less on Jesus' teaching of the religious leaders and the crowds. This is not surprising. You are more apt to discover the thinking of Jesus from what He taught the disciples, where there was little opposition, than from His teaching of the religious leaders, where there was nearly total opposition. Luke places a slightly greater emphasis on the healing ministry than Matthew does. In Luke, there are 18 specific instances of healing described. This does not include the places where it says, "many were brought to him and he healed them all." On the other hand, in Matthew there are 17 specific instances of healing described. The only surprise here is that there are not far more instances listed in Luke. Though Luke's background was in medicine, that was not his purpose in writing the Gospel. He was trying to help Gentile people understand who Jesus was and what He had been doing. Note, however, that Luke displays a greater sensitivity to human, physical qualities than any of the other three Gospel writers. Again, this is not a source of surprise. If there is any surprise, it is that there is not far more of it. As you read this Gospel record, you will notice that Luke is often less than specific about time and location of the different events. He was far more concerned about the content of the teaching than he was concerning the identification of the particular day on which it was taught or the specific location where Jesus was standing when He taught this great truth. The following passages illustrate this truth:
The biographical material on the life of Jesus is far more complete in Luke than it is in either Matthew or Mark.6 This is particularly interesting in that Luke was not one of the original twelve disciples. As you read the Gospel of Luke, note how vibrant and alive Luke presents Jesus. Jesus is a more understandable human being in Luke than in other writings. Luke presents Jesus as totally human, as struggling with the things that we share in our humanity. I trust that this study will be as inspirational for you as it has been for me. Footnotes:
|
|
|