COMMENTARY
1. Prologue (1:1ā4)
Context
In approaching any literary work, we will always find that genre matters. This should be obvious enough on considering the differing strategies readers adopt when they take in a newspaper article as opposed to, say, a science-fiction story. Consciously or unconsciously, we rely on certain textual signals as we discern a textās genre. This was as true in antiquity as it is today. As Luke beckons his readers into his story through the doorway of this prologue, he immediately offers us the calling card of a historian. Everything about Luke 1:1ā4 seems to say in so many words, āThis is serious history.ā
Modern Western readers tend to associate āserious historyā with a dispassionate and objective recounting of events. Good historians, we tell ourselves, at least try not to let on that they have a particular agenda. Nothing could be further from the case when it comes to ancient historiography. For the ancient historians, it was exactly their commitment to the facts and interpretation that qualified them to speak authoritatively. That is why Luke never claims to be objective, either here or at any other point in his two-volume set. He is unapologetically committed to the facts, true enough, but he is also ā equally unapologetically ā motivated by his theological interests. Like those before him who also had āundertaken to set down an orderly accountā (namely, Matthew and Mark), Luke wants to impress upon his readers the wonders of the earthly and Risen Lord Jesus Christ, as well as the necessity of placing faith in him.
Comment
1. Luke states that many have undertaken to set down an orderly account (diÄgÄsis), similar to the story he is about to tell. The word diÄgÄsis was a semi-technical term, referring to a āwell-ordered, polished product of the historianās workā. This would certainly support the Evangelistās attempt to position his material as credible history. But in Lukeās writing, the verbal cognate of the same noun is regularly used in connection with Godās mighty acts. This implies that the author seeks to provide not just a biography of Jesus but also a narrative of Godās works through Jesus. These mighty works include certain salvific events which have been fulfilled among us. For Luke, then, the story which he is about to tell must be set in the broader context of Godās purposes ā past, present and future.
2. Eager to vouch for the accuracy of his own account, Luke next informs his readers that the materials he received were handed on (paredosan) by eyewitnesses and servants of the word. The verb here often refers to the transmission of official traditions (1 Cor. 11:23; 15:1ā3; 1 Thess. 4:1ā2), suggesting that the process of passing on āJesus storiesā was a carefully executed, even solemn task. Meanwhile, governed by a single article, the nouns eyewitnesses and servants actually refer to two aspects of the same role. The mediators of this tradition are eyewitness-servants, who are likely the apostles themselves (cf. Acts 26:16). The apostles serve Godās people by collectively standing by their traditions as authoritative eyewitnesses of the events they relate. As such they are also the self-identified guarantors of the gospel truth which now stands to be perpetuated through established ecclesial structures.
3. Luke himself claims to have investigated everything (1) from the very first, (2) carefully and (3) in an orderly fashion. The phrase from the very first (anÅthen) speaks of Lukeās decision to begin with the birth narrative, as well as to the overall comprehensiveness of his biographical account. Working within the framework of transmitted traditions yet building upon them, Luke claims to have done fresh investigative work according to the best historiographical practices of his day. He does so for the sake of one Theophilus, a figure who was either a fictitious construct representing every friend (philos) of God (theos) or, as maintained above, an actual person.
4. The point of all this is to assure the truth (asphaleia) or certainty of the proclaimed gospel ā in regard to not only the isolated historical facts but also their apostolic interpretation. For Luke, salvific event and interpretation are inseparable; together both must stand up to scrutiny. History and faith together stand as the bedrock for the gospel story he is about to tell.
Theology
Luke calls his story an āorderly accountā or a ānarrativeā (ESV) of events. Now, as Aristotle pointed out, the very concept of narrative ā complete with a beginning, a middle and an end ā assumes a logical sequence of events. The concept of sequence is important. Far too often, modern readers of the Gospels have treated the authorized stories of Jesus as a hodgepodge of random incidents and teachings with little discernible relationship to one another. The same readers may wonder whether there is any rhyme or reason to the ordering of the stories, aside from a rough chronological interest. But by identifying his story as a diÄgÄsis and therefore an orderly account, Luke is claiming that his plot has a linear progression. This means that the Evangelistās readers need to be sensitive to the narrative as a whole, even when examining the shortest of sayings or stories. Nothing is arbitrary: every word, sentence, paragraph, must be appreciated in relation to that which precedes and that which follows. Because Luke offers an organic narrative, the responsible interpreter must constantly look to the Gospel writer as his own best interpreter.
Moreover, because the Evangelist sees the events surrounding Jesusā life, death, resurrection and ascension as having been āfulfilled among usā, he also sees his own narrative as an authorized extension of the Old Testament narrative, the writings of the likes of āMoses, the prophets, and the psalmsā (24:44). If the second-century heretic Marcion reduced the four Gospels to a pared-down version of Lukeās story simply because the third Gospel seemed to have the least to do with the God of Israel, it is only because he badly misunderstood that story in the first place. According to our Evangelist, the revelation of Jesus Christ is a progressive revelation, which fits snugly within the larger, overarching framework of the story of Israel.
2. INFANCY NARRATIVE (1:5 ā 2:52)
A. Two birth announcements (1:5ā38)
Context
The narrative action begins by focusing on Jesusā forerunner John, as well Johnās parents, Zechariah and Elizabeth. In all four Gospels, John the Baptizer plays an inestimably important role. Yet it is Luke, more than any other Gospel writer, who highlights Johnās significance. In 1:5ā38, Luke puts the prenatal histories of John and Jesus side by side. He does so to anticipate their mutual association and to establish a contrast. As great as John was, Jesus was greater.
To put Gabrielās dual birth announcements in the same category as the many angelic appearances in LukeāActs would be to miss the point. Gabriel stood at the top of the angelic hierarchy (cf. 1 En. 40:9). His appearance at the beginning of Lukeās story strikes an auspicious note. Further, Lukeās more well-versed readers would have been aware that when Gabriel first appears in Scripture, in the book of Daniel, he comes to reveal a flickering light of hope at the far end of the dark tunnel of exile (Dan. 8:16; 9:21). Now that flickering light, Luke begins to hint, is about to come into view.
The birth announcements of John and Jesus parallel each other in step-by-step fashion. Both conceptions announced by Gabriel are miraculous; both involve the Holy Spirit; finally, both are singled out as having redemptive significance. Of course, there are contrasts as well. Two are salient. First, whereas the announcement of Johnās birth takes place in the temple in Jerusalem, news of the coming Messiahās birth is first broadcast in an insignificant and out-of-the-way location. Second, while the priest Zechariah disbelieves the angelās message and is rendered mute, the obedient response of a barely pubescent girl finally culminates in a declaration of Godās praises (1:46ā55). The movement from unbelieving priestly man to believing common girl, from officially sanctioned sacred space to newly established sacred spaces, augurs the over...