Luke

Walter L. Liefeld, David W. Pao, Tremper Longman III, David E. Garland

• Publisher: Zondervan Academic
• Year: 2017
• eBook ISBN: 9780310532002
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Criticism & Interpretation

Continuing a Gold Medallion Award-winning legacy, the completely revised Expositor's Bible Commentary puts world-class biblical scholarship in your hands.

A staple for students, teachers, and pastors worldwide, The Expositor's Bible Commentary (EBC) offers comprehensive yet succinct commentary from scholars committed to the authority of the Holy Scriptures. The EBC uses the New International Version of the Bible, but the contributors work from the original Hebrew and Greek languages and refer to other translations when useful.

Each section of the commentary includes:

• An introduction: background information, a short bibliography, and an outline
• An overview of Scripture to illuminate the big picture
• The complete NIV text
• Extensive commentary
• Notes on textual questions, key words, and concepts
• Reflections to give expanded thoughts on important issues

The series features 56 contributors, who:

• Believe in the divine inspiration, complete trustworthiness, and full authority of the Bible
• Have demonstrated proficiency in the biblical book that is their specialty
• Are committed to the church and the pastoral dimension of biblical interpretation
• Represent geographical and denominational diversity
• Use a balanced and respectful approach toward marked differences of opinion
• Write from an evangelical viewpoint

For insightful exposition, thoughtful discussion, and ease of use—look no further than The Expositor's Bible Commentary.

Text and Exposition

I. INTRODUCTION (1:1–4)

OVERVIEW

The introduction to Luke is a long, carefully constructed sentence in the tradition of the finest historical works in Greek literature. It stands in contrast to the genealogical table of Matthew, the concise opening sentence of Mark, and the theological prologue of John. It was customary among the great Greek and Hellenistic historians, including the first-century Jewish writer Josephus, to explain and justify their works in a preface. Their objective was to assure the reader that they were capable and reliable and that they had done thorough research. While such a weighty introduction does not in itself guarantee the honesty of the writer, neither should its conventional form be dismissed as merely formal pretension.

The classical literary style of the preface contrasts with the remainder of the gospel, in which Semitisms abound (cf. comments in introduction, sections 7 and 10; see Overview, 1:5–2:52).

1Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, 2just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

COMMENTARY

1 The preface opens with the Greek word epeidēper (GK 2077, untranslated in NIV; KJV, “forasmuch as”; NASB, “inasmuch as”), a classical word used only here in the NT but found in such major authors as Thucydides, Philo, and Josephus. It stands in stylistic contrast to the colloquial egeneto (“there was”), which in v.5 opens the narrative. The NIV omits epeidēper for the sake of concise English style, adding “therefore” in v.3. This clarifies the meaning—that Luke’s account was written after those of many others.

“Many have undertaken” implies that by the time Luke wrote there was considerable interest in data about Jesus and his ministry. Luke does not say that he himself actually reproduced material from any of the existing accounts, though that could be assumed from this and subsequent evidence. The choice of the word “undertaken” (epecheireō, GK 2217) need not mean that earlier attempts to write gospel narratives had failed (cf. MM, 250–51; Vernon K. Robbins, “The Claims of the Prologues and Greco-Roman Rhetoric,” in Jesus and the Heritage of Israel [ed. Moessner], 63–83). Obviously Luke would not be writing if there were no need for something further, but this does not necessarily reflect adversely on his predecessors. “To draw up an account” (anataxasthai diēgēsin, GK 421, 1456) means “to write a report or narrative, relating events in an orderly way” (cf. MM, 38). The verbal form of diēgēsis (diēgeomai, GK 1455) occurs in Luke (8:39; 9:10) and Acts (9:27; 12:17).

“Fulfilled” is a better translation of peplērophorēmenōn (GK 4442) than “most surely believed” (KJV) in this context. The word and its cognate plērophoria (GK 4443) can be translated “full assurance” or “assurance” when their basic reference is to the confident attitude of a person (cf. Ro 4:21; 14:5; Col 2:2; Heb 6:11; 10:22). Otherwise, and especially with reference to things rather than people, the idea of accomplishment or completion is foremost. (See “discharge all the duties” and “fully proclaimed” in 2Ti 4:5, 17.) Further, if the accomplishment of God’s purposes in the life and ministry of Jesus is one of Luke’s themes, it is appropriate for the preface to reflect this.

2 “Just as they were handed down” stresses the validity of the tradition of Jesus’ words and deeds. The same emphasis occurs in Paul, who was careful to pass on to others what had been “handed down” to him (1Co 11:23; 15:3; cf. O. Cullmann, The Early Church: Studies in Early Christian History and Theology [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1956], 59–75).

Though the “eyewitnesses and servants” may have included some of the “many” (v.1), they are mostly to be distinguished from them because they were prior to them. Luke is establishing the validity of the information both he and his predecessors included in their narratives. Witnesses are important to Luke. While the concept of “witness” is not as prominent in Luke as in John (see esp. Jn 5:31–47), it is integral to Luke’s historical and theological purposes.

The words “from the first” (probably meaning from the early days of Jesus’ ministry) are tied to the word “eyewitnesses” as closely as grammar permits—i.e., “the from-the-first witnesses” (hoi ap’ archēs autoptai). These were not passive observers but “servants of the word.” Luke is probably referring primarily to the apostles, whose authority he upholds throughout Luke–Acts. In Acts 10:39–42, Peter speaks as one of those who were both witnesses and preachers.

“Word” (logos, GK 3364) here means “the message of the gospel,” especially as embodied in the words and deeds of Jesus. Ancient Greek writers often stressed the importance of matching one’s words with appropriate deeds. In Acts 1:1, Luke combines the words “do” and “teach” when he describes Jesus’ ministry. This is essential to the fulfillment mentioned in v.1. While all four gospels use the term logos (with particular significance in Jn 1:1, 14), Luke uses it surprisingly often. This is especially true in passages unique to Luke (see Gaston, 64, 76; Hawkins, 20, 43). In summary, v.2 makes a serious claim regarding Luke’s careful historical research of witnesses and sources that has weighty implications for our estimation of the entire gospel.

3 The opening words in the Greek order are “it seemed good also to me” (edoxe kamoi). This establishes a balance and pattern of comparison between vv.1–2 and 3–4: “Many have undertaken” and “it seemed good also to me”; “to draw up an account” and “to write an orderly account”; “handed down to us” and “so that you may know.”

Luke now describes his own work of investigation and writing. The word “everything” may partially explain how his work differed from that of the “many” (v.1) and also from that of Mark—namely, in its greater comprehensiveness. “From the beginning” translates anōthen (GK 540), which can mean, according to the context, either “above” or “again.” Here in its relation to historical research it has a temporal sense. Theologically, Luke’s concern for the “beginning” of the gospel surfaces here. Luke did his research “carefully” (akribōs, GK 209; lit., “accurately”) and wrote an “orderly” (kathexēs, GK 2759) account. We cannot determine from this preface alone whether Luke is referring to a chronological or a thematic order. He does not specifically claim to have aimed at chronological sequence. Perhaps he may have followed an order found in his sources. If so, this could explain his occasional differences from Matthew and Mark. Or he may have rearranged his sources according to another pattern. Taken alone, the prologue is not conclusive as to these possibilities. In any event, Luke intended his claim of working in an orderly way to inspire confidence in his readers.

The identity of “Theophilus” is unknown, though many suggestions have been made (cf. R. H. Anderson, “Theophilus: A Proposal,” EvQ 69 [1997]: 195–215). The name (“friend of God”) might be either a symbol or a substitute for the true name of Luke’s addressee. Theophilus was, however, a proper name, and “most excellent” naturally suggests an actual person of some distinction. He may have been Luke’s literary patron or publisher, after the custom of the times (cf. E. J. Goodspeed, “Some Greek Notes: I. Was Theophilus Luke’s Publisher?” JBL 73 [1954]: 84).

4 Though it is not clear whether Theophilus was a believer, he had doubtless received some instructions in the faith. The genitive plural (logōn) of logos (“word,” GK 3364) is here translated in the NIV as “things”—a legitimate extended use. Theophilus has learned of both the words and deeds of Jesus. “Taught” (katēchēthēs, GK 2994) may refer to formal church teaching (Gal 6:6), but does not necessarily do so. For some reason Theophilus needed assurance, or “certainty” (asphaleia, GK 854), as to the truth of the things taught to him. Possibly he was troubled by denials of the resurrection and other historical foundations of the faith that gnostic speculation was challenging. Such are not to be countered by mere speculation but by the factual narrative Luke is about to write. His book will set forth evidences and purposes ancillary to the one he has stated in this preface.

According to the prologue, Luke’s purpose in writing was to assure Theophilus of the “certainty” of the gospel tradition. His gospel can still fulfill this purpose, without excluding other purposes for Luke–Acts (cf. section 5, “Purpose,” in the introduction).

NOTES

1–4 Among the many useful articles on the Lukan prologue and the method of his historical investigation, see Ned B. Stonehouse, The Witness of Luke to Christ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1951), 24–25, in which he especially surveys the contributions of H. J. Cadbury. Supplementary to this is Stonehouse’s Origins of the Synoptic Gospels (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963), 113–31. This discussion continues in the works of D. J. Sneen, “An Exegesis of Luke 1:14 with Special Regard to Luke’s Purpose as a Historian,” ExpTim 83 (1971–72): 40–43; and I. I. du Plessis, “Once More: The Purpose of Luke’s Prologue,” NovT 16 (1974): 259–71. The most extensive study is found in Loveday C. A. Alexander, The Preface to Luke’s Gospel, where scientific prose is understood as providing the appropriate context to examine Luke’s preface. While Alexander may have pointed to the social location of Luke, significant parallels to prefaces in historiographical material should not be ignored (see the study by Daryl Schmidt, “Rhetorical Influences and Genre: Luke’s Preface and the Rhetoric of Hellenistic Historiography,” in Jesus and the Heritage of Israel [ed. Moessner], 27–60).

3 The word ἀκριβῶς (akribōs, GK 209) can also mean “fully” in ancient historical prefaces. See David L. Balch, “ἀκριβῶς . . . γράψαι (Luke 1:3): To Write the Full History of God’s Receiving All Nations,” in Jesus and the Heritage of Israel (ed. Moessner), 29–50.

II. BIRTH AND CHILDHOOD NARRATIVES (1:5–2:52)

OVERVIEW

This narrative introduces a section in Luke unparalleled in the other gospels (see introduction for critical and stylistic issues). Its distinctive characteristics include (1) an atmosphere reminiscent of the OT, with a Semitic grammatical and stylistic cast; (2) an alternating focus on John the Baptist and Jesus; (3) the awesomeness of heavenly beings appearing to humans; and (4) a note of joy, especially as heard in four songs: Mary’s (1:46–55), Zechariah’s (1:68–79), the angels’ (2:14), and Simeon’s (2:29–32).

(1) The Semitic style fits the religious and historical connection Luke is establishing between the OT and NT periods. Luke does not use the fulfillment formulas Matthew uses but shows that OT promises stand behind the events he describes. He does this by giving his style and vocabulary a Septuagintal flavor. He also takes pains to ground the Christian message in Jerusalem and in its temple, the cultic center of Israel.

(2) To make this connection with the OT, Luke also uses a pattern of alternation in which attention shifts back and forth between John the Baptist and...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Contributors
• Preface
• Abbreviations
• Luke
• Introduction
• I. INTRODUCTION (1:1–4)
• II. BIRTH AND CHILDHOOD NARRATIVES (1:5–2:52)
• III. PREPARATION FOR JESUS’ MINISTRY (3:1–4:13)
• IV. THE GALILEAN MINISTRY (4:14–9:50)
• V. TEACHING AND TRAVELS TOWARD JERUSALEM (9:51–19:44)
• VI. THE JERUSALEM MINISTRY (19:45–24:53)