Luke | Knowable Word

Why Was Baby Jesus Laid in a Manger?

December 13, 2019 By Peter Krol

“And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.” (Luke 2:7)

This time of year, the words roll right off the tongue. And every child’s first question is: What is a manger? When the teacher explains that it is a feeding trough for animals, the astute youth then wonders: Why was the baby laid there?

Now enters the ancient and hallowed tradition of Nativity speculation. Since we’re supposed to reflect on this narrative for a few weeks each year, we need some way to fill in the gaps left by the gospel narrators. And so we wax eloquent about Mary and Joseph’s poverty. Or the pathetic rejection they faced by the innkeeper. Or the influx of tourism to Bethlehem on account of the census. Or the astonishing degradation to which the Son of God submitted himself in setting aside, for a time, his heavenly glory in order to clothe himself in earthly humiliation—all to win a people for himself.

And every one of these speculations might be true. But in connecting such historical and theological dots, let’s please be careful not to neglect the main reason Luke gives for including this detail in his narrative.

Luke’s Purpose

If we read Luke like a book and not simply as a Christmas photo shoot, we’ll realize that we’re only in chapter 2. It was not all that long ago in the book that Luke made his purpose quite clear and explicit:

“…it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.” (Luke 1:3-4)

Luke writes an orderly account of the early Christian movement, so the Roman official Theophilus can be certain about the things he’s heard about it. This is Luke’s purpose: to provide enough evidence to enable Theophilus to be sure about what he’s heard.

But what is it that Theophilus has heard, of which he ought to be certain? The main point of Luke’s gospel is something along the lines of: “The hope of Israel, God’s plan of salvation for the world, has arrived in Jesus.” (You can find my case for this main point here.) It is on account of this hope that Paul is on trial (Acts 26:6-7), and the facts surrounding this hope ought to lead, Luke believes, to Paul’s exoneration before Caesar from the charges brought against him by the Jews (Acts 24:5-6).

So Luke wants his reader to be certain about this hope, with the aim of exonerating Paul from all charges.

The Manger

Now how does this overall purpose help us to understand why Mary laid Jesus in a manger? I confess it will not be all that helpful in understanding why this woman laid her baby in the manger (we’ll need to employ our venerable Nativity speculation to close that gap). But it will help us in every way to understand why Luke saw fit to tell us she had done so.

Just follow the manger through the passage:

The narrator declares: “And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger” (Luke 2:7).
The angel proclaims: “And this will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger” (Luke 2:12).
Finally, the narrator recounts: “And they went with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby lying in a manger (Luke 2:16).

Do you see the flow of thought? Mary lays him there. The angel tells the shepherds they will know they have the right baby when they see him lying there. Then they go to see for themselves, and yes, they find him there, just as they had been told.

So can the shepherds be certain of the things they were taught? Can they be sure that this is the right child?

“And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, as it had been told them.” (Luke 2:20)

Conclusion

Luke’s reason for mentioning the manger is that it provided for the shepherds corroboration of what the angel said. The detail of the manger serves a clear narrative and persuasive purpose to show the fact (the baby was laid there), the prediction (the angel said they’d find him there), and the testimony (they did in fact find him there, just as they were told).

So why was the baby Jesus laid in a manger? In Luke’s narrative world, it was so that Theophilus (and by extension, you and I) could be certain that these shepherds were eyewitnesses to the birth. They are among the many eyewitnesses from the beginning (Luke 1:2) whom Luke has researched and included in his account to promote certainty. And just as they could be certain, from the sign of the manger, that they had located the right baby, so also you and I can be certain of the same.

And what is it, precisely, of which they and we can be certain regarding him? What is the hope of which they can be certain?

“For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.” (Luke 2:11)

This child is the one. He is the one to rescue us (Savior). He is the Messiah, the Chosen One (Christ). He is Yahweh (the Lord) in the flesh.

This advent season, let us, too, “go over to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has made known to us.” And may we, too, return, “glorifying and praising God for all [we have] heard and seen, as it [has] been told [us].”

Thanks for visiting Knowable Word! If you like this article, you might be interested in receiving regular updates from us. You can sign up for our email list (enter your address in the box on the upper right of this page), follow us on Facebook or Twitter, or subscribe to our RSS feed.

Context Matters: Peace on Earth

December 9, 2019 By Ryan Higginbottom

Perhaps you’ve heard that Jesus came to bring peace on earth, that the angels sang this very phrase when his birth was announced to the shepherds. You’ve got piles of cards (and maybe boxes of ornaments) bearing this phrase. And at this time of year, the words “peace on earth” invoke a warm, reflective mood, just right for hot cocoa and soft-focused photography.

But is this how we should read the divine birth announcement? Did Jesus really come to bring peace on earth?

We always need to pay attention to the context of our favorite verses and phrases. When we learn to read the Bible for what it is—and not just as a collection of slogans or choruses—we may find that it has a deeper or different meaning than we’ve assumed.

The Immediate Context

We begin with the immediate context of the phrase in question. In Luke 2, after the angels tell the shepherds about the birth of the Savior, we read this:

And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!” (Luke 2:13–14)

The angels are not announcing a general, earth-blanketing peace. They announce and pray for peace “among those with whom he is pleased.” This is an important first qualification.

The Broader Context in Luke

There is certainly a need for peace at the beginning of Luke’s Gospel.

Luke deliberately calls attention to the political setting of his narrative in the first two chapters; he mentions King Herod (Luke 1:5), Caesar Augustus (Luke 2:1), and the Syrian governor Quirinius (Luke 2:2). Mary praises her God who has “brought down the mighty from their thrones” (Luke 1:52). During the Roman occupation of Jewish land, these markers and desires were pointed.

Additionally, many of the characters we encounter could use a healthy dose of peace. Mary is troubled by her angelic visitor (Luke 1:29) and so is Zechariah (Luke 1:12). Zechariah remembers the enemies of the Lord’s people when he prophesies over his son (Luke 1:71, 74), and he points forward to the work of the Messiah. At the end of the prophecy, we get a partial description of the peace about which the angels will sing.

And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High; for you will go before the Lord to prepare his ways, to give knowledge of salvation to his people in the forgiveness of their sins, because of the tender mercy of our God, whereby the sunrise shall visit us from on high to give light to those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace. (Luke 1:76–79)

Later, in the midst of a long string of teaching, Luke records a striking statement from Jesus about his purposes for coming.

I came to cast fire on the earth, and would that it were already kindled! I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how great is my distress until it is accomplished! Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. (Luke 12:49–51)

Jesus goes on to speak primarily about divisions within a family, but it is clear that universal peace is not one of Jesus’s immediate objectives.

There is one last cry about peace in Luke, as Jesus is approaching Jerusalem for the last time.

As he was drawing near—already on the way down the Mount of Olives—the whole multitude of his disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen, saying, “Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!” (Luke 19:37–38)

We can now tie off this thread of peace that runs in the background of Luke. The disciples hail Jesus as the king, and Luke captures their praise as an echo of the earlier angelic song. Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!

The Peace that Jesus Came to Bring

Jesus came to bring peace. But his peace is not the world’s peace. It is not for everyone, and it is not immediate.

Peace often requires confrontation, sacrifice, and suffering, and this describes much of Jesus’s time on earth. He came primarily to bring us peace with God, and that required his obedient life, his brutal death, and his resurrection.

But the thing about peace with God is that it spreads. The angels announced peace on earth among God’s people because that is a fruit that the Spirit of Christ brings. The church now is to be a glimpse of what the world will be. It happens slowly and imperfectly, two steps forward and one step back. But it happens.

Jesus came to bring peace. That peace is not for everyone, and it does not arrive in fullness now. But it is real and life-giving and earth-rocking. It is worthy of a sky full of angels.

Context matters.

For more examples of why context matters, click here.

Keep the Whole Book in Mind

November 25, 2019 By Ryan Higginbottom

Luke 20 begins with a confrontation.

One day, as Jesus was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes with the elders came up and said to him, “Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority.” He answered them, “I also will ask you a question. Now tell me, was the baptism of John from heaven or from man?” (Luke 20:1–4)

Before digging into this passage, whenever I heard this chapter I thought Jesus was simply countering a question with a question. The chief priests and scribes were trying to serve him a trap, so he volleyed back a puzzle. I didn’t see much connection.

I should have known better.

Authority and Baptism

Since John baptized Jesus, when Jesus referred to John’s baptism he was not pointing toward something abstract. For Jesus, this could not have been more personal and meaningful. Jesus’s ministry began with his baptism.

For Luke, the surrounding context of Jesus’s baptism (Luke 3:21–22) was all about authority. John spent time answering questions from tax collectors and soldiers, two groups of people in authority (Luke 3:12–14). This led to questions about whether John was the Christ, but he pointed to one who was coming who would have so much authority that he could baptize with the Holy Spirit and serve as judge (Luke 3:15–17).

John was then thrown into prison for opposing Herod’s evil ways (Luke 3:18–20). Without an eye toward the topic of authority, this might seem a strange section of the passage. But when we know the theme, we see Herod’s obvious abuse of authority.

Finally, we read of Jesus’s baptism. Luke doesn’t explicitly tell us that John baptized Jesus, but this is a reasonable deduction (see Luke 3:7 and Luke 3:21), confirmed in other Gospels.

The Baptism of God’s Son

When Jesus was praying immediately after his baptism, a special guest arrived.

Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heavens were opened, and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.” (Luke 3:21–22)

We usually read this voice as divine words of comfort and affirmation; they were this and much more. The title “son of God” was a kingly title, stretching back to the Old Testament and finding its clearest illustration in 2 Samuel 7:8–17. From that point forward, Davidic kings were “sons of God.” The one with ultimate earthly authority toward God’s people was the son of God.

Luke proceeds from the baptism of Jesus to the genealogy of Jesus. Unlike modern Christians, Luke’s first readers would not have nodded off at a list of “begats.” Especially not this list.

The genealogy begins with Jesus and ends with God, with lots of sons in between. Luke is repeating his point in case we didn’t hear it the first time: Jesus is the son of God.

The Confrontation Fizzles

The chief priests, scribes, and elders thought that Jesus’s question in Luke 20 was about John. But Jesus’s question answered theirs. Who gave Jesus the authority to do what he did?

God did. In John’s baptism of Jesus, God declared Jesus to be his son, and Luke wants us to see there is no higher authority.

Context Matters

We write a lot on this blog about how context matters. But we aren’t only concerned with the sentences and paragraphs surrounding your favorite verse.

This example from Luke 20 shows the importance of at least three different Scriptural contexts. The location of the question in Luke 20 and the baptism in Luke 3 reminds us that the immediate context matters. The reference from Luke 20 to Luke 3 reminds us to keep the whole book in mind—the context within the book matters. And the references to the phrase “son of God” remind us that the whole Bible is connected. Old Testament context informs New Testament usage.

This is not just an argument for careful Bible study and for regularly re-reading the book of the Bible you are studying. It’s also a reminder that the whole Bible matters when we interpret the whole Bible.

New and Old Garments

November 8, 2019 By Peter Krol

There are parts of the Bible I’ve read so many times that I’m prone to mistake familiarity with them for understanding of them. But once in a while, when I set my familiarity aside, I can take a look at what’s actually there. This happened to me recently in a study of Luke 5.

Image by Mabel Amber, still incognito… from Pixabay

At the end of the chapter, the Pharisees get upset with Jesus and his disciples for not fasting like either John or the Pharisees themselves. Part of Jesus’ response is a straightforward parable:

He also told them a parable: “No one tears a piece from a new garment and puts it on an old garment. If he does, he will tear the new, and the piece from the new will not match the old. (Luke 5:36)

The issue (the problem with my familiarity) is that I’ve spent years of my life studying Mark’s version of this story. This is the first time I’ve taken a close enough look at Luke’s account to realize that Luke is saying something quite different from Mark. Check out Mark’s version:

No one sews a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. If he does, the patch tears away from it, the new from the old, and a worse tear is made. (Mark 2:21)

And just for the sake of completeness, here is Matthew’s version:

No one puts a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch tears away from the garment, and a worse tear is made. (Matt 9:16)

Observe the Difference

Matthew and Mark are very similar. They talk about cutting an “unshrunk” garment to make a patch for an old garment. The problem is that the new patch will subsequently shrink and tear away from the torn garment, making the original tear far worse.

But Luke is using the same cast of characters to tell a completely different story. He speaks of ripping up a new garment to fix an old one. The problem here is twofold: 1) You’ve ruined a perfectly good (and new) garment, and 2) the fix won’t even match the original.

Why does this matter? What really is the difference between them?

Matthew and Mark are concerned with the damage to the old garment, while Luke is more concerned with the damage to the new garment.

Why Does This Matter?

The epiphany for me was simply to realize I was assuming Luke was telling the same parable as Mark. I needed a jolt to actually look at the text and observe the bare facts of Luke’s presentation. It is so easy to assume I know what a story says. And the unfortunate result of that assumption is that I stop looking!

As for how this affects interpretation: I’m not exactly sure yet, but perhaps you have some ideas. It’s surely related to the extra line Luke adds, which is not found in any other gospel: “And no one after drinking old wine desires new, for he says, ‘The old is good.’ (Luke 5:39).” The problem here is that the new thing is damaged to the point of being perceived as undesirable in comparison to the old thing. And this is a little different from the way Matthew and Mark present the situation.

Perhaps you’re already more familiar with Luke’s version, and it’s difficult for you to see what Mark/Matthew has to say. Either way, it’s another example of the danger of hasty harmonization. Let’s make sure to grasp the particular point each author seeks to make, and not lump them together, presuming they’re communicating the same thing!

How an Overview of Luke Helps You to Grasp a Particular Passage

November 1, 2019 By Peter Krol

I proposed a few weeks ago that if you fail to grasp the big picture of a book of the Bible (in this case, Luke), you’re in danger of getting the pieces wrong. Let me now give an example.

Let’s say you’re ready to begin studying the Gospel of Luke, and you come to the first episode (after the prologue). How does the work you spent in overviewing the book help you?

Structure of Luke 1:5-25

After some careful observation of literary clues, you’ll see that the passage breaks clearly into sections based on the narration and dialogue:

Narrative setting – 5-7
Narrative introduction of conflict – 8-12
Angel speaks – 13-17
Zechariah responds – 18
Angel speaks – 19-20
Narrative climax and resolution – 21-23
Narrative new setting – 24-25

And as you look even more closely at the details, you’ll see that these sections are actually arranged concentrically (as a chiasm). Even the narrative sequence of events supports the structure (mention of Zechariah the priest, and the people praying in reverse order in 8-12 and 21-23).

Setting: An elderly couple’s reproach – 5-7
- Tension introduced: Priest chosen for incense duty – 8-9
  - Rising action: People outside praying – 10
    - Rising action: Angel appears with words from God – 11-17
      - Zechariah: “How will I know? I’m old!” – 18
    - Rising action: Angel decrees silence until word fulfilled – 19-20
  - Rising action: People waiting outside and wondering -21
- Climax/resolution: Priestly service ends in silence and signs – 22-23
New setting: The wife speaks of her reproach being taken away – 24-25

So the narrative conflict revolves around the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for this elderly, reproached priest to offer incense. How will he do? Will he prove faithful? Will his disgraced, childless status affect his ability to serve as priest in any way?

The word of God comes to him, but he does not believe (Luke 1:20)—not even when the most important, chief angel is the one to deliver the message. Whoops! So the passage hinges on Zechariah’s response in Luke 1:18.

The resolution of the tension is actually an anti-resolution: He emerges successful from his service of offering incense, but unable to speak. Since he will not listen to God’s words through the angel Gabriel, he will have no words of his own to speak.

Help from the Big Picture

So what are we to make of this? We could draw significant lessons simply from observing and interpreting the text itself. How does the book’s big picture help at all?

First, we must remember that Luke’s stated purpose to his primary audience (Theophilus) is “that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught” (Luke 1:4). Paul is on trial for his life, and Luke wants to give Theophilus all the facts of this Christian movement.

Then the very first scene of the book hinges on the question “How shall I know this?” (Luke 1:18). Luke opens his book with a man asking the very question Theophilus would have regarding Christianity and Paul’s defense.

Second, when we consider that the Jewish priests are the chief accusers of Paul (Acts 24:1-8), we realize it’s no accident that Luke opens his book with the story of a Jewish priest. A priest serving in the temple — the very place Paul was accused of having profaned (Acts 24:6). And that priest’s service in the temple doesn’t prevent him from being characterized by unbelief (Luke 1:20). It’s as though Luke wants Theophilus to see from the beginning that you can’t really trust what Jewish priests say. Even when they serve in the temple. Even when they get a message directly from God by the hand of the most famous angel.

Now, of course we see Zechariah come around by the end of his story, believing the promises of God (Luke 1:62-64, 67-79). But that doesn’t change the fact that he clearly does not believe God’s word at first. And this only highlights Luke’s purpose for his secondary audience — that the Jews might repent and believe.

The Main Point of Luke 1:5-25

So Gabriel says some remarkable things in Luke 1:13-17. And it’s all there for a purpose. But we should note that the prophecy about John, his role like Elijah, his presumed Nazirite lifestyle, and his effect on the hearts of his generation are all supportive of the main point. These things certainly make up part of the message we must believe. But if we come away from this passage armed with only the theology of John’s role in God’s plan, we have missed the main thing.

The main point is: How do we know? Can we really trust any of these reports? Can we trust an account about an encounter with a supernatural being?

Luke wants Theophilus, along with the rest of us, to know that we can have certainty regarding what we’ve heard about Christianity — just possibly not from a first century Jewish priest. And those who will not listen to the word from God will have nothing useful to say.

Application

Having seen Luke’s main idea, we’re ready to consider application.

We all tend to know what ails us. We are aware of the reproach and shame we feel.

And we can know God’s rescue plan. We can know God’s intentions to turn our hearts back to him. We can know joy and gladness once again, in the Lord’s plan of salvation.

But listening to the wrong voices (those with the greatest authority and the largest following in our culture) won’t get us any closer to the truth. Those who won’t listen to God’s plan for the world’s salvation will have nothing of value to say.

Therefore, we can trust God’s plan to rescue us from our worst ailment. This passage doesn’t say anything about Jesus yet, but it sets us up to be ready for him.

And we don’t need to fear the bluster of those who won’t believe. They may have all kinds of accusations against the faithful. But we can know that their accusations will fall to the ground. They will one day be silenced.

The Main Point of Luke’s Gospel

October 18, 2019 By Peter Krol

Would you like to study Luke’s gospel? Whether you do it for your own edification or to lead a group of friends or students, you must grasp the big picture. Fail to grasp the big picture, and you will get the pieces wrong.

Too often, we study the Bible like we’re United States Navy SEALs. We infiltrate the book via HALO—high altitude, low opening—jump (learn just enough about the book’s basic historical background). We parachute in to the landing zone (the chosen text) and conduct our mission to secure the asset (a nugget of truth or practical application). We then pursue extraction under cover of darkness and radio HQ with the “all clear” (bridging contexts from the ancient world to today).

And we do this week after week, chapter after chapter, without coming away with any real grasp on the argument made by the author, or his intentions for his original audience. Therefore, like Navy SEALs, we can accomplish a narrowly-defined mission. But we haven’t taken the time to assimilate to the culture we’re infiltrating. We don’t understand that foreign nation’s political process, class consciousness, economic aspirations, folk tales, or hopes and dreams for the future. We’re not able to represent the interests of this foreign land (in this case, the book of Luke) nor serve as competent ambassadors to our own (as we seek to apply this ancient text in our setting).

What’s at Stake

You’ve probably got some favorite or familiar passages from Luke. Maybe you’ve taught or preached them to various audiences.

The Christmas story
Simeon’s and Anna’s testimony regarding the infant Jesus
Jesus’ preaching of Isaiah in the synagogue at Nazareth
Simon’s great catch of fish
The good Samaritan
Martha serving while Mary sits at Jesus’ feet
Sending out the 70
Repent or perish
The prodigal son
The rich man and Lazarus
The disabled woman healed
The Last Supper
The crucifixion
The resurrection
Walking down the road to Emmaus
Explaining the Old Testament to the disciples

But can you confidently or competently explain what Luke meant by these episodes? Can you explain how they fit into his structure, or how they drive his main idea home? Can you identify why Luke cared enough to include these stories, or why Luke’s take on them differs from that of other gospel writers?

If the answer to any of those questions is “no,” how can you be certain you haven’t been using these stories the way a drunk uses a lamppost—more for support than for illumination? Can you be sure these words have been speaking to you, and you haven’t been dictating to them?

Rounding Up the Data

This is why I’ve spent many weeks overviewing this lengthiest of all New Testament books. That length can be daunting enough to dissuade us from a full-book overview and make us more comfortable to simply parachute in to a chapter here and a chapter there.

So here is where we’ve been so far in this overview:

Let me remind you of the train-of-thought outline I proposed for the book:

Christianity is on trial, and this orderly account will help you to be certain regarding what you’ve heard about the movement – 1:1-4
The Defendant’s Credentials – 1:5-4:13
1. The Salvation of God – 1-2
2. The Son of God – 3:1-4:13
The Defendant’s Fundamentals – 4:14-9:50
1. His Teaching – 4:14-6:49
2. His Offer of Salvation Through Faith – 7:1-8:56
3. His Followers – 9:1-50
The Defendant’s Goals – 9:51-19:27
1. Proclaiming His Kingdom – 9:51-10:37
2. Growing His Kingdom – 10:38-13:21
3. Numbering His Citizens – 13:22-17:10
4. Timing His Kingdom – 17:11-19:27
The Defendant’s Vindication – 19:28-24:53
1. Judaism is Guilty – 19:28-21:38
2. Jesus is Innocent – 22:1-23:56
3. Israel’s Salvation has Arrived – 24:1-53

Proposing a Main Point

All that work leads me to the following main point:

The hope of Israel, God’s plan of salvation for the world, has arrived in Jesus.

Now I’m not saying that I’ve found the perfect or the absolute best way to state Luke’s main point that couldn’t be improved upon. It’s still possible that I’ve missed something or could refine this further. This sentence simply represents an effort to pull together all the data and be as clear and succinct as possible.

But as far as I can tell from my study, this statement captures the essence of what Luke aims to communicate. It encapsulates the entire train of thought from the book’s structure. It takes account of both primary (Theophilus) and secondary audiences (children of Abraham). It fits with the very purposes we can reconstruct from Luke’s intentions.

As we now study any and every passage within the gospel, we should be able to see how that passage advances Luke’s agenda. Some passages will riff on the hope of Israel. Others will expound on that hope as God’s plan of salvation. Others will direct our attention to see this hope of Israel being not merely for Israel but for the world. And yet others will land on the person of Jesus being himself the arrival point for all these hopes.

But when we consider each passage’s placement in the structure of the argument, and how that placement serves the overall agenda—we’ll be in the best place possible to grasp the author’s intent in that passage. Let’s not read our favorite stories from Luke in a vacuum, as though they were dropped from heaven for our next Sunday school lesson.

Let’s make sure we’ll have no need to be ashamed, because we handle these words of truth rightly.

The Usefulness of Luke’s Gospel

October 11, 2019 By Peter Krol

I’ve now written a number of posts presenting an overview of Luke’s gospel. I’ve addressed numerous background issues, but not simply for historical knowledge. My purpose has been to lay the groundwork for a fruitful study of Luke’s gospel. And for such study to bear fruit, we must be able to grasp the main point of the entire book. All the discussion on genre, audience, occasion, and structure has been working to this end: proposing a main point for the book.

And I have one last issue to cover before I can finally propose that main point. How did Luke expect his book to be used?

Two Audiences, Two Uses

As I’ve covered so far, Luke has at least two audiences in mind. His primary, explicit audience is the Roman official named Theophilus, serving some role or other in the Apostle Paul’s trial before Caesar (Luke 1:1-4). And the secondary, implicit audience is the Jews—both ethnic Jews who need to repent before it’s too late, and spiritual Jews, who become such by trusting in Christ.

So it’s not difficult to imagine two main ways Luke might expect people to make use of his book.

He wants Theophilus to read, understand, and consider the evidence in support of Paul’s innocence. Luke wants him to corroborate the testimony, check out the source documents, and confirm the facts. In short, Luke writes his book in order to defend Paul.

And he also wants those who would be children of Abraham to read, understand, and consider the evidence in support of Christianity’s legitimacy. Luke wants both Jews and Gentiles to corroborate the testimony, check out the source documents, and confirm the facts. In short, Luke writes his book in order to defend Christianity.

For more information, you may be interested in checking out Daniel Wallace’s overview article on Luke which argues further for this dual purpose of Luke’s gospel.

Two-fold Usefulness

With Paul on trial, Christianity is on trial. And Luke (and the Holy Spirit who inspired him) feels no embarrassment going on record in the Roman court system to stake his claim that this movement is the real deal. Christianity’s God is real. Christianity’s beginnings are real. Christianity’s truth claims are real. And Christianity’s ringleaders are trustworthy.

Luke expects his work to be cross-examined and thoroughly vetted. So go right ahead. Consider these claims. Look for holes in the testimony. Review the cited documentation. Give it your best shot; Luke is not afraid of political, historical, or scientific verification. He’s presented his material in an orderly fashion to make it easier to cross-examine and verify.

And in the end, the evidence will, in fact, show two things:

Paul is innocent.
Salvation is here.

The first conclusion is of historical interest to Luke. He wants his friend to go free.

The second conclusion is of apologetic interest to Luke. He wants the world to be saved from sin and attain to the hope of resurrection.

With this in mind, we’re ready to finally craft a main point for the book. I plan to do so next week, when I’ll also show how the main point ought to guide your study of each passage on your way through the book.

The Structure of Luke’s Gospel

October 4, 2019 By Peter Krol

Luke wrote a two-volume history of the early Christian movement to Theophilus, a Roman official who likely had some role in Paul’s trial before Caesar. The charges against Paul guided Luke in his selection of themes, and led him to appeal to the Jews to turn around before their doom fell upon them.

So how does Luke structure his gospel? How does he arrange his material in order to persuade both the Romans to acquit Paul and the world (including Jews) to receive God’s salvation?

Major Divisions

Matthew uses five major speeches to shape his gospel. Mark uses disciples and predictions. John uses signs and conversations. But Luke’s primary mechanism for signaling literary divisions is his use of setting, especially geography.

After a short preface (Luke 1:1-4), Luke opens with a statement of time and place (Luke 1:5). Since he’s presenting an “orderly account” (Luke 1:3), he goes out of his way to refer to his sources and extensive research. So we ought to expect such organization to continue.

In Luke 4:14-15, Luke tells us that Jesus returned to Galilee, and he gives us a summary statement of Jesus’ work there (“he taught in their synagogues”). Such summary statements appear to serve as Luke’s main signals that a section is beginning or ending. And Jesus remains in Galilee until Luke 9:50.

In Luke 9:51, Jesus sets his face to go to Jerusalem. From here until Luke 19:27, Luke peppers his narrative with reminders that Jesus was “on the way” (Luke 10:38, 13:22, 17:11).¹

In Luke 19:28, Jesus finally goes up to Jerusalem, and he remains there until the end of the book.

So Luke’s geographical markers give us the following major divisions for the book:

Preface (Luke 1:1-4)
Groundwork for ministry (Luke 1:5-4:13)
Ministry in Galilee (Luke 4:14-9:50)
Ministry on the way to Jerusalem (Luke 9:51-19:27)
Ministry in Jerusalem (Luke 19:28-24:53)

Now Luke is a long book. Can we subdivide these major sections any further?

Luke 1:5-4:13

The early chapters begin with scenes that alternate between John and Jesus:

Prediction of John’s birth – Luke 1:5-25
- Prediction of Jesus’ birth – Luke 1:26-38
  - Celebration of the two coming children, who will bring salvation – Luke 1:39-56
John’s birth – Luke 1:57-80
- Jesus’ birth – Luke 2:1-20
  - Celebration of Jesus’ coming, which brings salvation – Luke 2:21-52

Then we get another major statement of setting (Luke 3:1-2) and another alternation between John and Jesus:

John’s baptism and credentials, preparing for the true son of God – Luke 3:3-20
- Jesus’ baptism and credentials as the Son of God – Luke 3:21-4:13

So Luke’s first major division has two subdivisions:

The salvation of God – Luke 1:5-2:52
The Son of God – Luke 3:1-4:13

Luke 4:14-9:50

I’m frankly uncertain regarding how to subdivide this section. I’ve come across two schemes that both make sense.

One framework divides the text thematically:

Jesus’ teaching – Luke 4:14-6:49
Jesus’ offer of salvation through faith – Luke 7:1-8:56
Jesus’ followers – Luke 9:1-50

This framework fits with the content of the material. The statement, “After he had finished all his sayings in the hearing of the people” (Luke 7:1), sure sounds like a concluding transition statement into a new section. And it’s exactly the sort of thing Luke would say to “order” his account. But there is no clearly corresponding transition statement at Luke 8:56 or Luke 9:1 to suggest a division there. But “faith” is certainly a major theme in chapters 7-8. And Luke 9 appears to switch topics.

So a second possible framework is worth considering:

Jesus’ first tour of Galilee – Luke 4:14-7:50
Jesus’ second tour of Galilee, with his disciples – Luke 8:1-56
Jesus’ third tour of Galilee, sending his disciples – Luke 9:1-50

The best evidence in favor of this framework is the presence of clearer literary signals in the text (Jesus’ “going out” or “sending out” at the beginning of each of the three sections). The downside to this framework is that it can be difficult to see a unified message in each of the sections.

So I prefer the first framework, but I could easily be persuaded to reconsider.

Luke 9:51-19:27

In this part of the book, it’s easier to identify clear subdivisions, because of Luke’s reminders that Jesus was “on the way” (Luke 10:38, 13:22, 17:11).¹ These are not incidental statements without purpose. They serve as literary markers for the sections. In addition, each of the four sections opens with a question from someone for Jesus, and the rest of the section proceeds to answer the question.

Do you want us to call down fire to consume them? – Luke 9:51-10:37
Do you not care that I’m left to serve alone? – Luke 10:38-13:21
Will those who are saved be few? – Luke 13:22-17:10
When will the kingdom of God come? – Luke 17:11-19:27

The outline will be more memorable and concise, though, if we use the answers instead of the questions:

Proclaiming his kingdom – Luke 9:51-10:37
Growing his kingdom – Luke 10:38-13:21
Numbering his citizens – Luke 13:22-17:10
Timing his kingdom – Luke 17:11-19:27

Luke 19:28-24:53

Once again, we ought to expect some signals from Luke to show us the “orderly” nature of his account. So what do we find?

First, Jesus draws near to Jerusalem by drawing near to Bethphage and Bethany, at “the mount that is called Olivet” (Luke 19:28-29). So as we look for structural markers, we should look for a corresponding summary statement of setting. And we find it in Luke 21:37-38, where Jesus was “teaching in the temple” every day, but retiring to “the mount called Olivet” every night. So Luke 19:28-21:38 make up the first subdivision. In between these bookends, we see the content of Jesus’ “teaching in the temple”—a condemnation of Israel’s current generation.

Second, the next verses tell us that the Passover drew near, and the chief priests and scribes were seeking how to put him to death (Luke 22:1-2). This setting reaches its completion, of course, when Jesus is dead and seemingly done away with on the feast’s Day of Preparation (Luke 23:54-56). In between, we’re told repeatedly that Jesus was innocent and undeserving of this conspiracy (Luke 23:4, 14, 22, 41, 47, etc.).

This leaves us with chapter 24, the grand climax, where the living is not to be found among the dead (Luke 24:5), where the hope of Israel (Luke 24:21) is found in all the Scriptures (Luke 24:27, 32, 44-46), and where the worship of Jesus is found at Bethany (Luke 24:50-52) and the blessing of God is found at the temple in Jerusalem (Luke 24:53).

To summarize, we’ve got the following subdivisions:

Israel is guilty – Luke 19:1-21:38
Jesus is innocent – Luke 22:1-23:56
Israel’s salvation has arrived – Luke 24:1-53

Summary and Conclusion

To summarize, the structure shows us the following train of Luke’s thought:

Christianity is on trial, and this orderly account will help you to be certain regarding what you’ve heard about the movement – Luke 1:1-4
The Defendant’s Credentials – 1:5-4:13
1. The Salvation of God – 1-2
2. The Son of God – 3:1-4:13
The Defendant’s Fundamentals – 4:14-9:50
1. His Teaching – 4:14-6:49
2. His Offer of Salvation Through Faith – 7:1-8:56
3. His Followers – 9:1-50
The Defendant’s Goals – 9:51-19:27
1. Proclaiming His Kingdom – 9:51-10:37
2. Growing His Kingdom – 10:38-13:21
3. Numbering His Citizens – 13:22-17:10
4. Timing His Kingdom – 17:11-19:27
The Defendant’s Vindication – 19:28-24:53
1. Judaism is Guilty – 19:28-21:38
2. Jesus is Innocent – 22:1-23:56
3. Israel’s Salvation has Arrived – 24:1-53

¹I’m grateful for William Taylor’s Read, Mark, Learn volumes on Luke, which persuaded me of Luke’s structural use of these “on the way” statements. The Amazon link is an affiliate link. If you click it and buy anything, you’ll provide a small commission to this blog at no extra cost to yourself.

Luke’s Secondary Audience

September 27, 2019 By Peter Krol

Upon analyzing Luke’s treatment of the Jews in both Luke and Acts, I concluded that neither Jesus, nor Paul, nor Luke gleefully wished doom on the Jews. Paul says as much regarding himself, in both Acts (Acts 28:19-20) and his own letters (e.g. Rom 9:1-3, 10:1). Yet he remains confident in the justice of that coming doom as retribution for the way the Jews treated both their God and his message (1 Thess 2:14b-16).

So throughout both Luke and Acts, we ought to notice a consistent thread of appeal to the Jews to turn around before it’s too late. Though Luke’s primary audience is Theophilus (Luke 1:3, Acts 1:1), a “most excellent” Roman official, Luke extends persistent invitations to a secondary audience, the Jewish people, to repent while they still can.

Luke’s Appeal to the Jews

Luke wants the Jews to repent and turn to Jesus.

We see this appeal in Jesus’ tearful regret over his people (Luke 19:41-44). We see it in Jesus’ stern warning after they try to implicate Pontius Pilate (Luke 13:1-5). Luke follows that warning with a parable (Luke 13:6-8) and healing episode (Luke 13:10-17) whose allusions to the rotten vine of Isaiah (Isaiah 5:1-7) and the subsequent ethical condemnation (Isaiah 5:8-25) must not be missed.

We see the appeal in Jesus’ inaugural sermon in Luke, where he offers himself to the people of Israel, for the sake of their liberty, sight, and reception of God’s favor (Luke 4:17-21). We see the appeal in one of Jesus’ final discourses, where he foretells the precise signs that generation should look for to recognize the doom before it hits (Luke 21, especially Luke 21:29-33).

We see the appeal in the words of Peter when he begs his fellow Jews to save themselves from “this crooked generation” (Acts 2:40). We see it again when Peter exposes once again the Jews’ rejection of their Messiah, even while once again offering the ignorant a chance to trust the Prophet whom God sent to give them life (Acts 3:12-26).

We can see the appeal in the words of Mary, Zechariah, and Simeon, who offer help to Israel (Luke 1:54-55), mercy to Israel (Luke 1:72), and glory to Israel (Luke 2:32). It is the unrequited hope in this redemption for Israel that has crushed the two disciples on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:21). This hope in the restoration of Israel is on the minds of Jesus’ disciples even in their last days with him (Acts 1:6-7). This same hope, sometimes labeled as hope in the resurrection, inspires Paul at every step (Acts 23:6, 24:15). Paul’s hope in these promises have put him in chains (Acts 26:6-7, 28:20).

Through both volumes, Luke constantly appeals to the Jews—perhaps even the same Jews who now accuse Paul before Caesar—to find the very hope they seek (Acts 26:6-7). But to find it, they must stop doing what they are doing (Luke 3:7-8) and receive cleansing on the inside from the mighty one (Luke 3:15-16).

An Appeal for Salvation

And this hope which Luke, Jesus, and Paul share for the Jews, this “hope of Israel” for which Paul is in chains (Acts 28:20), can be summarized in a single word which Luke uses more than any other gospel writer: salvation.

Besides Luke, only John uses the noun, and only once (John 4:22). Luke uses it 5 times in his gospel (Luke 1:69, 1:77, 2:30, 3:6, 19:9) and 6 times in Acts (Acts 4:12, 7:25, 13:26, 13:47, 16:17, 28:28). Luke alone includes Isaiah’s line about all flesh seeing “the salvation of God” in his description of John the Baptist’s ministry (Luke 3:6). Simeon sees this salvation in the infant Jesus (Luke 2:30), and it can come to any house of Abraham’s true children (Luke 19:9)—those who repent and believe.

Luke uses the verb form “save” (sometimes also translated “made well” or “healed”) more times than any other gospel writer. And he is the only one beside John (again, only once, in John 4:42) to use the personal title Savior (Luke 1:47, 2:11).

Luke is deeply concerned with salvation. It’s the thing a Savior effects when he saves people. This salvation is something the Jews can find nowhere but in Jesus the Savior (Luke 2:11, Acts 4:12).

And yet, when they reject it, God offers it freely to the Gentiles instead (Acts 28:28). “They [the Gentiles] will listen” are Paul’s last words in Luke’s body of writing. They are the last words put in the mouth of any character. They represent Luke’s parting shot, his fourth-quarter Hail Mary pass. His desperate appeal to the Jews, motivating them through jealousy (Rom 10:19).

Conclusion

Though we have good reason to read Luke (and Acts) as a trial-brief to help exonerate the Apostle Paul from the charges laid against him by the Jews, that defense of Paul before the Roman official Theophilus is clearly not Luke’s only purpose. Luke also seeks to win the Jews who accuse Paul—and Jews around the world—to receive their own Messiah, and with him the salvation of God. That Messiah rose from the dead to make it possible.

Yet even if the Jews don’t receive their Messiah, God remains eager to save (Luke 14:15-24). Therefore his offer of “salvation to his people in the forgiveness of their sins” (Luke 1:77) will find a warm reception among the other nations of the world (Luke 2:30-32, 4:25-27, 11:29-32, Acts 8:5-8, 10:1-5, 13:48-51, etc.).

We could therefore possibly identify a tertiary audience for Luke’s gospel in the Gentiles of the world who likewise need and will receive God’s salvation offered in Christ. But I find it simpler to see them as part of the same “secondary audience.” In other words, faithful Jews are not those who are Jews merely outwardly—via ancestry—but those who are Jews inwardly, with circumcised heart (Rom 2:28-29). True Jews are those who repent and believe in Jesus the Messiah. And God is able to raise up such children for Abraham from the stones if he pleases (Luke 3:7-8).

So while Luke addresses Theophilus directly, he also implicitly writes his book for all of Abraham’s children, be they Jew or Gentile, to lead them to repentance and faith in the risen Savior, who is Christ the Lord.

Luke’s Treatment of the Jews

September 20, 2019 By Peter Krol

The themes of Luke and Acts are shaped by the charges brought against Paul by the Jewish leadership. So in continuing our overview of Luke’s gospel, we ought to look at how Luke portrays the Jews, and especially the leadership. In this post, I’ll land on the key points in Luke’s gospel, but I’ll end with a few comments from Acts as well.

The Jews in Luke’s Gospel

Of course, no people group is monolithic. So authors rarely treat them as such. Therefore, we should not be surprised to see a variety of portraits of Jewish people in Luke’s gospel.

While some of the greatest acts of faith, in Luke’s gospel, take place among foreigners (Luke 7:8-9, 17:17-19), many Jews still demonstrate sincere faith in the identity or promises of Jesus: the paralytic’s friends (Luke 5:20), a sinful woman (Luke 7:50), a bleeding woman (Luke 8:48), a synagogue ruler (Luke 8:50), and a blind man (Luke 18:42).
Jesus’ own mother is in many ways a faithful, model Israelite, trusting the Lord’s word (Luke 1:38), ruminating on God’s ancient promises (Luke 1:46-55), and obeying everything written in the law of Moses (Luke 2:22-24, 39).
A few select witnesses understand who Jesus is and what he came to do (Luke 2:15-17, 34-35, 36-38).
While multitudes of Jews seek Jesus out for teaching and healing, at least 11 stuck close to him (Luke 6:13-16).
A number of marginalized Jews play key roles in making Jesus’ ministry possible (Luke 8:1-3).
Yet notwithstanding these positive examples, Jesus wonders whether he will, in the end, find faith among those who ought to be faithful (Luke 18:1-8). This leads him into severe criticism of the Jewish leadership (Luke 18:9-14).

Jewish Leaders in Luke’s Gospel

Luke’s portrayal of the Jewish leaders is quite bleak. This ought not surprise us, as this is likely the very group of people Luke must defend Paul against.

It’s no coincidence that Luke’s opening scene, after his preface, describes a Jewish priest inside the temple of God in Jerusalem. And this holy man on a holy task can’t recognize the holy word of God when he hears it. The angel Gabriel must defend his credentials to this priest before cursing him with muteness (Luke 1:18-20)—if you won’t trust God’s word, you’ll have nothing of your own to say. So while this priest comes around by the end of his story (Luke 1:63-64, 67-79), he has a rather inauspicious beginning. It’s as though Luke wants us to be suspicious from the start of Jewish priests serving in the temple!
When Jesus first arrives at the temple, as an infant, the two people who recognize his identity are not priests (Luke 2:25, 36-37)!
The civil leader closest to being Jewish refuses to repent of his sin (Luke 3:18-20), thereby finding himself utterly unprepared to meet the King of the Jews (Luke 23:8-12).
Unlike Matthew (Matt 3:7) and John (John 1:19), Luke doesn’t mention any Jewish leaders going out to visit John the Baptist (Luke 3:7, 10-14).
Luke’s first mention of the Pharisees has them questioning Jesus’ identity (Luke 5:17-21). It doesn’t take them long to start plotting his downfall (Luke 6:7, 11). Luke tells us outright that they rejected the purpose of God for themselves (Luke 7:29-30) and were lovers of money (Luke 16:14).
The Pharisees repeatedly extend hospitality to Jesus (Luke 7:36, 11:37, 14:1), yet Luke always uses the episode to expose their mistaken beliefs and evil motives.
They ask him questions under false pretenses (Luke 5:30, 6:2, 13:31, 17:20), and they lie in wait for him (Luke 11:53-54).
Of course, they arrest Jesus under cover of darkness and on trumped-up charges (Luke 22:52-53, 23:2).
They play the primary role in manipulating Pilate to execute Jesus (Luke 23:10, 13-18). We know of only one of their number who did not agree with the council’s decision to condemn Jesus (Luke 23:50-51).

Jewish Crowds in Luke’s Gospel

Under such poor leadership, it’s inevitable that the rot would likewise infect the masses.

Jesus’ own townspeople try to kill him (Luke 4:28-29).
As in all the gospels, the crowds come out to hear him teach (Luke 5:1) and to get healed (Luke 5:15).
However in Luke, it’s only “the multitude of his disciples”—not a broadly Jewish crowd—who acclaims his entry to Jerusalem (Luke 19:37). The Pharisees ask Jesus to shut them up (Luke 19:39-40).
A theme unique to Luke is Jesus’ surprising sorrow over the coming fate of the people. He weeps for them while riding his donkey (Luke 19:41-44). On the way to his own death, he ominously advises the daughters of Jerusalem to weep not for him but for themselves and their children over their coming doom (Luke 23:28-31).
The coming doom on that generation of Jews is a major theme for Luke (Luke 12:49-59, 13:1-9, 13:27-30, 13:34-35, 21:5-36).

Hope for Jews

Notwithstanding all the negativity toward the majority of Jews who reject or oppose Jesus, Luke presents tremendous hope for the people of Israel.

From the beginning of Luke’s history, there is much hope extended to Israel:

John will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God (Luke 1:16).
Jesus will reign over the house of Jacob forever (Luke 1:32-33).
In Mary’s pregnancy, God has helped his servant Israel in remembrance of his mercy to Abraham and his seed (Luke 1:54-55).
The prophetic calling of John involves giving knowledge of salvation to God’s people in the forgiveness of their sins (Luke 1:76-79).
In the baby Jesus, Simeon sees God’s salvation, which is glory for Israel (Luke 2:29-32).
Anna speaks of the baby Jesus finally bringing to pass the redemption of Jerusalem (Luke 2:38).

This theme of hope for Israel leads Luke to recount Jesus’ patient exposition of the Old Testament to show that he, in fact, is the one who will redeem Israel (Luke 24:21, 25-27).

Jewish Leaders in Acts

In the book of Acts, we see the Jewish leaders continuing their opposition to Jesus by escalating their opposition against Jesus’ followers. The Jewish leaders:

are annoyed at the apostles’ teaching (Acts 4:1-2)
arrest the apostles (Acts 4:3, 5:17-18)
ask questions under false pretenses (Acts 4:7)
can’t figure out what to do (Acts 4:15-17: 5:33-39)
command the apostles to stop speaking (Acts 4:18, 5:28, 5:40)
beat the apostles (Acts 5:40)
allow themselves to be manipulated into prosecuting Christians (Acts 6:12-14)
persecute the church (Acts 8:1, 9:1-2)
plot to kill Paul (Acts 9:23-24, 14:5, 18:12-13, 20:3, 20:18-19, 21:11, 23:12-15, 23:20-21, 23:27, 24:2-9, 25:2, 25:7, 25:15, 26:21)
are pleased with the death of James (Acts 12:3)
whip up lynch mobs (Acts 13:50, 14:19, 17:5, 17:13, 21:27-30, 22:22-24)
remain doggedly resistant to receiving Gentiles into the church, even after coming to faith in Christ (Acts 11:2-3, 15:1-2)

Yet even in Acts, there is hope for the Jews.

A great many of the priests come to faith (Acts 6:7).
The first converts in many towns are Jews (Acts 13:43, etc.).
“More noble” Jews in Berea consider Paul’s teaching in light of the Old Testament Scripture (Acts 17:11).

There is hope for the Jews precisely because Paul’s mission, all along, has been to bring the Jews their promised hope (Acts 26:6-8, 28:18-20).

Conclusion

Across the entire two-volume history of Luke and Acts, all these observations boil down to a few key assertions:

Jesus came to fulfill all God’s promises to the Jews, putting Israel at the center of God’s work in the world.
The apostles (especially Paul) preached a message consistent with Jesus’ mission to fulfill God’s promises to the Jews.
A few Jews received and participated in that message.
Many Jews, especially leaders, rejected that message and tried to squash it out by any means necessary.
Because of this rejection of their own Messiah, Luke expects the first century Jews to suffer a terrible doom on their temple and nation.
In the first century AD, the Christians are not disturbers of the Roman peace; the Jewish leaders are. Therefore Rome will herself serve as the agent of God’s vengeance on the Jewish people (Luke 21:20-24). Jesus—and Paul, for that matter—is like a new Jeremiah, weeping over a new calamity coming upon Jerusalem and its temple at the hands of a new Babylon.

Neither Jesus, nor Paul, nor Luke gleefully wish this doom on the Jews. Perhaps this trial-brief could have another purpose besides simply persuading Theophilus of Paul’s innocence…?

« Previous Page