Commentary on Luke (Commentary on the New Testament Book #3)

California

Introduction

Dear reader,

Here you have part of a commentary on the whole New Testament, published by Baker Academic both in hardback and as an ebook. The electronic version has been broken into segments for your convenience and affordability, though if you like what you find here you may want to consider the whole at a proportionately lower cost. Whether in whole or in part, the e-version puts my comments at your fingertips on your easily portable Kindle, iPad, smartphone, or similar device.

I’ve written this commentary especially for busy people like you—lay people with jobs and families that take up a lot of time, Bible study leaders, pastors, and all who take the New Testament seriously—that is, people who time-wise and perhaps money-wise can’t afford the luxury of numerous heavyweight, technical commentaries on the individual books making up the section of the Bible we call the New Testament. So technical questions are avoided almost entirely, and the commentary concentrates on what will prove useful for understanding the scriptural text as a basis for your personal life as a Christian, for discussion with others, and for teaching and preaching.

Group discussion, teaching, and preaching all involve speaking aloud, of course, and when the New Testament was written, even private reading was done aloud. Moreover, most authors dictated their material to a writing secretary, and books were ordinarily read aloud to an audience. In this commentary, then, I’ve avoided almost all abbreviations (which don’t come through as such in oral speech) and have freely used contractions that characterize speaking (we’ll, you’re, they’ve, and so on). To indicate emphasis in oral speech, italics also occur fairly often.

You’ll mostly have to make your own practical and devotional applications of the scriptural text. But such applications shouldn’t disregard or violate the meanings intended by the Scripture’s divinely inspired authors and should draw on the richness of those meanings. So I’ve interpreted them in detail. Bold print indicates the text being interpreted. Translations of the original Greek are my own. Because of the interpretations’ close attention to detail, my translations usually, though not always, gravitate to the literal and sometimes produce run-on sentences and other nonstandard, convoluted, and even highly unnatural English. Square brackets enclose intervening clarifications, however, plus words in English that don’t correspond to words in the Greek text but do need supplying to make good sense. (As a language, Greek has a much greater tendency than English does to omit words meant to be supplied mentally.) Seemingly odd word-choices in a translation get justified in the following comments. It needs to be said as well that the very awkwardness of a literal translation often highlights features of the scriptural text obscured, eclipsed, or even contradicted by loose translations and paraphrases.

Literal translation also produces some politically incorrect English. Though brothers often includes sisters, for example, sisters doesn’t include brothers. Similarly, masculine pronouns may include females as well as males, but not vice versa. These pronouns, brothers, and other masculine expressions that on occasion are gender-inclusive correspond to the original, however, and help give a linguistic feel for the male-dominated culture in which the New Testament originated and which its language reflects. Preachers, Bible study leaders, and others should make whatever adjustments they think necessary for contemporary audiences but should not garble the text’s intended meaning.

Out of respect for your abilities so far as English is concerned, I’ve not dumbed down the vocabulary used in translations and interpretations. Like the translations, interpretations are my own. Rather than reading straight through, many of you may consult the interpretation of an individual passage now and then. So I’ve had to engage in a certain amount of repetition. To offset the repetition and keep the material in bounds, I rarely discuss others’ interpretations. But I’ve not neglected to canvass them in my research.

On the theological front, the commentary is unabashedly evangelical, so that my prayers accompany this volume in support of all you who strive for faithfulness to the New Testament as the word of God.

Robert Gundry

Luke

Very early church tradition attributes the writing of this Gospel to Luke, a physician who accompanied the Apostle Paul on at least some of his travels (Colossians 4:14; 2 Timothy 4:11; Philemon 24). In accord with eyewitness reports and earlier writings, the Gospel portrays Jesus preeminently as a model of religious piety, moral purity, and political innocence—and thus as an attractive, sympathetic, and beneficent Savior of others.

A PROLOGUE INDICATING LUKE’S PRECEDENTS, METHOD, AND PURPOSE

Luke 1:1–4

The prologue consists of one long sentence, here divided in half for purposes of comment. 1:1–2: Inasmuch as many have put [their] hand to drawing up a narrative about the matters that have been brought to fulfillment among us, ²just as those who from the beginning became eyewitnesses and assistants of the word gave [those matters] over to us [by way of testifying to them] . . . . Inasmuch as is a fancy way of saying Since and therefore starts this prologue on a note of formality. The formality, which Luke carries throughout the prologue, lends credence to Luke’s precedents, method, and purpose. In connection with the rest of the prologue, Inasmuch as also indicates that earlier narratives—that is, his precedents—prompted Luke to add his own narrative. His description of the earlier narratives as many points to an abundance of testimonial evidence. Luke’s narrative will therefore result in a superabundance of such evidence. Have put [their] hand to indicates the successful production of many earlier narratives, not mere attempts at drawing them up. Drawing up a narrative means putting its events in a meaningful order. The things that have been brought to fulfillment among us consist in the events of Jesus’ life and ministry. Their having been brought to fulfillment describes them as the result of God’s activity in the fulfillment of his plan and promises dating back to the Old Testament (compare, for example, 24:44–47). Among us describes the fulfillment as having taken place in plain view and therefore as verifiable. Just as indicates an agreement between the earlier narratives and the fulfilling events themselves. Those narratives are reliable. (Luke doesn’t identify the earlier narratives, but modern students hypothesize that he’s referring to Mark’s Gospel and possibly to Matthew’s, among other, presently unknown narratives, whether written or oral.) That the things brought to fulfillment among us derive from eyewitnesses adds to the element of reliability. That the eyewitnesses saw these things from the beginning adds chronological comprehensiveness to the reliability. Assistants of the word describes the eyewitnesses as helping the word—that is, the message concerning the fulfilling events—get circulated. And gave [those things] over to us describes the circulation as a handing on of information to those who weren’t themselves eyewitnesses.

The sentence continues in 1:3–4: it has seemed good also for me, having followed [= investigated] all things carefully from the start, to write for you in an orderly way, most excellent Theophilus, ⁴so that you may know [= recognize] the certainty of the words about which you were instructed. Though not an eyewitness himself, Luke’s investigation of the eyewitness tradition has made it seem good for him to add his narrative to the earlier narratives. The care and comprehensiveness (all things . . . from the start) of his investigation lend credibility to the coming narrative. So also does the orderly way in which Luke will now write. (By the way, the order may be variously chronological, topical, and logical.) His organization of materials will reflect the carefulness of his investigation, make for clarity of presentation, and thus enhance its persuasiveness. This Theophilus can hardly be the Jewish high priest who occupied his office A.D. 37–41. So we know nothing more about the Theophilus whom Luke addresses except that Luke will also address to him the book of Acts (Acts 1:1). This address carries on the formality of tone that helps undergird Luke’s credibility. The words about which Theophilus was instructed equate with the matters that have been brought to fulfillment among us (1:1) since the matters were conveyed in testimonial words. Recognition of their certainty marks Luke’s purpose in writing. He wants to provide Theophilus, and us, a convincing historical basis for Christian belief. Historical writing doesn’t consist in a bare chronicle of events, though. So Luke will present events in the framework of an interpretation. The interpretation will contribute persuasive power to his narrative.

THE PROMISE AND ONSET OF ELIZABETH’S PREGNANCY

Luke 1:5–25

1:5–6: In the days of Herod, king of Judea [that is, during his reign, 37–4 B.C.], there was a certain priest—Zechariah by name—of the division of Abijah; and he had a wife from the daughters of Aaron [that is, a wife descended from Aaron, the elder brother of Moses and the first high priest of Israel]; and her name [was] Elizabeth. ⁶And both [of them] were righteous in God’s sight by way of traveling [a figure of speech for living their lives]—blameless—in all the Lord’s commandments and righteous requirements [as recorded in the Old Testament]. Luke starts laying a solid historical basis for Christian belief by rooting the initial episode of his narrative in the historical period of Herod, king of Judea (Judea here referring to the whole land of Israel, as also in 4:44; 6:17; 7:17; 23:5; Acts 1:8; 10:37). Added to the details of Herod’s name and title is a cavalcade of other names and details. Luke knows about a Zechariah, that this Zechariah was a priest; that he belonged to the priestly division of Abijah (which along with twenty-three other divisions served in the temple for two one-week periods each year, excluding festivals); that Zechariah had a wife; that his wife was descended from Aaron even though it wasn’t required that the wives of priests, as well as the priests themselves, should have such a pedigree; that her name was Elizabeth; that both she and he were righteous; that even God considered them righteous; that their righteousness consisted in ongoing obedience to the Lord’s commandments and righteous requirements (the twoness of this expression emphasizing the couple’s obedience); that this obedience wasn’t marred by any exceptions; and that as a result they were blameless. These details exhibit the thoroughness of Luke’s research and thus enhance the credibility of his narrative. But some of the details do more: they recommend the word that Luke narrates by calling attention to the moral attractiveness of those who played positive roles in the good news about Jesus. According to Luke’s account, this same moral attractiveness will characterize Jesus too. Throughout, Luke will appeal to our highest ideals, to what some people call the better angels of our human nature. The certainty that calls for belief in 1:4 has an admirable moral basis as well as a credible historical one.

But here are further details, ones that evoke our sympathy, especially in view of Zechariah’s and Elizabeth’s distinguished statuses (priestly and, in her case, unnecessarily Aaronic) and exemplary conduct. 1:7: And they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren; and they were both advanced in their days [that is, very old and therefore past child-producing age]. Their advanced age prepares for the coming miracle of Elizabeth’s getting pregnant by her husband. Luke delights in miracles, for they contribute to the certainty of Christian belief.

1:8–12: And it happened that while he was doing priestly service before God in the order of his division [that is, when his division was on duty in the temple], ⁹according to the custom of priestly service he was chosen by lot to offer incense upon entering into the Lord’s sanctuary [more specifically, the first room of the temple building, called the Holy Place, where the altar of incense was located]. To offer incense was to put it on the altar and burn it. ¹⁰And all the multitude of people were praying outside at the hour of incense [which could be either early morning or late afternoon, though the presence of a multitude favors late afternoon]. ¹¹And an angel of the Lord, standing at the right of the altar of incense, appeared to him. ¹²And on seeing [the angel], Zechariah was unnerved; and fear fell on him. To Zechariah’s priestly status (1:5) is now added ordinary priestly function. Before God enhances this function and connects the Christian story to Judaism. Because ancient people, unlike most moderns, distrusted novelty, Luke will keep playing on this theme of continuity, that is, Christianity as fulfilled Judaism—Judaism come of age. The custom of choosing by lot had the purpose of leaving the choice entirely to God (not to chance, for in his world nothing happens by chance [compare Acts 1:24–26]). And entering into the Lord’s sanctuary to offer incense piles extraordinary priestly privilege on top of ordinary priestly service; for not every priest got this privilege, and once a priest got it, to give other priests a better chance he was removed from the pool of lot-casting. Adding to this extraordinary privilege, Luke then bathes what’s about to happen in an aura of special sanctity—special because of its time (the hour of incense), because of what the people outside were doing at the time (praying), because of their large number (the multitude), and because of the inclusion of everyone in the praying of the multitude (all). The appearance of a divinely sent messenger, an angel of the Lord no less, heightens the sanctity immeasurably. The angel’s standing at the right of the altar of incense augurs well, for—given the righthandedness of most people—the right side is the side of favor. Nevertheless, Zechariah is unnerved and frightened—appropriately, though; for such a reaction shows an absence of temerity and thus carries forward Luke’s emphasis on the moral and religious attractiveness of those who contributed to the word about Jesus. And Zechariah’s seeing the angel contributes to the theme of reliability based on eyewitness.

1:13–17: And the angel said to him, "Stop being afraid, Zechariah, because your prayer request has been heeded [that is, heard so as to be answered positively]. And your wife Elizabeth will bear a son for you [so Zechariah must have prayed for offspring]. And you shall call his name John. ¹⁴And you’ll have joy and gladness, and many will rejoice because of his birth; ¹⁵for he’ll be great in the Lord’s sight. And by no means shall he drink wine and strong drink [that is, wine and other alcoholic beverages, like beer]. And he’ll be filled with the Holy Spirit while he’s still in his mother’s womb, and onward. ¹⁶And he’ll turn many of the sons of Israel to the Lord their God. ¹⁷And he himself will proceed before him [before the Lord their God] in Elijah’s Spirit and power to turn fathers’ hearts to children, and disobedient people into the good sense of righteous people, [that is,] to prepare for the Lord a people that have been readied [for the Lord’s coming]." Showing God’s favor toward Zechariah are the angel’s quieting his fear and promising him, despite his and his wife’s old age, a son in answer to a request he’d made in prayer and, as a result of the answer to that prayer, joy and gladness. "A son for you" underscores the favorable estimate of Zechariah and its result. Because he’s associated positively with the story of Jesus, then, the Lord’s favor toward Zechariah on account of Zechariah’s godliness brushes Jesus with virtue by association (the opposite of guilt by association). But Zechariah’s joy will spill over to many. The son’s birth will constitute the immediate basis of his and their joy. But its ultimate basis consists in the son’s high status and coming activity.

The high status comes into view with the Lord’s determining that Zechariah should name his son John. Ordinarily, a father has freedom to choose his son’s name. But the Lord has special plans for this son and therefore has the angel tell Zechariah what he must name his son. Moreover, the son will be great in the Lord’s estimation, not just in that of mere mortals (compare 7:28). His abstinence from wine and other alcoholic beverages will set him apart as specially consecrated to the service of God (compare Leviticus 10:9; Numbers 6:1–4, 20; Judges 13:4–5). The Lord’s filling him with the Holy Spirit while he’s still in his mother’s womb (compare 1:44) and onward will empower him for that service. The service will consist in turning many Israelites to the Lord. More than this, he himself will proceed ahead of the Lord. By implication, the Lord is coming—in the person of Jesus, but Luke has yet to reveal that wrinkle. And John will proceed in the power of God’s Spirit that characterized the ministry of the Old Testament prophet Elijah (compare Malachi 3:1; 4:5). The purpose and result of this Spirit-empowered ministry will be the uniting of old and young in the obedience to God that alone makes good sense and characterizes the righteous. The further purpose and result will be the preparation of a people, consisting of many of the sons of Israel, who are morally ready for the Lord when he arrives. Thus Jesus, on his arrival as the Lord’s emissary, will have people prepared so as to have the good moral sense to believe on him. Again, Luke is using his material to make a moral as well as historical case for Christianity. Allusions to the Old Testament put Christianity in the flow of divinely guided history, and Christianity’s orientation to genuine piety and righteous behavior recommends it to the human conscience. Of course, Christianity hasn’t yet come into being in Luke’s narrative. But when it does, it will appeal to the pious and righteous.

1:18–20: And Zechariah said to the angel, How shall I know this? For I’m an old man and my wife is advanced in her days. So how can she bear a son for Zechariah? ¹⁹And answering, the angel told him, I’m Gabriel, the one standing in God’s presence. That’s his usual location. And I’ve been sent to speak to you and tell you these things as good news. Gabriel changes Zechariah’s singular this, referring to the seemingly impossible birth of a son to such an aged couple, to the plural these things, referring to the son’s coming activities as well as birth. ²⁰"And behold, you’ll be silent and unable to speak until the day that these things have taken place [which would seem to be the day of the son’s birth; but Zechariah won’t recover his ability to speak till the eighth day after birth, the day of circumcision and name-giving (1:57–64), so that the birth doesn’t count technically till circumcision and acknowledgment by name-giving], because you didn’t believe my words, which as such [that is, as divinely commissioned] will be fulfilled in their due time." Here’s a fly in the ointment: Zechariah doesn’t believe the angel’s words and therefore asks how he can be sure that what the angel told him will really happen. He defends his question by noting his and his wife’s old age. He’ll get an indication how he can be sure, but first the angel notes what Zechariah should have noted to forestall any unbelief. He should have taken into consideration that an angel of the Lord wouldn’t deliver a happy message only to tease him with an impossibility. But since Zechariah didn’t consider the obvious, the angel gets more specific. He’s no less an angel than Gabriel, who stands in God’s presence when he’s not on a mission for God. And at the moment he’s on just such a mission. It’s to tell Zechariah the good news of the items recounted earlier. So Zechariah’s unbelief lacks justification and, as emphasized by behold, the tongue that expressed unbelief won’t be able to speak until the unbelief is conquered by fulfillment. Through the narration of this story Luke is telling us not to disbelieve as Zechariah did. The news really is good, and God’s promises do come to pass at their proper time. Not only is righteousness sensible. Belief in the gospel is, too.

1:21–23: And the people were waiting expectantly for Zechariah and marveling at his spending so much time in the sanctuary. It was Gabriel’s appearance and dialogue with Zechariah that took up the time, of course. ²²And on coming out, he couldn’t speak to them. This fulfillment of Gabriel’s punitive prediction foreshadows and guarantees the later fulfillment of Gabriel’s happy prediction. And they recognized that he’d seen a vision [an actual appearance, not a dream] in the sanctuary. Luke records the people’s recognition to convince us of the vision. After all, they were there and saw its effect on Zechariah. To emphasize its demonstrative effect, Luke rementions it in a twofold expression: And he himself [as distinct from the people] was gesticulating to them and remaining mute. The gesticulations dramatize Zechariah’s muteness and thus emphasize the fulfillment of Gabriel’s prediction that ability to speak won’t return till the happier predictions start happening. ²³And it came to pass that when the days of his religious service [at the temple] were fulfilled, he went away to his home. Luke doesn’t tell the whereabouts of Zechariah’s home. It’s important only that before going home, Zechariah did his religious duty despite being mute. And, naturally, going home enables him by God’s power to impregnate Elizabeth.

1:24–25: And after these days [the week that Zechariah spent serving at the temple] Elizabeth his wife conceived. So the fulfillment of Gabriel’s happy predictions gets started. And she hid herself for five months . . . . Luke isn’t interested in her motive for hiding herself the first five months of her pregnancy. He’s interested only in the outcome, namely, that the news of her pregnancy comes in the sixth month as a divine revelation and encouragement, delivered again by Gabriel, to Mary the mother of Jesus (1:26–38). Meanwhile, though, Elizabeth gives all credit to God: saying, ²⁵"Thus has the Lord done for me during the days in which he looked [on me] to take away my disgrace among human beings." The contrast between the Lord and human beings corresponds to the contrast between favor and disgrace. In that culture childlessness was considered disgraceful. The Lord’s looking on Elizabeth so as to take away this disgrace exhibits the Lord’s approval of her piety just as his promising a son for Zechariah exhibited the Lord’s approval of his piety. Luke wants us to know that those who lie at the base of Jesus’ story are good people, as are Jesus himself and his later followers. Join up. You’ll like the company.

THE PROMISE OF MARY’S PREGNANCY

Luke 1:26–38

1:26–29: And in the sixth month [of Elizabeth’s pregnancy] the angel Gabriel was sent from God [and therefore by God] into a city of Galilee that had the name Nazareth, ²⁷to a virgin engaged to a man named Joseph from the household of David [that is, descended from King David]; and the virgin’s name [was] Mary. ²⁸And on coming in to her, he said, "Rejoice, favored one; the Lord [is] with you!" ²⁹But she was very perplexed at this saying and pondered what sort of greeting this might be. The details of chronology, geography, and personal and place names breathe the air of factuality that suits Luke’s purpose of providing a solid historical basis for Christian faith. God’s sending Gabriel, as he’d sent him to promise John’s supernatural birth, leads us to expect another startling promise. The designation of Mary as a virgin marks her as chaste, in line with Luke’s theme of Jesus’ people as admirably moral, and prepares for a child-bearing that will surpass even the birth of John to parents too old to have had a child naturally. And the designation of her as engaged to a descendent of David prepares for the birth of a son who’ll occupy the Davidic throne, for legal rights—like throne rights—passed through the father’s ancestral line even though he was only a foster father. Ordinarily, the greeting Rejoice meant no more than Hello. But the following address, favored one, and declaration, the Lord [is] with you, suggest the stronger, literal translation, Rejoice, because the Lord’s favor and personal presence are matters to get happy about. There is, in fact, something of a wordplay in Luke’s original text; for both Rejoice and favored one go back to the same root and therefore share some letters (chaire and kecharitōmenē), almost as if to say, Rejoice, you who’ve been made [by the Lord] to rejoice.

Mary doesn’t understand just how or why it is she’s favored with the Lord’s presence. So Gabriel explains in 1:30–33: And the angel said to her, "Don’t fear, Mary, for you’ve found favor with God. ³¹And behold, you’ll conceive and give birth to a son. And you shall call his name Jesus. ³²This [son] will be great, and he’ll be called the Son of the Highest. And the Lord God will give him the throne of David his [fore]father, ³³and he’ll reign forever over the household of Jacob [= the nation of Israel, compared to a household, Israel being the other name of Jacob, whose twelve sons fathered the twelve tribes of Israel]. And there’ll be no end of his reign." Don’t fear, plus Gabriel’s addressing Mary by name, adds assurance to the initial greeting. You’ve found favor with God portrays her as yet another good person, like Zechariah and Elizabeth. But it also indicates that God is treating her with a favor, which Gabriel goes on to explain, introducing it with an exclamatory behold. It’s the promise that she’ll conceive and give birth to a son. As in the case of John, God’s stepping in to determine the son’s name indicates that God has special plans for Mary’s son. Since it was a father who normally named his son (as Zechariah will name John), the command that Mary should name her son Jesus implies that he won’t have a human father, at least not a biological one. Indeed, he’ll be great not just in the Lord’s sight, as John will be (1:15), but great as the Son of the Highest, that is, of God as the highest of all beings and so-called gods. No higher sonship than this! He’ll be called such because he’ll be such. Because he’ll be the Son of the Highest, the Lord God—who is the Highest—will give him the throne of his ancestor David. As a result, he’ll reign over Israel forever, without end. The Davidic character of his reign establishes continuity between the gospel of Jesus and Israel’s history and religion. Luke stresses tradition, not novelty.