《Bible Commentary - Luke》(Adam Clarke)
Commentator
Adam Clarke (1760 or 1762 - 1832) was a British Methodist theologian and Biblical scholar. He is chiefly remembered for writing a commentary on the Bible which took him 40 years to complete and which was a primary Methodist theological resource for two centuries.
Contained in 6 volumes, consisting of nearly 1,000 pages each, it was considered the most comprehensive commentary on the Bible ever prepared by one man. His commentary, particularly that on Revelation, identified the Catholic Church with the antichrist and bordered on antisemitic, as illustrated by the following quote:
"The Jewish philosophy, such as is found the Cabala, Midrashim, and other works, deserves the character of vain deceit, in the fullest sense and meaning of the words. The inspired writers excepted, the Jews have ever been the most puerile, absurd, and ridiculous reasoners in the world. Even Rabbi Maimon or Maimonides, the most intelligent of them all, is often, in his master-piece, the Moreh Neochim, the teacher of the perplexed, most deplorably empty and vain." A.C. 1831 VI p. 486
As a theologian, Clarke reinforced the teachings of Methodist founder John Wesley. He taught that the Bible provides a complete interpretation of God's nature and will. He considered Scripture itself a miracle of God's grace that "takes away the veil of darkness and ignorance."[2] With such an understanding, Clarke was first and foremost a Biblical theologian, often uneasy with purely systematic approaches to theology.
00 Introduction
Preface
THERE is little certain known of this evangelist: from what is spoken in the Scriptures, and by the best informed of the primitive fathers, the following probable account is collected:
Luke was, according to Dr. Lardner, a Jew by birth, and an early convert to Christianity; but Michaelis thinks he was a Gentile, and brings Colossians4:10, 11, 14, in proof, where St. Paul distinguished Aristarchus, Marcus, and Jesus, who was called Justus, from Epaphras, Lucas, and Demas, who were of the circumcision, i.e. Jews. Some think he was one of our Lord’s seventy disciples. It is worthy of remark that he is the only evangelist who mentions the commission given by Christ to the seventy, Luke 10:1-20. It is likely he is the Lucius mentioned Romans 16:21, and if so he was related to the Apostle Paul, and that it is the same Lucius of Cyrene who is mentioned Acts 13:1, and in general with others, Acts 11:20. Some of the ancients, and some of the most learned and judicious among the moderns, think he was one of the two whom our Lord met on the way to Emmaus on the day of his resurrection, as related Luke 24:13-35; one of these was called Cleopas, Luke 24:18, the other is not mentioned, the evangelist, himself, being the person and the relator.
St. Paul styles him his fellow-laborer, Phm 24. It is barely probable that he is the person mentioned, Colossians4:14, Luke, the beloved physician. All the ancients of repute, such as Eusebius, Gregory Nyssen, Jerome, Paulinus, Euthalius, Euthymius, and others, agree that he was a physician, but where he was born, and where he exercised the duties of his profession, are not known. Many moderns have attributed to him the most profound skill in the science of painting, and that he made some pictures of the Virgin Mary. This is justly esteemed fabulous; nor is this science attributed to him by any writer previously to Nicephorus Callisti, in the fourteenth century, an author who scarcely deserves any credit, especially in relations not confirmed by others.
He accompanied St. Paul when he first went into Macedonia, Acts 16:8-40; 20:1ff; 27:1ff; 28:1ff. Whether he went with him constantly afterwards is not certain; but it is evident he accompanied him from Greece through Macedonia and Asia to Jerusalem, where he is supposed to have collected many particulars of the evangelic history: from Jerusalem he went with Paul to Rome, where he stayed with him the two years of his imprisonment in that city. This alone makes out the space of five years, and upwards. It is probable that he left St. Paul when he was set at liberty, and that he then went into Greece, where he finished and published this Gospel, and the book of the Acts, which he dedicated to Theophilus, an honorable Christian friend of his in that country. It is supposed that he died in peace about the eightieth or eighty-fourth year of his age. Some suppose he published this Gospel fifteen, others twenty-two years after the ascension of Christ.
See much on this subject in Lardner, Works, vol. vi. p. 104, etc., and in Michaelis’s Introduction to the New Testament.
Some learned men think that Luke has borrowed considerably from St. Matthew: collate Luke 3:7-9, 16, 17, with Matthew 3:7-12; also Luke 5:20-38, with Matthew 9:2-17; also Luke 6:1-5, with Matthew 12:1-5; Luke 7:22-28, with Matthew 11:4-11; also Luke 12:22-31, with Matthew 6:25-33. It is allowed that there is considerable diversity in the order of time between St Matthew and St. Luke, which is accounted for thus: Matthew deduces the facts related in his history in chronological order. Luke, on the contrary, appears to have paid little attention to this order, because he proposed to make a classification of events, referring each to its proper class, without paying any attention to chronological arrangement. Some critics divide this history into five distinct classes or sections, in the following manner:
CLASS I. Comprehends all the details relative to the birth of Christ; with the preceding, concomitant, and immediately succeeding circumstances. Luke 1:1ff, and 2:1-40.
CLASS II. Contains a description of our Lord’s infancy and bringing up; his visit to the temple when twelve years of age; and his going down to Nazareth and continuing under the government of his parents; Luke 2:41-52.
CLASS III. Contains the account of the preaching of John Baptist, and his success; the baptism of Christ, and his genealogy. Luke 3:1ff.
CLASS IV. Comprehends the account of all our Lord’s transactions in Galilee, for the whole three years of his ministry, from Luke 4:1ff to Luke 9:1-50. This seems evident: for as soon as Luke had given the account of our Lord’s temptation in the deserts Luke 4:1-13, he represents him as immediately returning in the power of the Spirit into Galilee, Luke 4:14; mentions Nazareth, Luke 4:16; Capernaum, Luke 4:31; and the lake of Galilee, Luke 5:1; and thus, to Luke 9:50, goes on to describe the preaching, miracles, etc.; of our Lord in Galilee.
CLASS V. and last, commences at Luke 9:51, where the evangelist gives an account of our Lord’s last journey to Jerusalem: therefore this class contains, not only all the transactions of our Lord from that time to his crucifixion, but also, the account of his resurrection, his commission to his apostles, and his ascension to heaven. Luke 9:51, to Luke 24:53, inclusive.
A plan similar to this has been followed by Suetonius, ln his life of Augustus: he does not produce his facts in chronological order, but classifies them, as he himself professes, cap. 12, giving an account of all his wars, honors, legislative acts, discipline, domestic life, etc., etc. MATTHEW therefore, is to be consulted for the correct arrangement of facts in chronological order: Luke, for a classification of facts and events, without any attention to the order of time in which they occurred. Many eminent historians have conducted their narratives in the same way. See Rosenmuller. It must not, however, be forgotten, that this evangelist gives us some very valuable chronological data in several parts of the three first chapters. These shall be noticed in their proper places.
01 Chapter 1
· Usherian year of the World, 3999.
· Alexandrian year of the World, 5497.
· Antiochian year of the World, 5487.
· Constantinopolitan AEra of the World, 5503.
· Rabbinical year of the World, 3754.
· Year of the Julian Period, 4708.
· AEra of the Seleucidae, 307.
· Year before the Christian AEra, 6.
· Year of the CXCIII. Olympiad, 3.
· Year of the building of Rome, 748.
· Year of the Julian AEra, 41.
· Year of the Caesarean AEra of Antioch, 44.
· Year of the Spanish AEra, 34.
· Year of the Paschal Cycle or Dionysian Period, 529.
· Year of the Christian Lunar Cycle, or Golden Number, 15.
· Year of the Rabbinical Lunar Cycle, 12.
· Year of the Solar Cycle, 4.
· Dominical Letter, C.
· Epact, 4.
· Year of the Emperor Augustus, 25.
· Consuls, D. Laelius Balbus, and C. Antistius Vetus, from January 1 to July 1; and Imp. C. Julius Caesar Octav. Augustus XII. and L. Cornelius Sulla, for the remainder of the year. The reason why two sets of Consuls appear in this Chronology is this: the Consuls were changed every year in July, therefore, taking in the whole year, four Consuls necessarily appear: two for the first six months, and two for the latter half of the year.
The preface, or St. Luke’s private epistle to Theophilus, 1-4. The conception and birth of John Baptist foretold by the angel Gabriel, 5-17. Zacharias doubts, 18. And the angel declares he shall be dumb, till the accomplishment of the prediction, 19-25. Six months after the angel Gabriel appears to the virgin Mary, and predicts the miraculous conception and birth of Christ, 26-38. Mary visits her cousin Elisabeth, 39-45. Mary’s song of exultation and praise, 46-56. John the Baptist is born, 57-66. The prophetic song of his father Zacharias, 67-79. John is educated in the desert, 80.
Notes on Chapter 1
Verse 1. Many have taken in hand— Great and remarkable characters have always many biographers. So it appears it was with our Lord: but as most of these accounts were inaccurate, recording as facts things which had not happened; and through ignorance or design mistaking others, especially in the place where St. Luke wrote; it seemed good to the Holy Spirit to inspire this holy man with the most correct knowledge of the whole history of our Lord’s birth, preaching, miracles, sufferings, death, resurrection, and ascension, that the sincere, upright followers of God might have a sure foundation, on which they might safely build their faith. See the note on Luke 9:10.
Most surely believed among us— Facts confirmed by the fullest evidence-twn peplhroforhmenwn pragmatwn. Every thing that had been done or said by Jesus Christ was so public, so plain, and so accredited by thousands of witnesses, who could have had no interest in supporting an imposture, as to carry the fullest conviction, to the hearts of those who heard and saw him, of the divinity of his doctrine, and the truth of his miracles.
Verse 2. Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eye-witnesses— Probably this alludes to the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, which it is likely were written before St. Luke wrote his, and on the models of which he professes to write his own; and ap/ archv, from the beginning, must mean, from the time that Christ first began to proclaim the glad tidings of the kingdom; and autoptai, eye-witnesses, must necessarily signify, those who had been with him from the beginning, and consequently had the best opportunities of knowing the truth of every fact.
Ministers of the word— tou logou. Some suppose that our blessed Lord is meant by this phrase; as o logov, the Word or Logos, is his essential character in John 1:1, etc.; but it does not appear that any of the inspired penmen ever use the word in this sense except John himself; for here it certainly means the doctrine of Christ; and in this sense logov is frequently used both by the evangelists and apostles.
Verse 3. Having had perfect understanding— parhkolouqhkoti anwqen, Having accurately traced up-entered into the very spirit of the work, and examined every thing to the bottom; in consequence of which investigation, I am completely convinced of the truth of the whole. Though God gives his Holy Spirit to all them who ask him, yet this gift was never designed to set aside the use of those faculties with which he has already endued the soul, and which are as truly his gifts as the Holy Spirit itself is. The nature of inspiration, in the case of St. Luke, we at once discover: he set himself, by impartial inquiry and diligent investigation, to find the whole truth, and to relate nothing but the truth; and the Spirit of God presided over and directed his inquiries, so that he discovered the whole truth, and was preserved from every particle of error.
From the very first— anwqen, from their origin. Some think anwqen should, in this place, be translated from above; and that it refers to the inspiration by which St. Luke wrote. I prefer our translation, or, from the origin, which several good critics contend for, and which meaning it has in some of the best Greek writers. See Kypke.
Theophilus— As the literal import of this word is friend of God, qeou filov, some have supposed that under this name Luke comprised all the followers of Christ, to whom, as friends of God, he dedicated this faithful history of the life, doctrine, death, and resurrection of our Lord. But this interpretation appears to have little solidity in it; for, if all the followers of Christ are addressed, why is the singular number used? and what good end could there be accomplished by using a feigned name? Besides, kratiste, most excellent, could never be applied in this way, for it evidently designates a particular person, and one probably distinguished by his situation in life; though this does not necessarily follow from the title, which was often given in the way of friendship. Theophilus appears to have been some very reputable Greek or Roman, who was one of St. Luke’s disciples. The first four verses seem a private epistle, sent by the evangelist with this history, which, having been carefully preserved by Theophilus, was afterwards found and published with this Gospel.