Whedon S Commentary on the Bible - Luke (Daniel Whedon)

《Whedon’s Commentary on the Bible - Luke》(Daniel Whedon)

Commentator

Daniel Whedon was born in 1808 in Onondaga, N.Y. Dr. Whedon was well qualified as a commentator. He was professor of Ancient Languages in Wesleyan University, studied law and had some years of pastoral experience. He was editor of the Methodist Quarterly Review for more than twenty years. Besides many articles for religious papers he was also the author of the well-known and important work, Freedom of the Will. Dr. Whedon was noted for his incisive, vigorous style, both as preacher and writer. He died at Atlantic Highlands, N.J., June 8, 1885.

Whedon was a pivotal figure in the struggle between Calvinism and Arminianism in the nineteenth-centry America. As a result of his efforts, some historians have concluded that he was responsible for a new doctrine of man that was more dependent upon philosophical principles than scripture.

01 Chapter 1

Verse 1

§ 1.—LUKE’S PREFACE, Luke 1:1-4.

1. Forasmuch—Luke here informs us that the many attempts made to reduce the oral and documentary gospel matter to form had induced him to furnish a complete, orderly, and reliable Gospel.

Many—The history of the doings and sayings of Jesus would necessarily constitute a main amount of the preaching of the apostles. Of this history so preached every Church, at any rate, if not many private Christians, would desire to possess some sketch or summary. These would be raw material for history, but not of sufficient authority to become a standard gospel for the Christian Church at large. Among these defective particulars of the many, the gospels of Matthew and Mark, even if written previous to the publication of Luke’s, are not to be included. Matthew’s gospel as yet was in the Hebrew language, and Mark’s was published in distant Italy, so that neither probably was yet in circulation in the locality where Luke was conversant.

Have taken in hand—Have undertaken. The phrase in itself expresses neither success nor failure; and so implies neither praise nor censure. The only terms, indeed, in which Luke implies censure are those in which he expresses the excellences he expected his own gospel to exhibit. These excellences will be found to consist in the earliness of the point at which his history begins the care with which he had investigated everything to the bottom, and the certainty of his confirmation.

To set forth in order—To arrange. It does not, therefore, seem that Luke reprehends any very great want of orderly arrangement in the documents of these

many. A declaration—A narrative or relation. Something less than a history, yet constituting a summary of the matter, however long or short.

Things… most surely believed among us—Things held as absolute facts, on the surest evidence, by the full faith of the Church.

Verse 2

2. Delivered them unto us—This delivery being previous to writing must have been oral. The us to whom they were delivered must be the Church and people contemporaneous with the apostles, and to whom they preached. The phrase “handed down,” therefore, is not a proper translation of the Greek term; for that would imply that the receiver belonged to a later generation. Luke, though after the apostles in rank, was probably their coeval in time.

From the beginning—The beginning of the public ministry of Jesus.

Eyewitnesses—To be “witnesses chosen before of God” of the doings and sayings of Jesus was the very essence and object of the apostolic office. Acts 10:41; Acts 1:8; Acts 1:22; Acts 26:16. In accordance with this is the bold declaration of Peter at a later day: “We have not followed cunningly devised fables… but were eye-witnesses.” On equally strong grounds does John, near the close of the first century, later, in fact, than the publication of this gospel, place his own testimony: “That which was from the beginning, which we have HEARD, which we have SEEN with our EYES, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled… declare we unto you.” 1 John 1:1. Such declarations afford no room, no interval of time, no chance for the intervention of fabricators for forming traditions, legends, or myths. Our gospels are the plain records of the statements of actual spectators.

Ministers of the word—The terms eyewitnesses and ministers are epithets for the same persons. The apostles were to be eye-witnesses of the facts, in order to be official rehearsers of the history.

Verse 3

3. It seemed good to me also—This seeming good to himself does not exclude a concurrence with the influence of inspiration, nor a use of the aid of Paul. So in the letters of the counsel at Jerusalem, it is said, “it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us.” Acts 15:28.

Having had perfect understanding—Having completely traced out by investigation to the utmost. Luke here writes in the true conscientious historical spirit. Though he had not studied in the schools of modern criticism, he had all the means of immediate investigation, of which the rules of modern criticism seek to supply the want. Conscientiousness and common sense, with facts and witnesses so near at hand, were incomparably superior to any critical apparatus of the modern professor. Besides, he had more than any secular historian can claim. He had a providential commission, a divine inspiring guidance, and the endowment of the discerning of spirits. He so wrote by order of the great Head of the Church, and his record was accepted by the Church in its gifted and blessed first age.

From the very first—This refers to the early point to which Luke’s investigations carried the beginning of his history back, namely, to the angel’s announcement to Zacharias in Luke 1:5.

In order—Not a mere unarranged miscellany, or series of swings or doings, but a narrative with a beginning, middle, and end. This does not pledge Luke to an absolutely accurate observance in details of chronological order; for of that his documents may not have always furnished him the means. Yet no evangelist is so careful to connect his events chronologically with contemporaneous secular history as Luke; no error, we firmly believe, has ever been truly detected in his professed chronological statements; and if the investigations of Wieseler be reliable, Luke has well sustained any professions of a chronological order which he can be supposed to have here made.

Most excellent Theophilus—As the name Theophilus signifies a lover of God, some have supposed that it stands as a symbol to represent any Christian reader. But the literal writings of the New Testaments know no such use of symbolic names. The epithet most excellent indicates not affection simply for a friend, but respect for elevated character or rank. Theophilus, therefore, must be considered as a Christian of influential character; a convert, perhaps, of Luke. Of his residence we have but one indication. The Acts of the Apostles is also addressed by Luke to Theophilus, (Acts 1:1;) and it has been noted that Luke, when his narrative brings him into Italy and near Rome, mentions such minute places as Appii Forum and the Three Taverns (Acts 28:15) precisely as if they were known to Theophilus. The inference is that he was a resident of Rome. Although, however, the name of Theophilus is not symbolic, yet Theophilus himself stands as a representative man for every Christian reader. Neither the Gospel nor the Acts are to be viewed as a mere private letter to him. In a similar way, Cicero addressed his treatises on Old Age and on Friendship to Atticus; Horace addressed his Art of Poetry to the Pisoes; and Plutarch addressed his Treatise on Divine Delay to Cynius.

This address, although it was usually attended with some personal references, yet, like a modern dedication of a book, was simply a token of respect for an honoured friend; and the composition itself was none the less a work for the public and posterity.

Verse 4

4. Mightest know the certainty—This was the great ultimate object; that the Christian laity, of whom Theophilus was a representative, might be fully assured of the perfect confirmation of the Christian history. This confirmation would arise from the profoundly reliable character of Luke, and from his perfect understanding of all things, even

from the very first. Hast been instructed—The Greek word here used, κατηχηθης, is that from which the words catechise and catechumen are derived. This probably refers not to the catechesis of Theophilus’s childhood; for Theophilus was probably an adult when the apostolic ministry commenced. It more probably refers to the private oral instruction preparatory to baptism which the minister of the word bestowed on the young convert, over and above the preaching of the word. This catechetical instruction would embrace such documentary or traditional history of Jesus as his particular Church possessed. Luke now proposes to give this catechetical matter a more authentic substance and form.

It is agreed among scholars that this brief preface of Luke’s is written in the purest Greek style of any passage in the New Testament.

Verse 5

5. Days of Herod—Herod, surnamed the Great. See note on Matthew 2:1.

Course of Abia—Abijah. See 1 Chronicles 24:3; 1 Chronicles 24:10; 1 Chronicles 24:19; also, Nehemiah 12:1; Nehemiah 12:4; Nehemiah 12:17. When the sons of Aaron became too numerous, David divided them into twenty-four courses, or classes. Each class had supervision of the daily service of the temple for a week. The priests for each day of the week were selected from the class by lot. On the return from the captivity but four courses were left, which were again divided into twenty-four. The course of Abia, being the eighth, it has been calculated officiated April 17-23, and in October 3-9.

His wife was of the daughters of Aaron—Both John’s parents were of priestly rank, the most honourable nobility among the Jews. It is a saying of R. Jochanan, “He that would be rich, let him join himself to the seed of Aaron; for so it is, that the law and the priesthood make rich. R. Idi bar Abin married a priestess, and from him proceeded those that were made doctors, namely, R. Shecheth, and R. Joshua.” And so Josephus says, “As among different nations there are different sorts of nobility, so with us the sharing of the priesthood is token of illustrious rank.” And so the learned Greek Jew of Alexandria, the celebrated Philo, a contemporary of Jesus, loftily said, “As far as God surpasses man in greatness, so far the high-priesthood surpasses the royalty; for the former is the service of God, the latter the care of men.” The two illustrious births now about to be announced were to be from the daughters of the sacred line of Aaron and the royal line of David.

Verses 5-25

§ 3.—ELISABETH’S CONCEPTION, Luke 1:5-25.

Luke now opens his gospel history with the striking scene which announced the approaching birth of John, the harbinger of Jesus.

During the 400 years preceding the account now to be narrated, neither vision nor miracle had been vouchsafed by God to his people. As the old canon closed with the prediction by Malachi that the coming of Elijah should precede the advent of the Messiah, so the first action of the new is to announce the true Elijah’s birth. God did but honour the ordinances of his own appointment when he made his temple the place, his priesthood the instrument, and his service the time of the initial movement.

Verse 6

6. Commandments and ordinances—Commandments refer to the moral law, ordinances to the ritual.

Blameless—Blameless even before God. Not blameless, indeed, as tried by the Christless law, which makes no allowance for infirmities; but blameless as living, through grace, under the atonement, in the undiminished approbation of God. So perfect was their faith, and so pure their life, that God imputed no blame unto them. This was their ordinary spiritual state; yet it excluded not the possibility of sin. For at a moment of trial Zacharias was betrayed into fault, and suffered a divine penalty.

Verse 8

8. While he executed the priest’s office—In order to understand the scene, which now so solemnly opens our Christian history, let the reader compare our Temple Plan in vol. i, p. 247. At the hour (probably of the

Sabbath, when all the congregation of Israel attended) the people are in the Court of Israel, and the Court of the Women, in front of the Great Altar, on which the bleeding lamb is about being placed. In the so-called HOLY PLACE is the Altar of Incense, (7,) with the Golden Table for the show-bread (6) and the Golden Candlestick (8) on either side. Two officiating priests are present; the one to supervise the sacrifice on the Great Altar, and to the other (being to-day Zacharias himself) belongs the more honourable office of burning the incense on the Golden Altar in the Holy Place.

Verse 9

9. To burn the incense—The composition of the sacred incense for the altar (which the Jews were forbidden to make for private use) is given in Exodus 30:34-38. It was in the performance of the service placed in a vase or cup, called the censer, upon the Golden Altar in the Holy Place, with burning coals beneath, producing by its smoke a powerful perfume, filling the Temple with its fragrance. As it was within the MOST HOLY, on the Sacred Ark, between the Cherubim, that God the King of Israel dwelt, whose house the Temple was, so the bread, the candlestick, and the incense were all, symbolically, furnishings for him.

Some have incorrectly supposed that Zacharias was High Priest. But that pontiff’s duty was to enter the MOST HOLY once a year to make expiation for the people; namely, on the great day of atonement.

Verse 10

10. People were praying—When the priest within the Holy Place, sprinkles the incense in the censor upon the burning altar, as the column of incense rises, the prayers of the people also ascend, of which the incense was the sacred type; and while the incense is ascending the bleeding victim is on the altar. Just so, when our prayers ascend, the great atoning victim avails in our behalf. So does the scene which introduces the new dispensation typify the results for which the new dispensation took existence.