The author of this treatise is the same as the author of Actions of the Envoys. After making this observation, we now search to see whether or not the traditional identification is correct. The majority view is that the various "we" passages (much of parts three through five in Actions of the Envoys) indicate that the author was one of Paulus' companions. If we follow this train of thought, a comparison with Paulus' letters (e.g., Col 4:14; Phm 24; 2 Tim 4:10f.) reveals that there is one person mentioned as a member of Paulus' party who is not mentioned in the Actions: Lukas the "beloved physician." Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that Lukas was the author both of this work and of the account giving a defense of the message which follows this one (Acts 1:1).
If we acknowledge Lukas as the author of the two historical accounts, we must still ask a question as to the date of composition. Some theorize that Lukas wrote this work quite late, c. 85 CE. However, since both books (Lukas and the Actions) refer to the destruction of the temple and siege of Jerusalem in such a way that it is evident that the First Revolt had not yet begun, it seems more likely then that the books were written prior to the beginning of the war in 66 CE.
Furthermore, the Actions leave us no account of the final hearing of Paulus, appearing to stop at a point where his vindication was believed to be imminent. Also, there is no mention of persecution by the Romans, which began under Nero after the Great Fire of Rome. With the absence of the Great Fire -- for which the author was likely an eyewitness -- it is more tenable then that the Actions were written just as the events detailed within them terminate, with the author awaiting Paulus' appearance before Nero c. 63-64 CE. Since the Actions were written after this account of Jesus' life, no date later than c. 63 CE makes sense for the work. However, the introduction to the Actions makes it appear as though that work was not long behind this one. Considering the research done for each work, we place the date of composition for Lukas at c. 60-63 CE.
Comparison to the so-called "fourth" account of Jesus' life -- that written by Johannes -- reveals that the two writings share a common timeline, something that is not true for Lukas and Markus or Lukas and Matthaiah. With Johannes having been written c. 40 CE or perhaps even earlier (see the Commentary on Johannes), and with Lukas claim that he used eyewitness accounts in composing this work (see the Preface, below), we theorize that Lukas used Johannes as one of his sources. Matthaiah was certainly one of his other sources, since Lukas and Matthaiah mention events not contained in Markus, and since Matthaiah claims to be a primary source. It is not disputed, though, that Lukas made use of other sources, for Lukas includes a substantial section of material that is not found in any other source. Here we refer especially to several of Jesus' analogies.
While Lukas' account is secondary, Lukas himself associated with Paulus and received information from primary sources -- people who had known Jesus. Furthermore, Lukas' presentation of the material indicates that he was making an effort to compile a scholarly and accurate narrative. Consequently, more weight should be attached to an account such as Lukas' than to a wholly secondary account of Jesus' life. In fact, although Johannes' account is chronological, it is never explicitly stated, and so Lukas' is the only account about which we are certain is chronological.
The traditional chapter divisions are disruptive if not annoying. The work is divided into sixty short sections which are separated into four parts. These parts begin with the nativity accounts; the sending of the Twelve; the end of signs; and the final journey to Jerusalem.
Preface
Whereas many have undertaken to prepare a narrative about those things that have been fully established among us, just as those people who became from the beginning eyewitnesses and assistants of the message delivered them to us, it seemed good also to me (who have accurately traced out all of it from the top) to write those things to you in order, Excellent Theophilus, so that you would know the certainty of the sayings about which you have been instructed.
The author begins by addressing a person called "Theophilus." Since "Theophilus" means "lover" (or friend) "of God," the name may be the author's means of indicating that the book belongs to anyone who loves God. On the other hand, there may simply have been a recipient with that name.
The purpose of the treatise is far more clear. The author sets out to prove his message, a message that was handed to him by noteworthy and trustworthy people, including eyewitnesses. Based on this carefully sketched out testimony, the reader -- who is already a believer -- will become more sure of the veracity of the message.
PART ONE
I
1:5 It happened in the days of Herod, King of Judea, that there was a high priest named Zechariah, from the course of Abijah. And his wife was from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. Now they were both just in the presence of God, walking as blameless people in all the precepts and ritual acts of Yahweh. And there was no child for them, because Elisabeth was barren, and both of them were advanced in their days.
Having indicated a purpose to write his account in chronological order, the author sets the stage for the earliest scenes in the book, linking the events not only to one another but also to common secular history, such as might likely be known by his reader.
Herod the king was otherwise known as "Herod the Great." The author places the scene in the times of Herod, which ended with his death in about 4 BCE, having become King in 39 BCE. After being appointed to power, Herod married into the priestly family and had his chief opponent executed. Herod had cities built in honor of Julius Caesar's successor, Octavian (who was renamed Caesar Augustus). Augustus in turn proclaimed Herod his friend and expanded Herod's sphere of influence.
But Herod was ruthless, even murdering his wife when he suspected her of treachery. As the temple in Jerusalem was being reconstructed under his rule, Herod ordered a golden eagle placed there -- a symbol of Rome. When the Jewish people resisted, he ordered some of them executed. Near the end of his rule, he appears to have gone mad, ordering even his sons executed. Among the days of Herod were dark times for the Jewish people, and the reader was expected to recall those times.
Now, concerning the statement about Zechariah's lineage, Lukas has few words to say -- but they say a lot. The priests had been divided originally into twenty-four groups, or courses (1Chr 24:4), according to the grandchildren of Aaron. The course of Abijah (1Chr 24:8) was one of these divisions. Thus, the reader learns that Zechariah was a priest who traced his lineage back to Aaron through Aaron's grandson, Abijah. Some commentators point to the "Abijah" that is listed in Nehemiah as having returned to Israel from the Babylonian dispersion, but Lukas' language, including his mention that it was Zechariah's week to offer incense, clearly mean that the "Abijah" in question was Aaron's grandson. Zechariah's claim to priesthood was strong, but also we read that his wife was one of Aaron's descendants also, meaning that their children would be part of the priestly lineage on both sides of their parentage.
Unfortunately, Zechariah and Elisabeth had no children. This was not a punishment for wrongdoing (as some people might have been tempted to believe), but to the contrary, everyone recognized that they followed the prescribed teachings flawlessly as they understood them. Yet still they had been unable to have children, even though the two were becoming old. The story is reminiscent of that of Abram and Sarai, who had been unable to have children so that God would do something great for the Jewish people in bringing about a covenant through Isaac and Jacob.
Now during the time when he was performing the sacred rites, during the time when his course was arranging the duties before God (according to the custom of the priesthood), it happened that it fell to him to enter into Yahweh's temple to burn incense. And all the crowd of the people were praying outside at the hour of incense burning.
1 Chronicles 31:2 indicates that Hezekiah had established that the courses of the priesthood would serve at certain times by burning incense, exactly as Zechariah is described as doing. The specifications for burning incense had been specified in Exodus 30. And so we learn that it was Zechariah's time to burn incense, as people were outside offering prayer to God. Thus, the occasion was as solemn as possible.
Now a messenger of Yahweh appeared to him, standing at the right side of the incense brazier. And when Zechariah noticed him, he was troubled, and fear fell upon him. But the messenger said to him,
"Don't be afraid, Zechariah, because your supplication has been heard, and your wife Elisabeth will give birth to your son, and you will call his name John. And he will be a joy to you and a gladdening, and many will rejoice at his birth.
The appearance of God's messenger is significant, and Lukas uses the traditional language to describe that appearance, indicating the detail of his research. The incense brazier stood next to the altar where the sacrifices were made, and so the apparance of the messenger in this particular place had the greatest possible significance to the Jewish people.
Here we learn for the first time that Zechariah and his wife had been praying that they would be able to have children together, but so far they had received no answer one way or the other. Yet their child would be in direct response to their prayers, just as Abram had been heard at age 99. In Abram's case, it had been he whom God had (re)named. Here, though, God had given a name not for Zechariah but for his son. That name, Yohahan, signified "Yahweh's gift," and it was necessary for Zechariah to give his son that name in order to properly honor God.
"Many will rejoice" may be parallel to Abraham's being a "father of many," but this is unlikely, and the parallel appears to shift at this point, for John's own parallel is not to Isaac but to another favored ancestor. The whole scene may be intended to remind of Mal 3:1-2, wherein Yahweh's messenger appears in the temple to announce an impending judgment upon all Israel.
"For he will be great in Yahweh's presence, "and he will by no means drink wine and strong drink," and he will be filled with holy breath while still new from his mother's womb. And he will turn many of Israel's sons to Yahweh their God.
In addition to having both his parents belong to the priestly lineage, this child called John would necessarily be a Nazirite. The citation is from Numbers 6, where the vows specify that no form of fermented beverage may be consumed by the Nazirite. In addition, no Nazirite may ever cut his hair or approach a corpse. Normally, a Nazirite vow was temporary, but John's would be permanent, lasting his whole life. The term "Nazirite" denotes a "separated one," and John's life would be separated for God.
The expression "filled with holy breath" means that God would speak to and through John. The hyperbole claims that this would happen from the time he was a baby. In the typical idiom of the day, this meant that his whole life's service would be from God. His role, to "turn ...Israel's sons to Yahweh," is almost identical to the wording in Mal 4:6 and, in fact, evokes a quotation from that passage:
"And he will come first in his presence, with Elijah's spirit and power, to "turn the hearts of the fathers to children" and to turn the unpersuaded with the intellect of the just, to make ready for Yahweh a prepared people."
"He will come first" indicates that John's work would precede someone else's. In the context of the quote from Malachi, that someone is the Anointed One. The function of the Elijah figure, identified with John, is to bring people back to Yahweh God, teaching love for one another. According to Malachi, all of this takes place not long before a day of judgment on Israel, "the great and majestic day of Yahweh" (Mal 4:5). Such a judgment did take place in 66-73 CE, when the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed and Israel's status as a nation removed.
John's function was to prepare God's people for what was to come, so that he might persuade some to follow the Messianic teachings. Those who did so would be prepared for the coming judgment, themselves escaping punishment.
18 And Zechariah said to the messenger, "By what will I know this? For I am an old man, and my wife is advanced in her days." And the messenger answered, saying to him, "I am Gabriel, the one who has attended in God's presence and who was sent forth to speak to you and to announce these things to you as a good message. And look, you will be mute and unable to speak until the day these things happen, because you have not trusted my sayings, which will be fulfilled in their season."
That the messenger was Gabriel indicates that a time of judgment was near, for it had been Gabriel (Dan 8:16; 9:21) who had forecast the desolation of the temple under Antiochus IV. Gabriel attended (Dan 8:15) in God's presence, indicating favor with God and closeness of relationship. Therefore, his message was not to be doubted. Still, Zechariah was unsure, and so Gabriel called upon God's power to strike the man mute. His distrust would be revealed to the people around him, and this sign would not subside until the birth of his son.
And the people were waiting for Zechariah, and they wondered why he was spending so much time in the temple. Now when he came out, he was unable to speak to them, and they knew that he had seen a vision in the temple. And he was signaling to them, and he continued to be mute. And it happened that he returned into his house, as the days of his religious service were fulfilled.
Zechariah went home mute, so that everyone knew that something with divine significance had happened to him.
Now after these days, Elisabeth his wife conceived, and she hid herself for five months, saying that "Yahweh has done this for me, in the days when he looked on me to remove my reproach among people."
If the order of service for the priests was the order given by the Chronicler, it is possible that Zechariah received his prophecy in about June, with Elisabeth conceiving John in perhaps early July.
It was common to regard a woman who was unable to have children with considerable degree of disrespect, and so Elisabeth rejoiced that her "reproach" was being removed. Now she would no longer be seen as being out of favor with God. "She hid herself" probably means that she disguised her pregnancy. One possible reason for this is her own uncertainty that she was really pregnant. Another possibility is that the couple had tried several times to have children, with each resulting in a stillbirth. Another rationale is that it might have been the case that it was Zechariah who was impotent; if Elisabeth conceived, people might think that she had been sleeping with another man. Either way, Zechariah and Elisabeth were no longer "barren," and by the end of five months it became clear that she was going to give birth.
II
26 Now in the sixth month, the messenger Gabriel was sent forth from God into a city of Galilaiah whose name was Nazareth, to a virgin engaged to a man whose name was Yosef from the house of David. And the name of the virgin was Miriam. And coming to her, he said, "Hello, favored one. The Lord is with you." But she was disturbed by the message and was reasoning what this greeting might be. And the messenger said to her, "Don't be afraid, Miriam, for you have found favor with God. And look, you will conceive in your abdomen, and will give birth to a son. And you will call his name Jesus ((Yeshua)). He will be great and will be called a son of the Highest One, and Yahweh God will give him the throne of his ancestor David. And he will reign over the house of Jacob for the ages, and his kingdom will be unending."
The month is now December, and Gabriel returns, this time to visit Elisabeth's close relative. The author's introduction leaves her name as incidental. The woman lived in a certain town called Nazareth. She was not yet married, although she was engaged to a man named Yosef. Hence, she was still a virgin. This man Yosef belonged to the priestly lineage, and so their children would belong to the priestly lineage (as lineage was regarded). It is likely that Miriam was named after Moses' sister, who, like Moses, was a prophet.
As with Elisabeth, God had a plan for Miriam to give birth through miraculous means. While Elisabeth had been unable to have children, in Miriam's case she had never made love to any man, making it impossible for her to become pregnant. Yet God sent a messenger to Miriam to inform her that the impossible was going to happen.
This son, too, was to have a special name, this time indicating his role. His name was to be Yeshua, which translates to "Yahweh is salvation." The promised Anointed One was to bring salvation to the Israelite peoples. The term "Messiah" is not used here, but another messianic term, "God's son," appears. Jesus would be God's son -- that is, the Anointed One -- but also he would have no literal father other than God. The promise of the Davidic reign is, of course, Messianic as well. Miriam should have no doubt that Gabriel was informing her that she would give birth to the Messiah.
Now Miriam said to the messenger, "How will this be, since I have not slept with a man?" And the messenger answered, saying to her, "Holy breath will come upon you, and power of the Highest One will overshadow you. And so, the one who is born, a holy child, will be called God's son.
It is here that the second significance of the term "God's son" is revealed to Miriam (and to Lukas' readers). Anyone who follows God from the heart might genuinely be called God's son, but the term was also an expression for "Messiah." It is used that way by all four authors of Jesus' life story. Yet the second significance did not escape Miriam -- that the term also signified God's parentage.
The author does not quote the famous prediction from Isaiah, "Look, a virgin will conceive..." (Isa 7:14f.), but the passage was almost certainly in the author's mind. That passage predicts that the Anointed One would come as a sign that God was on Israel's side, thus being called "God is with us" (Imma-nu-El). Not everyone took this as a prophecy of the coming of the Messiah, but by his inclusion of the infancy narrative, our author appears to have applied the passage to Jesus.
"And look at your relative Elisabeth. She has also conceived a son in her old age. And this is the sixth month for her, who is called barren. Because no declaration from God will be impossible."
Gabriel had another miraculous birth to which he could point, for Elisabeth had been granted a similar impossible birth. By the sixth month, it would be clear to Miriam (should she choose to visit) that Elisabeth was indeed pregnant. Therefore, Miriam should come to realize that nothing was impossible -- not even birth to a virgin.
The relationship between Elisabeth and Miriam is not specified here. Many believe that they were sisters; however, that term is not used here, and the difference in their ages may have been as much as 50 years. Elisabeth may have been an aunt to Miriam, or another relative.
Now Miriam said, "Look at Yahweh's slave. Let it happen to me according to your declaration." And the messenger went away from her.
Whereas Zechariah had disbelieved, Miriam had accepted the testimony of Gabriel and subjected herself to what God wanted for her. In his narrative, Lukas occasionally parallels men and women, and this appears to be the first such parallel. Zechariah the male priest was doubtful, but Miriam the common woman believed when spoken to by Gabriel about a miraculous birth.
39 Now Miriam got up in those days and went into the mountains with haste, into a city of Judah. And she entered into Zechariah's house and greeted Elisabeth. And it happened that as Elisabeth heard Miriam's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb and holy breath came upon Elisabeth, and she sounded out with a loud cry, saying, "You are praised among women! And the fruit of your womb is praised! And from where is this happening to me, that my Lord's mother should come to me? For, look! As the sound of your greeting happened in my ears, the baby in my womb leaped in gladness! And blessed is the one who trusted that there will be a completion of the things that were spoken to her by Yahweh!"
Miriam's attitude at hearing the miracle that had happened to Elisabeth was one of great celebration. She did not go to Zechariah's home doubting what had happened, but she rather rejoiced at learning that Elisabeth had received a child with the intervention of God.
The soon-to-be prophet, yet unborn John, leaped in his mother's womb as Miriam approached -- now bearing baby Jesus in her own abdomen. Elisabeth received inspiration from God and spoke words of praise. Elisabeth realized that Miriam was carrying the Anointed One, for she referred to her relative as "my Lord's mother." It is possible that this realization came from knowing that her own son would be a prophet, so that John's reaction to the proximity of Jesus told her that Jesus must be the Anointed. At any rate, she had had prior communication with Miriam about Jesus, because Elisabeth mentions that God had spoken to Miriam about her child's birth.
And Miriam said, "My soul magnifies Yahweh, and my spirit has rejoiced at God my savior! Because he looked upon the humility of his slave. For look, from now, all generations will call me blessed because the powerful one did great things for me.
Miriam's words of praise at learning of her upcoming miraculous delivery are strongly reminiscent of those of Hannah (1 Sam 2:1ff.) after Yahweh God had blessed her by allowing her to conceive Samuel (1 Sam 1:20). The acknowledgement of God as savior and the initial expression of joy is reminiscent of 1 Sam 2:1, and the expression of her own humility appears to parallel 1 Sam 1:11, but the statement about blessing the generations is unique to the Messiah's mother.
"And holy is his name! And his mercy is for generations and generations of those who fear him! He has made strength with his arm. He has scattered those who are highminded in the attitudes of their hearts. He has cast down the powers from thrones and has lifted up the humble. He fills the hungry people with good things and he sends away the wealthy people empty. Remembering mercy, he grants things to Israel his child, just as he said to our ancestors, 'To Abraham and his seed for the age.'"
Here again the parallels with Hannah and other Hebrew Bible personages continue. 1 Sam 2:2 reads "There is no one as holy as Yahweh," and here we read a praise to God's holiness. Miriam's citation about God's mercy appears to come from Psa 103:17, where the wording is virtually identical, although the granting of the ten "words" on Sinai (Ex 20:5-6).
God's ability to strike down the wealthy and raise up the humble is mentioned throughout the Hebrew Bible, but 1 Sam 2:7-8 is probably the proper parallel. Miriam's words of praise are clearly directed toward a recognition of Yahweh's greater plan and purpose. While she remembers the wonderful deeds of God among his people, she also calls to mind his purpose in sending an anointed one. In fact, her recollection of the blessing of Abraham (Gen 17:7; 18:8) appears to drop in the wording of 2 Sam 22:51, "He gives great triumphs to his king and shows mercy to his anointed -- to David and his seed for the age." That oracle of David's identifies his own children as blessed, and Miriam may have interpreted the passage in a Messianic context, with her son being a descendent of David (Abraham) who would bless Israel.
Now Miriam remained with her for three months, and then she returned into her house.
Again the author provides us with as accurate a time frame as he is able. Miriam stayed with her relative, Elisabeth, for the remainder of Elisabeth's pregnancy with John.
57 Now Elisabeth's time of childbearing was fulfilled, and she gave birth to a son. And those who lived nearby and her relatives heard that Yahweh had multiplied his mercy towards her, and they rejoiced with her.
As Elisabeth finally did give birth, her relatives were pleased that God had been loving and merciful toward her. This again coincides with the belief that it was considered shameful (or even a curse) for a married woman to not bear children.
And it happened that during the eighth day they came to have the boy circumcised, and they were calling him after the name of his father, Zechariah. And his mother answered him, saying, "No. On the contrary, he will be called John." And they said to her, "There is no one among your relatives who is called by this name." Now they motioned to his father as to what he would want him to be called. And he asked for a tablet and wrote, saying, "His name is John." And they all wondered. Now his mouth was opened immediately, and his tongue was freed, and he spoke, praising God.
Jewish male children are traditionally circumcised on their eighth day of life, just as Isaak had been circumcised on his eighth day (Gen 21:4), as God had directed (Gen 17:12). Although in previous generations one might acquire a name at or before the time of birth, by the time of Zechariah it had become common to name a male child on the day of his circumcision. Christian groups that practice infant baptism carry on this same tradition, replacing circumcision with baptism.
Since Zechariah was mute, his family discussed what to name his child, with Elisabeth insisting that he be called John (Yohanan). The family protested, wanting her to choose the name of a prominent family member. Thinking that Zechariah would side with them, they asked for him to assist them. It was stunning enough when he wrote on the tablet that his son should be called John, but even more stunning was the fact that his voice returned immmediately upon following the messenger's instruction to name the child John.
And fear happened upon all those who lived near them, and these declarations were discussed in the whole mountainous region of Judea. And all those who heard put these things in their hearts, saying, "Whatever will this boy be?" For also, Yahweh's hand was with him.
The result of Zechariah's pronouncement and healing was predictable: everyone began talking about these things and about the miracle surrounding John's birth. Some time passes here, but we do not know how much, for the people also began to notice that the boy was enjoying God's favor. This observation on the part of Zechariah's associates and townspeople prompts a pronouncment from him:
And Zechariah his father was filled with holy breath, and he prophesied, saying, "Praiseworthy is Yahweh, the God of Israel, because he has visited and has made redemption for his people. And he has raised up a horn of salvation for us, in his servant-boy David's house (just as he said through the mouth of the holy ones from the age of his prophets): a salvation from our enemies and from the hand of all those who hate us, to do mercy with our ancestors and to remember his holy covenant--an oath that he swore to Abraham our ancestor--to give us to fearlessly do religious service for him in godliness and right in his presence for all of our days, rescuing us out of the hand of our enemies.
And so it is Zechariah who receives the first prophesy in modern times about the coming of the Anointed One. Lukas makes sure that his readers realize that Zechariah was inspired ("filled with holy breath") when he spoke this utterance because of its importance. The people's observations about his son, John, were only the beginning of something wonderful that God was planning to accomplish.
The praise that "God has visited his people" appears to stem from Ex 4:31, for just as the people had realized that God was active when they had observed Aaron and Moses performing signs, so also Zechariah observes that the people realized that Yahweh God had gifted his son for a reason. In this case, that reason was to prepare for the coming Anointed One.
A "horn of salvation" (see 2 Sam 22:3) was a symbol of God's intervention on behalf of the people. Here, that intervention was to come in the form of a Davidic figure, the Messiah. After explicitly mentioning the prophecies about this Anointed One, Zechariah continues in the traditional language of the Hebrew Bible, saying that in sending the Messiah God would bring vindication and mercy. The oath sworn to Abraham is the remembrance of the covenant that he made with his people -- that whoever followed him (among Abraham's descendents) would be taken care of. The rest of the language is also familiar, but "doing religious service" to God would take on a new significance in the teachings of the Anointed One.
"Now also child, you will be called a prophet of the Highest One. For you will go ahead in Yahweh's presence to prepare his ways, to give knowledge of salvation to his people with forgiveness of their sins, on account of our God's deep feelings of mercy, by which he has visited us, a dawn from on high, to shine on those who are sitting in darkness and in death's shadow, to direct our feet into a way of peace."
On behalf of his own son, Zechariah predicts that John would be a prophet, but even more so, that he would be a fulfillment of Isa 40:3, preparing God's path in advent of the coming of the Messiah. This oracle also establishes the "mission" of John: to bring people around to God's way of thinking, for John would find that many people preferred their religious practices to God's spiritual principles. But God was being merciful in sending John to help direct the people toward peace with God.
Absent but implicit here is what negative things would happen to those who did not accept God's prophets and teachings. Lukas will reveal these things later.
Now the child grew and became strong of spirit, and he was in the deserts until the day of his presentation to Israel.
John was basically raised outside of the reach of traditional Priestly Judaism. As we saw earlier, he was brought up as a Nazirite, separated to do God's work. The author leaves us with John's maturation and growing spiritual strength. After introducing us to the young Jesus, he will bring the two together.
III
2:1 Now it happened in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus to inscribe all the empire. This inscription was the first one that happened while Quirinius was governor of Syria. And all people went to be inscribed, each one into his own city. Now also, on account of his being of the house and family of David, Joseph went up from Galilaiah from the city of Nazareth into Judea into the city of David called Beth-Lehem, to be inscribed with Miriam his fiancee, who was pregnant.
The annals of Rome do not inform us in detail about the governorships of Quirinius (Kirenius, Cyrenius); however, we know by comparing with both Josephus (Antiquities, 18, I, 1) and with certain inscriptions -- including one found at Tiber (the Lapis Tiburtinus) and analyzed by William Ramsey in 1912 -- that Quirinius governed the region twice. The inscription clearly records that someone (alas, unnamed, but fitting Quirinius' description) had governed the region of Syria as imperial legate twice. Quirinius was chosen as legate the first time under the civil governance of other men, including Sentius Saturninus, who reigned from 8 BCE to 6 BCE. This is supported by testimony by Justin Martyr, who said that Quirinius had been a legate but not a full governor of the region when Jesus was born, and also by Tertullian, who said that Saturninus had been governor over the region when the census depicted here was held. The first reign of Quirinius began in 10 BCE and lasted at least until sometime between 7 and 2 BCE, while the second reign began c. 6 CE and included a second census.
Census registrations for military service were not rare, and despite the use of the word "taxed" in some translations it does not appear that this was a census taken for the purpose of taxation. One did not have to be a Roman citizen in order to be eligible for military service, and so such a census would have applied to Miriam's husband, Yosef. One source suggests that such inscriptions were held at least once every 14 years, although the timing was not always completely accurate. If the censuses had been held on time, then the census mentioned here was taken in or around 8-7 BCE, but political tensions may have caused the census to be taken later, perhaps 6-5 BCE. Therefore, we can narrow down the year of Jesus' birth somewhat. The exact timing seems to have been unimportant to early Christians.
The habit of sending people back to their hometowns for registration is also mentioned in Roman records, and since the Davidic line emerged through Beth-Lehem, Yosef and Miriam would have returned there from Nazareth to be registered.
Under Jewish custom, the sexual act created a marital union between husband and wife. Although two fiances could legally call one another "wife" and "husband," and although the Torah recognized the relationship as binding (see, for example, Dt 22:23f.), the distinction between an engaged couple and a married couple was the act of sexual union. Lukas points out with his terminology that Yosef and Miriam were still engaged, not married, although she was pregnant. That is, he insists that the child was neither illegitimate (for which the penalty was death) nor Yosef's (for the couple would have been married).
Now it happened while they were there that her days of bearing the child were fulfilled, and she gave birth to her firstborn son, and she wrapped him in strips of cloth and laid him in the stall, since there was no place for them in the guest room.
We do not know how long the trip took, nor are we told how long Yosef and Miriam remained in Beth-Lehem prior to the time of her delivery, although this time must have been short. It seems probable that they traveled while Miriam was not in dread danger of miscarriage, but that the return trip might likely have caused harm. It was not easy to secure room for the entire stay in Beth-Lehem, for so many people had been affected by the same decree from Caesar. Therefore, on the night that Jesus was born, there were no lodging rooms available for Miriam and Yosef; consequently, they accepted from the inn a stall to sleep in. It was there that Miriam gave birth to the promised son.
And there were shepherds in this countryside who stayed in the fields and who were keeping night watches over their flock. And a messenger of Yahweh stood near them, and Yahweh's glory shone around them, and they feared with great fear. And the messenger said to them, "Don't be afraid. For, look, I am announcing to you a good message of great generosity, which will be for all the people. Because today a savior is born to you, who is an Anointed Lord, in David's city. And this will be a sign for you; you will find a baby wrapped in strips of cloth and lying in a stall."
The probable month is now September, and perhaps it is fitting that the exact date has been lost to us, since the Christian way of life as explained by Jesus and Paul did not include the ritual celebration of Jesus' birthday but regarded all days equally.
The shepherds were still watching their flocks out in the field at night, an activity that was discontinued in the wet months. Clarke's Commentary reports that the sheep were kept outside at night during the Summer months only, with the purpose of their watch being to protect the sheep from bandits and predators.
On this particular evening, God's messenger appeared to them, glowing brightly. The message announced by this messenger is the Messianic message, although the details of its content are not yet given. The message was to be announced fully through a savior, the Anointed Lord, who is a descendent of David. The shepherds would recognize that this announcement was telling them that the Messiah was here. David himself had been a shepherd (as were many early patriarchs), and so it is appropriate that God would announce his message to them. However, shepherds were not considered great in Israel, and for the coming of a king it was socially inappropriate to announce such a thing to shepherds.
The shepherds were told exactly how to locate the newborn who would be the Anointed One.
And suddenly it happened that a crowd of the heavenly host was with the messenger, praising God, and saying, "Glory to God in the highest places, and on earth peace among people of good will."
The coming of the Anointed One and the important messianic message were so important that many of God's messengers appeared in order to praise him. Their words of praise remind us of the psalms (see, for example, Psa 57:5). In making this praise, they announce that the coming message brings both glory to God and peace among people -- not among all people but among those who will turn themselves to him and accept the spiritual teachings of his Anointed One.
On a textual level, later Coptic manuscripts, changes to some Greek manuscripts, and many later Greek manuscripts read eudokia (good will) instead of eudokiaV (of good will) at the end of the messengers' statement. Therefore, translations made prior to the discovery and textual analysis of certain earlier Greek manuscripts read "good will among people" or some similar thing.
And it happened as the messengers were going into heaven, the people -- the shepherds -- also said to one another, "We should surely go as far as Beth-Lehem and see this declaration which has been done, which Yahweh has made known to us." And they hurried and went, and they found both Miriam and Yosef, and the baby lying in the stall. Now after noticing these things, they made known concerning the declaration that had been told to them about this child. And all those who heard wondered about the things that were spoken to them by the shepherds. But Miriam preserved all of these declarations, tossing them together in her heart. And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God about all that they had heard and seen, just as it had been told to them.
The shepherds went to the place pointed out to them by the messenger, and they became witnesses to the arrival of the Anointed One. At this point, Lukas calls Jesus simply "the baby," since he had not been named by custom at his circumcision.
As the shepherds returned to their flock, they announced the coming of the Anointed One, as it had been told to them by the messenger. As for Miriam, she remembered the things that the shepherds told her and took those things as confirmation that her son was indeed the Messiah.
21 And when eight days were fulfilled, it was the time to circumcise him. And his name was called Jesus -- the name that he was called by the messenger before his conception in the womb. And when the days of their cleansing were fulfilled according to Moses' Torah, they brought him into Jerusalem to present him to the Lord (just as it has been written in Yahweh's Torah that "Each male who opens a mother will be called holy to the Lord.") and to give a sacrifice according to what was said in Yahweh's Torah, "A pair of turtle-doves or two young pigeons."
The shepherds had visited the newborn Messiah presumably during the night that he was born, but certainly within a week of his birth. On his eighth day, Jesus was formally named at the time of his circumcision.
That Jesus was circumcised according to the Torah was not the only manner mentioned in which Yosef and Miriam were sure to follow the teachings of the Torah. Lev 12:1-8 describe the time of purification after birth: "Then she will continue for thirty-three days [after the circumcision of the child]...she will not touch any holy object or enter the holy place until the days of her purification have been fulfilled." Therefore, Lukas records that at least one month passed after Jesus' birth.
The presentation to the priests had been initiated at that same time, along with the mother's sin offering. At this time in Yosef's and Miriam's life, they were poor enough that they could not afford a lamb for offering, but the Torah had made provisions for them to sacrifice two birds (Lev 12:8). The other quotation from the Torah comes from Ex 13, wherein God claims for himself the dedication of all firstborn children (13:1-2, 12) and animals. The firstborn animals were to be sacrificed, but firstborn children were bought back (redeemed), in memory of God's rescue of the firstborn children of the faithful on the night of the original Passover (Ex 13:13-16).
And look, there was a person in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon, and this person was just and devout who was expecting the comforting advice of Israel. And breath was holy upon him. And he had been warned by the holy Spirit that he would not see death until he indeed saw Yahweh's Anointed One. And with the breath he came into the temple court. And when the parents led the child Jesus in, for them to do according to what was customary in the Torah about him, Simeon also took him into his arms and praised God, saying, "Now O Sovereign, release your slave in peace, according to your declaration: because my eyes have noticed your salvation, which you have prepared according to the presence of all the people as a light for the revelation of nations and a glory of your people Israel."
As Yosef and Miriam went to the temple, they met there two priests, one named Simeon and another called Anna (or Hannah). Lukas provides both of their encounters with the baby Jesus, although the second is shortened for literary purposes. In his version of the narrative, Lukas often includes parallel accounts for men and women -- a sign of equality among all of God's people.
Simeon is described as both just and devout -- not only did he follow the traditions of his day, but also he followed God's spiritual teachings taught by the Torah. Knowing that the Torah predicted the coming of the Anointed One, Simeon was expecting the messianic message.
Simeon was also a prophet, for he had "holy breath" and in fact had received a prophecy from God that the Anointed One would come in his lifetime. As Simeon entered the temple court to approach Yosef, Miriam, and the young Jesus, he immediately realized that this was indeed the Messiah and praised God for having allowed him to see Jesus.
Israel's salvation would come in accepting the teachings of the Anointed One, but the phrase "light...to the nations" comes from Isa 42:6, which is part of one of the "servant songs" about the Messiah. Here already, Lukas reveals to his reader that people were aware that the Anointed One was not to be merely a Davidic king but also a suffering servant who would initiate a new covenant to eventually include gentiles.
And his father and mother were wondering about what was being said about him. And Simeon praised them and said to Miriam his mother, "Look, this one is being placed for a fall and rising of many in Israel and for a sign of contradiction. Now also, a sword will cut through the soul of you yourself, so that the reasonings of many hearts would be revealed."
Miriam and Yosef were not surprised that Simeon recognized who Jesus was, nor were they astonished that Jesus was who he was -- for they had been told these things in advance. What surprised them then? Simeon's revelation that the Anointed One would be the suffering servant predicted by Isaiah was something that was difficult to understand, since the traditions of the day separated these figures. When called to explain, Simeon noted that because of the limitations imposed on them by their own paradigm, many Jewish people would fall on account of Jesus, and many would rise up as well. This appears to be an application of the passage in Isaiah (8:14-5) which predicts that on account of the Messiah and his teachings, "many will stumble on it. They will fall and be broken; they will be ensnared and taken."
A sign "of contradiction" may signify that people would set themselves up in opposition to the Messiah, or that the Messiah would be a living contradiction to their preconceived ideas about him, or it may mean both things. This inner strife would affect even Jesus' parents. Yet all of this was happening so that it would be made known who was truly willing and who was not willing to follow God.
36 And there was a prophet Anna, daughter of Fanuel, from the tribe of Asher. She had advanced in many days: having lived with her husband for seven years from her virginity, she was also a widow until age eighty-four. She did not withdraw from the temple courts, night and day performing religious service with fasts and supplications. And at that hour, she was standing by, acknowledging God, and she spoke about him to all those who were expecting Jerusalem's redemption.
Together with Simeon was another prophet, Anna. It is interesting that she was from the tribe of Asher -- at least in one respect. Asher's family lived in Galilaiah, and Anna was therefore a prophet from Galilaiah. Certain of the Jewish leaders of the time believed that no prophet could arise from that region, and yet here was a well-respected prophet in the temple who was from Galilaiah.
It is possible that Anna's father might have been prominent as well. Nevertheless, Anna's claim to fame was her devoted life to God. As was appropriate, she had been a virgin at the time of her marriage. Even though her husband had only lived for seven years, she remained a widow (i.e., did not remarry) from that time until her present age of eighty-four. Rather than turning to other interests, she had spent numerous years in honest service to God. As a prophet, God spoke to her, and she too was aware that the Anointed One had arrived. Consequently, she began to tell people that the Messiah was here, but notice the wording: "she spoke ... to all those who were expecting...." Not everyone in Israel was open to the Anointed One's message, but those who were ready for it were also willing to listen to Anna. No doubt they were pleased that their "redemption" was near.
And as they finished all the things according to Yahweh's Torah, they returned into Galilaiah into their city, Nazareth. Now the child grew and was strengthened, being filled with wisdom. And God's favor was upon him.
After completing everything that the Torah prescribed for Jesus and his parents, the family returned home to Nazareth, where Jesus is described as growing up both physically and spiritually, and enjoying God's favor. The author has established that two great prophets were about to arise in Israel (John and Jesus); only one narrative now separates the reader from the advent of those great spiritual leaders.
41 And his parents went every year into Jerusalem to the feast of the Passover. And when it happened that he was twelve years old, they went up according to the custom of the feast, and after completing the days, during their return Jesus the boy remained in Jerusalem, and his parents did not know it. Now thinking him to be in the traveling company, they went a day's way and sought him among the relatives and acquaintances. And when they didn't find him, they returned to Jerusalem, seeking him out.
The Torah indicated that "three times per year all your males will appear before Yahweh God" (Ex 23:17; 34:23). Young children and women were not obliged to make the trips to the temple for the feasts, but many women went voluntarily, and families often traveled together. It is perhaps significant that the first feast mentioned by Lukas is the Passover, for the Passover celebration essentially climaxes this account. Some commentators suggest that boys were obliged to attend the feasts beginning at age twelve, which is the reason for Lukas' jump to this particular year.
We learn later on (22:1f.) that Lukas uses the term "passover" colloquially to signify the whole Feast of Unleavened Bread. After spending the week in Jerusalem at the feast, the extended family and traveling companions went to return to Nazareth by caravan. Apparently Jesus did not ride with his parents together but perhaps with one or the other, or perhaps with other children, and so they accidentally neglected to ensure that he was part of the caravan that was returning home. After one day's journey, they panicked, realizing that he wasn't anywhere among them, and so they went back to Jerusalem to find him, probably expecting to find no one at all -- or perhaps a frightened child crying for his parents.
And it happened that after three days they found him in the temple court, sitting in the midst of the teachers both hearing them and questioning them. Now all those who heard him were astonished at his intelligence and answers. And when they noticed him, they were amazed. And his mother said to him, "Child, why have you done to us in this way? Look, your father and I were seeking you in sorrow." And he said to them, "Why were you seeking me? Didn't you know that it is necessary for me to be in my Father's place?" And they did not understand the declaration that he had said to them.
Miriam and Yosef probably searched first near the place where they had been staying. Then they began to search places that they had visited, thinking that Jesus might be at one of them. Finally, they located him in the temple courts, where open religious discussion regularly took place. Among the rabbis and their students, Jesus the twelve year old boy was sitting, as though he too were one of their students. Rather than merely listening, though, he was actively participating in the discussion, asking questions and giving intelligent replies to the things that they asked him in return. The rabbis were amazed and probably delighted.
Jesus' parents were not so pleased. It was Miriam who began to chastise her son for having wandered from the caravan and having caused them grief for so many days. But Jesus' reply indicates that he knew already of his greater mission. "Why were you seeking me?" In other words, "Why didn't you know where I was?" He first implied, then stated that he had gone to the one place where he should have been expected to go. For Jesus had migrated to the temple courts, where scholarly instruction took place.
Since he was speaking to his mother, the phrase "in my Father's place" (or "about my Father's matters") seemed obscure. After all, Yosef had been with Miriam and was returning to his carpentry business in Nazareth.
And he went down with them and came into Nazareth, and he was submitting to them. And his mother kept all the declarations in her heart. And Jesus increased in wisdom and maturity and favor with God and people.
Although no one understood then the things that had happened, Miriam remembered them later on and came to understand more fully what it meant to have the Anointed One as her son. We read very little of Yosef in any of the four accounts after this point, and it is somewhat likely that he was old (or ill) and that he died during the years that Jesus was actively teaching. The prediction, earlier, had called for both of his parents to go through the same process of wondering about Jesus' identity; Lukas emphasizes the woman's response to him, again elevating the role of women.
3:1 Now in the fifteenth year of the government of Tiberius Caesar, while Pontius Pilatus was governing Judea and Herod was Tetrarch of Galilaiah (now Filippos his brother was Tetrarch of Ituria and of the Trachonite country, and Lusanias was Tetrarch of Abilene), under the high priesthood of Annas and Kaiaphas, a declaration of Yahweh happened upon John the son of Zechariah in the desert. And he went into all the countryside around the Jordan, heralding a baptism of mental change into forgiveness of sins, as it was written in a scroll of the words of the prophet Isaiah:
Tiberius Caesar had begun his reign on August 19th, in the year 14 CE. After ruling for two years together with his predecessor, Augustus, twelve full years had passed with Tiberius as emperor. Therefore, the author now pinpoints the time of the beginning of John the Baptizer's work as sometime between August 19, 28 and August 18, 29 CE. Tiberius died in the year 37. The account of Jesus' life according to Johannes places Jesus' own advent at perhaps a month or two prior to Passover (in 29 CE), which might make John the Baptizer's advent a few months earlier, perhaps in the fall of 28.
Pontius Pilatus was governor (the later term was "procurator") of Judea from 26 to 36 CE. Herod Antipas was the ruler of one fourth of the kingdom; the term "tetrarch" indicates this. According to Josephus, Herod Antipas continued as ruler of the region until Tiberius' successor, Gaius, removed him from the post. Filippos was Tetrarch at the time, dying during the 20th year of Tiberius' reign. Josephus records also that Lusanias was Tetrarch of Abilene until Claudius gave the region to Agrippa in 42 CE.
Having fixed the time of John's advent (and therefore Jesus') in secular history, the author points now to the Jewish priesthood. Annas (Hannas) was high priest by himself from 6 CE to about 15 CE. After this time, he shared the priesthood. Some say he held this role in somewhat of an emeritus status, but other researchers claim that he remained the high priest while others merely assisted him in the role of deputy. At any rate, Annas' son-in-law, Kaiaphas (Kaifa) was priest together with him from 18 CE until 36 CE. Lukas therefore has pointed to the beginning of the prophetic message of the new covenant far more accurately than a typical historian of the day would have expected, but since his readers may theoretically have come from any background within the Roman Empire, he provided some means for them to understand when these events took place.
Having established the time frame, the author writes in the traditional language about what happened. "A declaration of Yahweh happened...." Thus, John is portrayed as a traditional prophet. With what God told him, John became a herald -- an official representative -- telling people of a covenant of mental change. This is significant and also fits into the traditional role of prophet. In the Hebrew Bible, God often told his prophets to warn the people about a coming judgment but to tell them that the faithful who followed God with the proper attitude would be spared. Here, John tells those who would listen that they too would need to have the right attitude.
"A voice crying out in the desert, 'Make ready Yahweh's way. Make straight his highways. Every valley will be filled up, and every mountain and every hill will be lowered. And the crooked places will be made into straight ones, and the rough places will be made into smooth ways. And all flesh will see God's salvation."
The direct citation from Isaiah 40 indicates that John was sent to prepare the way for God to deliver his message (through the coming Messiah). The other language indicates a stark change in the state of affairs. Looking back, we see that salvation came not through following a religion, per se, but by adhering to certain spiritual principles. We also know that the judgment on Israel came during what is called the First Revolt, during which the Roman armies under Titus overwhelmed the city of Jerusalem and the surrounding areas, destroying the temple and putting an end to Priestly Judaism.
Therefore he said to the crowds who were coming out to be baptized by him, "You brood of vipers! Who has pointed out to you to flee from the coming anger? Therefore, make fruit worthy of the mental change and do not begin to say among yourselves, 'We have Abraham as a father.' For I am telling you that God is able to raise up children for Abraham out of these stones!
The author has apparently taken this segment from the account of Matthaiah, which is nearly identical. From that account, we know that at first glance Lukas' version appears to be more harsh. However, by comparing what Matthaiah wrote, we see that the people in "the crowds" that John was addressing were Perushim and Zadokites, members of the priestly classes and of the rabbinical scholars.
"The coming anger" is the judgment on Israel that was to happen during the First Revolt. John asks rhetorically who had warned them because he knew that their attitudes did not coincide with what God had in mind.
"We have Abraham..." refers to the claim that their physical lineage as Jewish people would save them, but just as God had judged his people before, so again he would judge Israel. This time, physical lineage would be insignificant, for God had been seeking those who served him spiritually.
There is a play on words here that would have been present in the alleged Aramaic original of Matthaiah's account but which is lost in Greek. The word for "stones" in Aramaic is "abanim," and the word for "sons" is "banim." Thus, John's word play was something memorable for the crowds around him. It was useless claiming to be banim, for God could make banim out of abanim.
"But already the axe is at the root of the trees. Therefore, every tree that does not make nice fruit is chopped down and is cast into fire."
The judgment of the religious system had already been decided. The axe was at the root, signifying that the whole system was coming down and would be destroyed, since it had been "fruitless." Those who continued in the system of ritual religion would be destroyed along with it, having no more access to God.
And the crowds asked him, saying, "Then what should we do?" Now he answered, saying to them, "The one who has two tunics should give to the one who has none, and the one who has food should do likewise."
John's message was not merely an ascetic saying -- that people should give away their property. Instead, he pointed to the spiritual principle of being a good neighbor and friend to those around us. The prophet urged his listeners to care enough about those around them that they would give in order to support one another's needs.
This is the center of the teaching that would bring salvation, for the Anointed One was about to internalize the Torah, explaining that its intent was to teach spiritual teachings rather than to control physical behavior. Therefore, John's followers were not only to give but to care, and that loving attitude would remain -- long after ritual religion was gone.
Now tribute takers came to him also to be baptized, and they said to him, "Teacher, what should we do?" Now he said to them, "Collect nothing more than what was arranged for you." And soldiers also asked him, saying, "What also should we do?" And he said to them, "Oppress no one. Neither should you extort. And be content with your wages."
When the Romans overran other nations, they exacted tribute from those countries for Rome. In simple terms, the people paid for the privilege of Roman rule. Since many Jewish people detested the fact that Israel was not an independent nation, their fellow Jews who took tribute money were despised. Even more despised were those who exacted additional funds from the people. The way the system worked, the tribute takers were given a quota to collect; anything beyond that they could keep for themselves. John tells them to collect only what they were directed to collect.
Soldiers were allowed by the government the freedom to impose themselves on the people around them -- at least to some extent. When traveling and for some other purposes, they could quarter themselves (stay) in the houses of local residents, often taking food for themselves. Less scrupulous soldiers may have used their military might to collect what we call today "protection money." John advised these soldiers to be happy with what money they had and to treat others well.
In each of the above examples, John has urged his listeners to pay attention to other people and their own needs, rather than greedily looking out for one's self.
Now all of the people were expecting and reasoning in their hearts about John--whether he was the Anointed One. John answered to everyone, saying, "I indeed am baptizing you with water, but someone stronger than I is coming, of whom I am not enough to loosen the strap of his sandals. He will baptize you with holy breath and fire.
As the people came to realize that John was a prophet, and as John's fame spread, people began to wonder whether he might be the promised Anointed One. The Baptizer had already announced his role as someone who prepares the way, but here he was even more clear. The Anointed One would appear to have a similar role, but he would be so much greater than John that the prophet considered himself unworthy to remove the Anointed One's shoes for him -- a servant's role.
John had been baptizing the people as a sign that they were entering a reformation movement within Judaism. Under his direction, they were publically setting themselves apart from those who preferred the religion of tradition. By contrast, the Messiah would distinguish his people also with "holy breath." We learn from the Actions that this is a reference to the spiritual gifts predicted by the prophet Joel that would precede the destruction of the temple. The use of "fire" denotes a purification, a cleansing, and during the judgment on Israel, the fire would purify those who followed God from the heart.
"His winnowing fork is in his hand to fully cleanse his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his granary. But he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire." Therefore indeed, advising them also of many other things, he announced a good message to the people.
However, for other Jewish people, the fires would be fires of judgment -- fires of destruction -- another common metaphor for fire. John's message can be summed up then by saying that the Anointed One was to come soon, teaching about spiritual truths. Those who followed those truths would receive holy breath -- guidance from God, but those who rejected God's teachings would have their religion destroyed and ultimately face destruction themselves. This message was a "good" message to those who earnestly sought to do what was right.
But Herod the Tetrarch -- who had been reproved by John concerning Herodias his brother's wife, and about all the evil things that Herod had done -- added this one to all of them: he also had John shut up in jail.
Wishing for his reader to know what happened to John, Lukas summarizes what was in Matthaiah's account (14:1-12) about the later fate of John the Baptizer. Perhaps two years later, John publically reproved Herod, telling him that it was against the Torah for Herod to have his sister-in-law. At first, he emprisoned John, as mentioned here. Later, Herodias' daughter caused Herod to have John beheaded. For Lukas, these details were not so important, and perhaps by this time many people already knew the story. He will later mention John's beheading, but only in passing.
Now it happened that during the baptism of all the people, when Jesus had also been baptized and was praying, heaven was opened and the holy Spirit descended on him in a bodily form like a dove, and a voice from heaven happened: "You are my son, the beloved, in whom I delight."
After informing us of John's eventual fate, more or less, the author returns to the present-day narrative. Although brief, the scene is of central importance, for it marks Jesus' anointing as God's son, the promised Anointed One. Lukas states it rather simply: Jesus identified himself with the reformation movement by receiving John's baptism, but at that time everyone observed a visual manifestation of God himself. The expression "holy Spirit" refers to God in communication with people, and in this instance, God identified Jesus as the Anointed One (God's son), and the people were able to see something physical that resembled an anointing.
As God spoke, he seemed to quote the beginning of Psalm 2:7, which reads, "You are my son; today I have fathered you." The content of the psalm is messianic, composed on the event of a coronation. The Latin tradition of Lukas, along with manuscript D and some patristic citations, depict God as quoting Psa 2:7 exactly. While this shows that early commentators also had the passage in mind, both the earliest and the majority of manuscripts read as shown above.
23 And when he, Jesus, was beginning, he was about thirty years old, being (as it was thought) son of Yosef, the son of Eli, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Yannai, the daughter of Yosef, the son of Mattathiah, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Noggai, the son of Ma-ath, the son of Mattathiah, the son of Shemei, the son of Yosech, the son of Yodah, the son of Yohanah, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Sheathiel, the son of Neiri, the daughter of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Kosam, the son of Elmodam, the son of Eir, the son of Yeshua, the son of Eliezer, the son of Yorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Yosef, the son of Yonan, the son of Eliakim, the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattathah, the son of Nathan, the son of David, the son of Yeshai, the son of Yobed, the son of Boaz, the son of Shelah, the son of Nahshon, the son of Aminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Arni, the son of Hesrom, the son of Fares, the son of Judah, the son of Jacob, the son of Isaak, the son of Abraham, the son of Therah, the son of Nachor, the son of Seruch, the son of Ragau, the son of Falek, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, the son of Ka-inan, the son of Arfaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, the son of Mathuselah, the son of Henoch, the son of Yared, the son of Mahalele-El, the son of Ka-inan, the son of Enosh, the son of Sheth, the son of Adam, the son of God.
Having established Jesus as the Anointed One, Lukas clearly identifies his anointing as his "beginning" and then traces his lineage. It was customary then to trace one's lineage back to Abraham through one's tribe, but making a double point that Jesus was "son of God" in three senses, Lukas identifies the high points of Jesus' genealogy all the way through Adam. Thus, Jesus was "son of God" by virtue of his virgin birth; he was "son of God" as the Anointed One who was to follow God's wishes completely; and he was "son of God" in that his lineage could be traced not only to David, nor to Judah, nor to Abraham, but all the way back to God. Of course, the tracing to God was simply an exercise to make a point, for anyone who could trace his lineage to Abraham was also able to trace himself back to God.
It is necessary to mention two things: first, that in identifying members of a genealogy only the prominent ancestors were normally listed. Therefore, the list appears longer here than it does in Matthaiah, for Lukas appears to have considered more of those ancestors "prominent" than did Matthaiah. Also, Matthaiah intentionally limited his list to include exactly multiples of fourteen ancestors, since "14" was the numerical equivalent of the Hebrew name "David."
The second point is this: that many people in those days had more than one name. Just as Simon was also called Peter and (we will see later) Matthaiah was also called Levi, certain of Jesus' ancestors were known by different names. Thus, Yosef's father is called here Eli rather than Jacob. We also observe that the ancestry diverges, following one child instead of another for Lukas, who follows the line through David's other son, Nathan, rather than through Solomon. He also appears to trace the lineage through women at some point(s), which was most uncommon, but Lukas did make it a priority to elevate women.
4:1 Now Jesus, full of holy breath, returned from the Jordan and was led in the breath into the desert, where he was tested for forty days by the Accuser. And he did not eat anything during those days, and he was hungry when they were completed. Now the Accuser said to him, "If you are God's son, talk to this stone, so that it would become bread."
Jesus spent some time out in the desert prior to returning to civilization. After his anointing, he immediately was led by inspiration of God into a secluded area to be tested. This is one of the rare occurrences in the Bible of direct involvement by the Accuser (or Enemy, called "the devil" and "Satan" in most translations). The tests appear to resemble the pattern in the book of Job, wherein the Enemy can only act as God allows him to act.
The first test concerns a basic human instinct: hunger. Appealing also to Jesus' pride, the Accuser questions whether he really is the Anointed One. If he is the Messiah, he should be able to call upon God's power to turn a stone into a loaf of tasty bread.
And Jesus answered to him, "It has been written that 'Humanity will not live on bread alone.'"
Jesus' reply cites the Torah: "...he humbled you and let you hunger, and he fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know -- so that he would make you know that humanity does not live on bread alone, but that humanity lives on everything that comes out of Yahweh's mouth." Matthaiah's account quotes the last portion, but Lukas assumes that the reader is familiar with it. Thus, Jesus establishes the priority that one's spiritual needs ought to have over one's physical needs. The principles of the Torah are the true food.
And after leading him up, he showed him all the kingdoms of the empire in a mark of time. And the Accuser said to him, "I will give you all this authority and their glory, because it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I want. Therefore, if you bow down in my presence, it will all be yours." And Jesus answered, saying to him, "It has been written, 'You will bow down to Yahweh your God, and you will do religious service to him alone.'"
As was the case in Job, God had given the Accuser whatever might be necessary to test Jesus. But what the Enemy possessed was purely connected to this physical realm. The Accuser offered Jesus all manner of earthly power and pomp if only he would renounce his messianic mission.
Bowing down to someone was a sign of respect, and ordinarily it signified the acknowledgement of someone else as a superior. Jesus was not about to treat his enemy as a superior in return for earthly kingdoms. His reasoning was easy to comprehend: only God is a worthy superior for the Messiah, for only God deserves the service of human beings. In support, Jesus cites God's words in Deut 6:13, which reads more fully, "You will fear Yahweh your god. You will do service to him, and you will swear by his name." This is repeated in Deut 10:20. Each time it is a prohibition about treating anything else as though it were a god. In Deut 11:1, the citation at 10:20 is accompanied by a reminder to love and to keep the principles of God's instruction (Torah).
Jesus quotes the passage loosely, and perhaps "bow down" appears in early copies of the Hebrew Bible in the place of "fear." The two words are not similar in Hebrew, though, and so "bow down" might be Jesus' own analysis of the situation, to which he applied the Torah passage.
Now he led him into Jerusalem and placed him on the wing of the temple, and he said to him, "If you are God's son, cast yourself down from here. For it has been written that "He will give a precept to his messengers concerning you, to protect you," and that, "They will raise you up on hands, lest you should strike your foot against a stone." And Jesus answered, saying to him that, "It is said, "You will not test out Yahweh your God.""
Finally, the Accuser of the Faithful takes Jesus to the temple, which the Jewish people regarded as a holy place devoted to God. There, he again questions Jesus' identity, this time daring the Anointed One to call on God to protect him -- after first jumping from the temple to the ground! The Accuser builds a strong case by citing from the Psalms: "Because you have made Yahweh your refuge -- the Highest One your habitation -- no bad thing will happen to you, no scourge will approach your tent. For he will give a precept to his messengers concerning you, to protect you in all your ways. They will raise you up on hands, lest you should strike your foot against a stone. You will step on the lion and the adder; the young lion and snake you will trample underfoot." (Psa 91:9-13)
However, it would be inappropriate for even the Messiah to put God to the test in such a fashion, and clearly that was not God's intent as protector of the faithful. Jesus' reply again comes from the Torah (Deut 6:16): "You will not test out Yahweh your God as you tested him at Massah."
At Massah (Ex 17:1-7), the people of Israel had tested God, wanting God to prove -- by giving them water -- that he really was with them (v. 7). Yahweh God did provide them water, but he forbade them from ever asking him to prove he was with them again. The name, "Massah," given to that place means "proof."
And when he completed every testing, the Accuser departed from him for a season.
Jesus refused three times to be tempted to change his loyalties. Knowing God's teachings, Jesus refused to violate them -- even to demonstrate that he was the Anointed One. And so the Accuser left Jesus, having found nothing in which to accuse him. However, the postscript does not say that he left Jesus alone permanently -- only that he stopped testing Jesus temporarily.
14 And Jesus returned into Galilaiah in the power of the breath. And a voice went out about him into the whole surrounding countryside. And he taught in their gatherings, being glorified by all people.
By this time, Jesus has gathered his initial students (Jn 1:19ff.), and his return to Galilaiah included also his visit to Kana with his mother. All we are told here is that people began to talk about him, because of the things that John was saying about him. In some of the Galilaian cities, then, people began to request his company and to listen to his teachings.
And he came into Nazareth, where he had been raised, and according to his custom he entered into the gathering on the Sabbath day, and he stood up to read. And a scroll of Isaiah the prophet was handed to him, and after unrolling the scroll, he found the place where it was written, 'Yahweh's breath is on me. On account of this he has anointed me to announce a good message to the poor. He has sent me forth to herald a release to captives and a restoration of sight to blind people, to send forth in freedom those who had been crushed, to herald Yahweh's acceptable year.'"
After speaking in several cities in the area, including Kafar-Nahum, Jesus returned to his hometown. In many Jewish gatherings it was (and is) traditional to allow someone to read and speak briefly from the Hebrew Bible. Following that custom, Jesus asked for the scroll of Isaiah, unrolled it to what we now call chapter 61, and began reading. The section is reminiscent of the servant songs, and the author writes in the first person. The passage (61:1-11) was commonly seen as a prediction by the author of the Anointed One, and what God would say through him. The chapter speaks of an everlasting covenant (v. 8) and of superiority over outsiders (vv. 5-6). The Anointed One describes himself as a bridegroom (v. 10), an image used by John the Baptizer in Johannes' account to describe Jesus.
"The poor" here may signify anyone who has been suffering spiritually; the reading in Isaiah allows for it, and Lukas appaers to use "the poor" in place of Matthaiah's "poor in spirit". The heralding of the acceptable year is an announcement of God's favor for those who accept their Messiah.
And he rolled up the scroll and gave it back to the assistant, and he sat down. And the eyes of all people in the gathering were staring at him. Now he began to say to them that, "Today this writing which is in your ears is fulfilled."
In stating that the writing was being fulfilled, Jesus was essentially telling them that he was the Anointed One. Although he did not bluntly state it so, anyone who understood the passage realized that if Jesus was applying it to the current time, then he was applying it to himself.
And all were testifying to him and were wondering at those sayings of favor which were going out from his mouth. And they said, "Isn't this Yosef's son?" And he said to them, "You will surely say this analogy to me, 'Healer, cure yourself.' Do also here in your own country the things that we heard have been done in Kafar-Nahum." But he said, "Indeed I am telling you that no prophet is acceptable in his country. Now in truth I am telling you, there were many widows in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the sky was shut up for three years and six months, as a great famine happened over all the land. And Elijah was sent to none of them except to a widowed woman, Sarepta of Sidon. And there were many lepers in Israel with Elisha the prophet, and none of them was cleansed except Naiman the Syrian."
On account of Jesus' application of the prophecy in Isaiah to himself, the people started thinking about whether or not he might indeed be the Anointed One -- especially given the things he was teaching. However, many of them doubted. After all, they had known him for years. They had seen him grow up, and they were familiar with his family. Naaahh: he couldn't be the Messiah.
In asking him to "cure himself," they were asking him to work whatever wonders and signs he had begun to work in other areas. After all, he ought to be able to do those same things in his own hometown, if he really were the Messiah.
Jesus responded by saying that "no prophet is acceptable" in his homeland. What did he mean? It did not matter whether or not Jesus performed similar miracles; the people would not accept him as Anointed One because they had preconceived ideas about him.
His two analogies were possibly the most scathing verbal attacks that he could have made. "There were many widows in the land" means "there were many Jewish widows." Yet during the time in question, the only widow visited by Elijah was a gentile. Elijah had cursed the land, using power from God to prevent it from raining -- due to Ahab's wickedness (1 Kgs 16:32-33; 17:1). At that time, God sent Elijah across the Jordan River (17:5), so he would not suffer that curse. But God himself also sent Elijah to Sidon to meet the widow (17:8-9), and because of her own faith, God blessed her so that her supplies would not run out until rain came (17:14-16). In citing this passage, Jesus implies that sometimes gentiles are more pious than Jewish people. His direct application is that Elijah had found more faith outside "his own country".
The story of Naiman (Naaman) the Syrian is found in 2 Kgs 5:1-14. The King of Israel (whose name is not mentioned there but is probably Yoram) did not wish to hear the Syrian king's plea to ask Elisha to cure his commander, Naiman. And even though Naiman had a lesson of his own to learn about expecations (5:11-14), he was smart enough to listen to his servants and never doubted that Elisha had the power from God to cure him. Thus, when his own king was more concerned with the political situation with Syria than with someone's health, Naiman the Syrian had enough trust in God's power to go to Elisha to be cured. Again, Elisha had found more faith outside "his own country."
Jesus was NOT building up the gentiles as superior in faith. Instead, his application was that the people of Nazareth were stumbling over their own preconceptions about Jesus, to the point where the people in the cities around them were more accepting of their hometown Messiah than they were.
And when they heard these things, all those in the gathering were filled with emotion. And they rose up and threw him out of the city, and they led him all the way to the mountain face on which their city was constructed, so as to hurtle him down. But he went through their midst and went away.
The Nazarenes appear to have misunderstood his saying -- thinking that Jesus was supporting gentiles over the Jewish nation. It is still possible that they did understand him, however, and were merely enraged at being compared unfavorably to every other city in Galilaiah. Either way, they planned to injure or kill him by throwing him from a cliff. God would not allow this and helped Jesus to escape.
31 And he went down into the city of Kafar-Nahum of Galilaiah, and he taught them during the Sabbath days. And they were astonished at his teaching because his message was with authority. And there was a person in the gathering who had a spirit of an unclean spirit being, and he cried out with a loud voice, "Ah, what is there between us and you, Jesus the Nazarene? Do you come to destroy us? We know who you are: God's holy one." And Jesus censured him, saying, "Muzzle yourself and come out from him." And after tossing him out into the middle, the spirit being came out from him without hurting him. And wonderment happened to all, and they were speaking together with one another, saying, "What a message this is, that with authority and with power he directs the unclean spirits, and they come out!" And a report about him went out into every place in the surrounding country.
Jesus and his small group of followers returned to Kafar-Nahum, where they had been better received. He stayed there for several weeks, teaching them about the deeper nature of the Torah. In those days, the rabbis were already beginning to cite one another in their applications of the Torah and Prophets. For example, they might explain that Rabbi Hillel taught that the passage meant that they should do such-and-such. In that respect, many of the teachers were not applying the teachings of the Torah directly but were passing on other people's opinions. They became keepers of tradition more than keepers of the Torah. On the other hand, Jesus taught "with authority." This meant that he simply applied the teachings of the Torah and explained their meanings, without the use of an intermediary set of rabbis, rejecting the practice of human opinion as tradition.
Jesus' authority to teach was accompanied by various signs that proved he was indeed the Anointed One. When Jesus encountered someone who had a spirit being inside of him, his authority to teach was demonstrated.
Spirit beings were not all "evil," but this particular spirit being was classified as "unclean," and so Jesus set out to free the man from its influence. Yet before he was able to do so, even the spirit identified Jesus as the Anointed One ("God's holy one"). Therefore, we have here double testimony that Jesus was the Messiah and therefore that his teachings should be followed: not only was he able to overpower the spirit being with the power from God to cast it out but also that spirit itself identified him as the Anointed One. As a consequence, people began to spread the message about his deeds from town to town. Notice, though, that Lukas does not tell us that they were all convinced that he was the Anointed One -- even this miracle did not persuade them all, but at least many of them knew that God was with him.
Now after rising up from the gathering, he went into Simon's house. Now Simon's mother-in-law was held by a great fever, and they asked him about her. And standing above her, he censured the fever, and it left her. Now she rose up immediately and served them.
Simon (i.e., Peter) was already traveling with Jesus, although Lukas has not yet mentioned him. Possibly, the author believes that his readers are familiar with Johannes' account of how Peter and Andreas met Jesus while they were in the company of John the Baptizer. Therefore, when the reader comes across the name "Simon," (s)he already knows who is intended.
It is probably at Simon's request that Jesus visited his mother-in-law and miraculously cured her fever.
Now while the sun was setting, all of those who had people who were afflicted with various diseases brought them to him. Now he placed his hands on them one at a time, and he cured them. Now also, spirit beings came out from many people, calling out and saying that, "You are God's son." And censuring them, he did not allow them to say that they knew him to be the Anointed One.
Possibly because they had heard what Jesus had done for Simon's mother-in-law, the people in the area began bringing their sick to him to be cured, and Jesus exercised his power from God to heal them all. The people had also heard about the man with the spirit being in him, and so anyone who had an unclean spirit in them was also brought to Jesus, so that the spirit would be cast out.
As before, these spirits wanted to identify Jesus as the Messiah ("God's son"), but he forbade them from telling everyone. Here we see that it is necessary for each person to come to his own convictions about Jesus. Furthermore, although Jesus was doing what the Anointed One was supposed to do, and although he had applied a messianic passage of the Prophets to himself, he was not publically announcing his identity. It is elsewhere indicated that he didn't want to "tip his hand." If he went around bluntly announcing that he was the Messiah, not only would the leaders of the people have questioned and attacked him sooner, but also there might have been a movement to crown him king -- something that he did not desire.
Now when day happened, he came out and went into a desert place. And the crowds hunted him, and came up to him, and urged him not to go away from them. But he said to them that, "It is necessary for me to also announce the good message of God's kingdom to other cities, because I was sent forth for this."
Notice that even at this point, Lukas is teasing his reader. Although he has quoted Jesus as pointing to "the good message," he has not informed us as to its content. So far, the author's priority has been to establish Jesus as the Anointed One. Then we will read of the message through various forms of teaching.
Jesus left the immediate area and went to the surrounding cities, trying to get the word out not of himself but of the message that he was confidently trying to spread.
As Jesus went around the Sea of Galilaiah (also called the Lake of Gennesaret), his students made their living. Peter and his brother, and a few of his friends, were fishermen. So, as Jesus was teaching on the shore, he happened to notice his students' ships in the sea ahead of him and decided to teach a lesson from aboard ship. Presumably, he did this because there were so many people that they would have been unable to see and hear him. So, he asked Simon to pilot his ship into a position where he could stand aboard ship, see everyone on the shore, and teach them, with them being able to clearly see and hear him. Again Lukas teases us, not telling us what he taught the people.
5:4 Now when he stopped speaking, he said to Simon, "Head off into the deep water and let down your nets for a catch." And Simon answered, saying, "Master, we have labored through the whole night and have received nothing. But at your declaration, I will let down the nets."
After completing his discussion with the crowd, Jesus initiates a lesson for his students. It is possible that Lukas read Johannes' account of the miraculous catch (Jn 21), and that his research uncovered the fact that another such incident had occurred earlier in their work with him. It may have been important to Lukas that readers of Johannes' account know that this first miracle had occurred -- putting the catch in Johannes into context.
Some commentators make Jesus and Peter out to be strangers at this point, but notice Simon's reaction. First, he unquestioningly allows Jesus to use his ship. Then he listens to Jesus, a rabbi, tell him about his own profession of fishing. Then, referring to Jesus as "master," he follows Jesus' instructions. Knowing that he had already visited Simon's mother-in-law at his request, we observe that the author is not attempting to portray this as the first meeting between Jesus and Peter. Instead, he has been focusing solely on establishing Jesus' identity, unconcerned with his entourage. But at this point, historically, it is necessary to introduce Peter and his friends.
For Simon's part, he does as instructed, simply because Jesus told him to do it, and not because he really believed that a miracle was about to happen.
And after doing this, they enveloped a great crowd of fishes, but their nets were ripping. And they signified to the partners in the other ship to come and help them. And they came, and they filled both ships, so as to sink them. Now when Simon Peter noticed, he fell down at Jesus' knees, saying, "Go away from me, because I am a sinful man, Lord!" For amazement had contained him (and all those who were with him) at the catch of fish that they had received. Now Jacob and Johannes, sons of Zebediah who were partners of Simon, did similarly also. And Jesus said to Simon, "Do not be afraid. From now on, you will be capturing human beings."
Not only Peter, but also Jacob and Johannes also let down their nets. Andreas is not mentioned by name, but we may assume that he was involved, and probably there were several other fishermen who normally worked with Peter. From the four accounts, we see that Zebediah was a wealthy fisherman who owned several ships. Peter appears to have had a role of captain, directing the other fishers where and when to fish.
There were so many fish that the nets in both ships were about to burst, and their weight was so great that they threatened to sink the two ships. Faced with catastrophe, Peter realized that God could accomplish anything, and that this man Jesus was indeed a powerful prophet. Simon was not yet ready to affirm that Jesus was the Anointed One, but that time would come soon enough. Notice, though, that Lukas does call Simon by the name "Peter." According to Johannes, Peter had been nicknamed "Kefa" (Aramaic for 'rock') early in their relationship -- possibly because of his personality -- but later on a special significance would be attached to that name. Kefa and Peter mean the same thing in Aramaic and in Greek.
"From now on...." Jesus did not take away their means of support as fishermen, but he had taught them a lesson that could be applied to their own lives. Just as an uncertain Peter, Jacob, and Johannes were able to catch a vast number of fish, so also a faithful group of students would be able to bring a great number of people to listen to and to accept Jesus' message.
And after leading the ships to the land, they put away all things and followed him.
Jesus was preparing to go to another city, and so the fishermen sold the fish, docked the ships, and prepared to travel with him.
12 And it happened during the time of his being in one of the cities that, look! A man full of leprosy! Now after noticing Jesus, he fell on his face and begged him, saying, "O Lord, if you want it, you are able to cleanse me!" And stretching out his hand, he touched him, saying, "I want it. Be cleansed." And immediately the leprosy left him. And he charged him to tell nobody, but "Leave and show yourself to the priests, and make an offering for a witness to them regarding your cleansing, just as Moses arranged."
Between the previous section and this one, an unspecified amount of time passes. In theory that time is somewhat short. Whenever this was, Jesus met up with a man whose body was covered with leprosy. Leprosy (today called, among other things, Hansen's Disease) was horribly feared in Biblical days. Not realizing that leprosy was not as communicable as perceived, people who saw the damage to the skin often feared and ran from lepers.
Under the Torah, lepers were not allowed to participate with other people in any gathering. Instead, anyone who might be stricken with the disease was directed to show himself to the priests (Lev 13:2f.). Because of the danger of spreading under certain circumstances, lepers were considered ritually unclean. They were directed to wear torn clothes, to allow their hair to grow and hang loose, and to call out ahead of him that he is unclean, so that no one else might come into contact with the disease (Ex 13:45). Consequently, lepers were not allowed to live in the same city with people who were free of the disease. Even a leper's clothes could be unclean in certain cases.
Wherever this particular leper was -- perhaps outside of one of the cities -- he had heard about Jesus and was convinced that Jesus could heal him. Recognizing the man's trust in God, Jesus healed him, but he directed him not to tell anyone except for the priests who he was and what he had done.
The procedure for being pronounced clean of leprosy is given in Exodus 14. The process took eight days, and so there was time for the word about Jesus to get out.
But rather the message about him got around, and great crowds came together to hear and to be cured from their weaknesses. But he was withdrawing in the deserts and was praying.
Not wishing to be surrounded by the crowds, Jesus left the area and went into the countryside. The solitude and prayer appear to have been something that Jesus practiced somewhat regularly, in order to regain the mental and emotional strength to continue his mission.
And it happened during one of the days that he was teaching, and Perushim and law-teachers were sitting to hear. They had come out of all the villages of Galilaiah and Judea, even Jerusalem. And Yahweh's power was on him to heal.
Sometime later, Jesus was again teaching, but again our author does not reveal the content of that teaching. However, by this time Jesus had attracted enough attention that some of the religious leaders were anxious to see him. The term "perush" signifies (roughly) a stickler for details; the Perushim were known widely for taking into account even the finest points of the Torah and Jewish tradition. It is said that all supposed prophets were put to the test by those who knew the Torah and Prophets the best. If Jesus' fame had spread as far as Jerusalem, then these men were certainly there to deny his claim to being a prophet, just as they also had attempted to deny John's claims.
The wording about healing may mean that God only empowered Jesus to heal under certain circumstances, or it may merely mean that Jesus happened to be healing people at the time.
And, look! Men were carrying on a mat a man who was paralyzed, and they sought to bring him in and to place him in Jesus' presence. And when they did not find out how they might bring him in through the crowd, after going up on the roof, they let him down through the tiles with the mat into the midst of the crowd in Jesus' presence.
This account will establish that Jesus' teachings are valid because the signs that he is showing demonstrate that God sent him. In this instance, however, we get to read what Jesus' said in response to some criticism of his actions.
The crowds that flocked to Jesus whenever word circulated that he was nearby were so large that people were pressed up against one another hoping to hear him, and, for some of them, to be healed. One man's paralysis prevented him from pushing through the crowd, and his friends were unable to make a path for themselves in between all the people. Yet they so much wanted to see Jesus, and they so deeply believed that Jesus could restore his body, that those who were carrying the paralytic found another way to get to Jesus. That "way" consisted of removing some tiling or thatching from the roof and lowering his mat through the ceiling to Jesus!
And noticing their trust, he said, "Person, your sins are forgiven of you." And the scribes and the Perushim began to reason, saying, "Who is this one who is speaking evil things? Who is able to forgive sins, except God alone?" But, recognizing their reasonings, Jesus answered, saying to them, "Why are you reasoning in your hearts? What is easier: to say, 'Your sins are forgiven of you,' or to say, 'Rise and walk'? But so that you would know that the Son of Man has authority on the earth to forgive sins...." He said to the paralyzed person, "I'm telling you, rise, and take up your mat, and go into your house."
Jesus knew that the Perushim and scribes were there to examine him, and so Jesus' words were said with the lesson in mind. "Your sins are forgiven," he said. The man had not asked for forgiveness, and perhaps he was a just man, but Jesus forgave him publically. Some people believe that the man's paralysis was connected with sinful behavior, but Lukas never offers us that.
Jesus' words provoked a response that he probably anticipated, for they questioned that he could forgive sins. As the Messiah -- someone who was always in tune with what God wanted -- he would know whether or not God would forgive someone, and therefore Jesus could correctly tell someone whether or not their sins were forgiven. But that's not the point here.
The point is that Jesus was demonstrating himself to those around him. He was establishing his identity, and Lukas' inclusion of the story indicates his intent to show that from the start Jesus was honest about who he was, even proving before the religious leaders that he was the Messiah.
Did he have the authority to forgive sins? If he really was the Anointed One, then he did. As Jesus implied, it is much easier to tell someone that their sins are forgiven than to tell someone, "You're healed." After all, if the healer was a charlatan, the paralyzed man could easily prove to the crowd that he had NOT been healed.
But the fact that Jesus could indeed heal the man would prove to the crowds that he had the authority from God to forgive sins. Therefore, Jesus told the man to get up and go home.
And instantly, he got up in their presence and took up what he had been lying on, and he went into his house, glorifying God. And everyone took amazement, and they glorified God, and they were filled with fear, saying that "Today we have noticed things we didn't expect."
And so, Jesus demonstrated who he was, again without actually claiming to be the Anointed One. People would observe him and would make that determination on their own. The response of the Jewish leaders is not mentioned here, but most likely they felt played. Jesus had turned what was supposed to be a healing into a validation of his identity -- and therefore a validation of his teachings.
27 And after these things, he went out and observed a tribute taker named Levi seated at the tax office, and he said to him, "Follow me." And he abandoned all things and rose up and followed him. And Levi made a great feast for Jesus in his house, and there was a large crowd of tribute takers and others who were reclining with him.
Some commentators place this segment as the end of Book One. However, because the segment that follows features a healing that serves to introduce Jesus' teachings, and because the second book appears to begin with the identification of the Twelve as his students, this commentary will consider this segment to be the next to last segment in Book One.
The name "Levi" indicates adherence to something, and that is the name used here. In his own account, Matthaiah refers to himself as "Matthaiah," which is one way of saying "Yahweh's gift." The account attributed to Markus also lists his name as "Levi," but points out that his father's name was Alphaeus (Mk 2:14). Like Simon Peter, Matthaiah went by more than one name. One of these (Matthaiah?) was probably the name given at birth, while the other was a name that he took on -- possibly while he associated with Jesus. "Levi" would be an ironic name for a tribute taker, so quite possibly this is the name that he chose (or was given) after he began to follow Jesus.
Levi appears to have known about Jesus, probably hearing of him because of his spreading notoriety. When Jesus asked him to come, Matthaiah dropped everything and immediately followed him. Of course, if Matthaiah himself was the primary source for this material, we might expect his memory to downplay any second thoughts he might have had. Thus, the account makes sense from a historical standpoint.
Matthaiah invited Jesus and his students to dinner, also inviting all of his friends, whom Matthaiah himself says were publically regarded as sinners -- those who did not follow the Torah, or perhaps merely ignored the traditions of the rabbis.
And the Perushim and their scribes grumbled to his students, saying, "Why are you eating and drinking with tribute takers and sinners?" And Jesus answered, saying to them, "The healthy have no need of a healer; rather, those who have a malady. I have not come to call just people but sinners into mental change."
Now we see that tribute takers and "sinners" were not the only ones at the feast, for various members of the religious hierarchy were also there, or rather passing by (which they would have done if the feast occurred outdoors). All three accounts appear to place their questions about the feast as contemporary with the feast itself, so it is more probable that they were passing by than that they questioned him later.
Why eat with sinners? Because they are the ones who recognize that they need someone like Jesus. Here, the interpreters split. Some, with whom this commentator agrees, say that Jesus told the leaders that he was not eating with people who were already following the Torah spiritually because they did not need his assistance. That interpretation follows directly from what he said. However, others believe that Jesus uses the word "just" as a reproof for people who claimed to be pious but were not. In that case, he would be saying that he was not eating with people like the Perushim because they did not welcome him.
The statement, "The healthy have no need of a healer," supports the former interpretation rather than the latter.
Lukas contains two words not found in Matthaiah or Markus. Instead of saying merely that he came to call sinners, Lukas' account adds "into mental change." Jesus was not merely fraternizing with tribute takers; he was calling them for a purpose. In the "healer" metaphor, he was there to heal them, spiritually. He cared about them enough to go to them and help them. The "sinners" of Jesus' association were described in predictions about the Messiah as "lost sheep" (Ezek 34, for example). Thus, Jesus was gathering lost sheep back into the flock when he ate with people like Matthaiah and his friends. By contrast, these Perushim refused even to eat with people like Matthaiah.
Now they said to him, "John's students often fast and make supplications, and the students of the Perushim do likewise. But yours are eating and drinking." Now Jesus said to them, "You are not able to make the sons of the wedding hall fast while the groom is with them. But days will come when the groom will be taken from them. Then, during those days they will fast."
This question seems to have come later, but the passage does not say how much later. If taken in the context of the preceding verses, then it is the Perushim and scribes who were asking this of Jesus. This is not the case, however. "They" must be interpreted in the general sense as "some people," especially in light of both Markus and Matthaiah. Matthaiah is clear (9:14) -- that some of John's own students were among those who wondered about this question, which points to a difference between John and Jesus.
The statement here is one of wondering and not a threat. The people who ask are merely wondering why there are differences between two prophets of what is clearly the same reformation movement. Why don't Jesus' students fast regularly? More generally, why are there differences?
Jesus responds by telling them that John essentially sums up the old covenant while Jesus represents something new that is coming. His first comment (above) directly answers their question, while their second (below) explains more. The "bridegroom" (i.e., the Anointed One) is present with Jesus' students. By analogy, people do not fast at a wedding feast. In fact, they don't fast until the groom has gone. In Lukas' account, this is Jesus' first foretelling of his upcoming death, which is still some time off. No one picked up on this reference then, and Lukas does not spoil his foreshadowing by mentioning it directly.
Now he also told this analogy to them: "No one puts a patch from a new cloak onto an old cloak. But if they do, it rips the new, and that patch from the new does not agree with the old. And no one puts new wine into old wineskins. But if they do, the new wine will burst the skins and it will be spilled out, and the wineskins will be destroyed. On the contrary, one must put new wine into new wineskins. And no one who has drunk the old wants the new, for he says, 'The old is better.'"
The importance of this saying cannot be overstated, for it explains for the first time the tremendous scope of Jesus' messianic mission. He was there to change everything -- and not only their system of worship but their way of thinking.
"No one puts a patch from a new cloak onto an old cloak." By analogy, it would be impossible to construct Jesus' way of devotion from Priestly Judaism. Therefore, Jesus' way of thinking will be something entirely new. That John the Baptizer sums up the first covenant and represents a transition into the new one is better handled in Markus, where there appears to be a parallel made between the John/Jesus relationship and the Elijah/Elisha relationship.
Jesus continues to say that it is likewise impossible to put new wine into old wineskins. The two analogies would be familiar to the common people. Of course you can't put new wine into old wineskins! The fermentation of the alcohol in the wine weakens the skins; if they are reused, they are likely to burst. In the same way, Jesus cannot introduce his teachings into the system of Priestly Judaism. It will require a new "system".
But while Jesus was talking about the upcoming fall of Priestly Judaism, he was not introducing the idea of a religion called Christianity. Instead, Jesus was saying that in order to understand and receive the Messiah, the people's whole way of thinking would have to change. The details of this change will come soon, beginning in Part Two.
Most interesting of all is Jesus' final comment, explaining why the old system, with its old way of thinking, had to go: And no one who has drunk the old wants the new, for he says, "The old is better." In modern language, Jesus is talking about paradigms (pronounced PAIR a dimes). Paradigms -- ways of thinking, or how we view the world through our own experiences and customs -- are difficult to shift. Many people live their whole lives without changing their basic way of looking at life. All around them, the Jewish people of Jesus' time saw the trappings of the religion of Judaism. There was the temple and priestly system. There were the rabbis, who taught the Torah but also explained it with their own interpretations. There was even a sense of Israel's independence, which at the time was stirring up factions in opposition to their domination by the Roman Empire. There were synagogues (gatherings), which by this time had developed into somewhat formal settings. For everything that could be done, there were the usual ways of doing those things.
So, the old way of thinking about God, about themselves, and about each other, would not work in the new covenant. Why not? Because not only would it reject the new way of thinking and be unable to contain it (like the old wineskins), but also as long as people had both the old and new ways of thinking side by side they would resist change and assume that the more familiar way of thinking was better. People tend to be conservative, to oppose radical changes. Therefore, unless the whole kit and kaboodle were removed, Jesus' new idea would never flourish. As readers, we will soon learn of Jesus' fresh understanding of the Torah.
6:1 Now during a Sabbath it happened that he went through the wheat fields. And his students also picked off the heads of wheat and rubbed them in their hands and ate. Now some of the Perushim said, "Why are you doing what is not legal on the Sabbath?" And Jesus answered, saying to them, "Haven't you even read what David did when he and those who were with him were hungry? How he entered into God's house, and he took the loaves of design, and he ate, and he gave to those who were with him. It was illegal to eat this, except for the priests alone." And he said to them, "The Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath."
This section, 6:1-11, is transitional. While it contains another sign of healing (see below), it also features teachings from the Lord. From this point on, Lukas will focus more on those teachings and less on Jesus' confirming activities.
By this time, Jesus is certainly in the area around Jerusalem, perhaps along the Mediterranean Sea. Markus appears to place this near the Sea of Galilaiah (3:7), but possibly "the sea" is the Mediterranean, for 3:7-8 appear to state that he had left Galilaiah and was now closer to a place where many Judeans would come to hear him. "The mountain" (Lk 7:12) may refer to the Mount of Olive Trees, of which Jesus seems to have been fond. In chapter eight (8:1) he is travelling around, and then back in Galilaiah (8:26). Chapter nine appears to occur back in the South and takes place after John's death (9:9). Therefore, in the sections that follow, Jesus travels around, spreading his teachings.
At this point in time, Jesus and his students were hungry, so they found wheat by the side of the road -- i.e., unattended wheat fields -- and picked wheat from them to eat. Crowds were still following Jesus around, and certain of the Perushim were among those crowds. Since the day was a Sabbath, they questioned what Jesus' students were doing.
It was legal to obtain wheat or fruits from fields or trees that were growing wild, and for food it was even legal to pick fruit or grain and eat it (Dt 23:24-25), but the question from the Perushim concerns their interpretation of what it was legal to do on the Sabbath day. The Sabbath (or seventh) day of the week was recorded as holy according to the Torah:
Deut 5:15 also adds:
"You will remember that you were a slave
in the land of Egypt, and that Yahweh your god
brought you out from there with a mighty hand
and outstretched arm. Therefore, Yahweh your
god directed you to keep the Sabbath day."
As to what could and could not be done on the Sabbath, the Torah itself is rather silent, and Jesus implies that there is a principle of what it means to "keep the day holy." The rabbis had a great many things to say on this subject. There are 39 acts listed in the Mishnah that were forbidden on the Sabbath, and there are still more recommendations and precautions. The 39 forbidden acts are found at Shabbat 97b. Details are added to activities like "bread making," and there are even minimal amounts of work specified that are to be considered violations of the Sabbath (Shabbat 74a). In extreme cases, one could be stoned to death for deliberately violating the Sabbath.
Jesus and his students were probably not traveling far on this particular day, since the Perushim do not question the distance that they were traveling. However, the students were preparing food -- albeit in a rudimentary way. Although the Torah said nothing about their activities, the Perushim interpreted them as violations of the Sabbath.
Jesus' retort is based on what happened in 1 Sam 21:2-7, wherein David proclaimed that his men had been consecrated to God and therefore could eat of the holy bread. Normally, only the priests could eat this bread (Lev 24:5-9). Jesus' point was that since the men who traveled with David were holy enough to be allowed to eat the loaves of design ("showbread"), then those who traveled with Jesus were holy enough to eat food that had not been set apart for God. The interpretations of the Perushim regarding the Sabbath were so strict that they should have condemned David for his actions, but since David was not to be blamed, then neither should they blame Jesus and his students.
The stronger principle here is the question, "What makes something holy?" Although David and his men were not priests, they were still consecrated to God (in going to fight his war). Therefore, they were not violating the precept against unholy men eating the bread -- even though the statement had been for priests alone. Jesus and his students were also doing God's work. Therefore, they were keeping the Sabbath day holy -- by not managing their own daily lives but devoting themselves to God.
And the final statement sums it up: that the Messiah is "Lord of the Sabbath." That is, he is completely devoted to God and therefore can state authoritatively what is the principle of the Sabbath, unlike the Perushim who were only able to endlessly add opinions to the discussion.
Now during another Sabbath, it happened that he entered into the gathering to teach. And there was a person there whose right hand was withered. Now the scribes and the Perushim were scrutinizing him to see if he would cure during the Sabbath, so that they would find a way to accuse him. But he knew their reasonings. Now he said to the man who had the withered hand, "Rise up and stand in the middle." And after getting up, he stood.
Somewhat later, Jesus and the Perushim had another disagreement over the principle behind the Sabbath. Seeing a man with a withered hand, Jesus intended to heal him. But he also knew that he would face accusation from the religious leaders. Therefore, he intended to make a lesson of the matter and asked them questions beforehand:
Now Jesus said to them, "I ask you if it is legal to do good on the Sabbath, or to do bad? To save a life, or to destroy?" And looking around at all of them, he said to him, "Stretch out your hand." Now he did it and his hand was restored. But they were filled with mindlessness, and they spoke to one another about whatever they might do to Jesus.
The principle here is the same as in the earlier encounter regarding the Sabbath. What makes the day (or anything, or anyone) holy? Doing good deeds on the Sabbath -- and certainly healing -- falls into line with what God had in mind. Take time to remember God. Devote yourself to God. Helping others is devotion to God, in and of itself. Therefore, it is legal to help others at any time.
Naturally, the man was cured, indicating God's own involvement in "activity on the Sabbath."
The Perushim so detested the fact that Jesus was tearing down their traditional interpretation of "Sabbath laws" that they were overcome with their desire to see Jesus defeated or humiliated. Later on, they would seek to kill him.
Click here to continue to Part Two.
Continue now to some notes on the Actions of the Envoys
Return to the Religious Concepts page.