The Gospel Series Part One
Luke's purpose for writing a gospel (Lk 1:1-4)
In the first view verses, Luke explains his reasons for writing, and explains his authority for writing the accounts of Jesus. Some speculate Luke and Acts were written as trial documents for Paul's trial in Rome, since Roman law required any person appealing to Caesar was required to have the facts regarding their case precede them to Rome.
Lk 1:1 Many other accounts of the life of Jesus were written, but only the four we have were considered inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Lk 1:2 Luke was not necessarily a witness to these events, but gets his information directly from people who were. This is important for several reasons. First, eyewitness testimony is obviously more credible than hearsay. Even today in our courts, hearsay is excluded from testimony; only eyewitness testimony is allowable. Luke is recording the credible eyewitness testimony of people who experienced these events, just as a court reporter would record testimony in a courtroom. Thus, his gospel account is authoritative.
But, what good is testimony if the recording of it is inaccurate? Many would say today the Bible is not credible, for since we don't have any of the original copies of the Bible, through the copying and copying over thousands of years, errors have crept into the text. Thus the recording of eyewitness testimony as Luke does is invalid. But, a quick glance of the following chart[1] illustrates the accuracy of the New Testament as it has been passed down to us:
| Document | Date | Copies | % Purity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Homer's Iliad | 800 BC | 643 | 95 |
| Herodotus | 480 BC | 8 | ? |
| Plato's Tetralogies | 427 BC | 7 | ? |
| Caesar's Gallic Wars | 44 BC | 10 | ? |
| New Testament | 50-95 AD | 25,366 | >99.5 |
If we don't accept the validity and accuracy of the Bible, we will have to throw out much more than the Bible. Sadly, many people have been deceived to believe the Bible has been corrupted over thousands of years, but God has taken care of his Word. The Christian can be completely comfortable the Greek text we have today is accurate and complete. Shamefully, Christian's themselves create doubt with their various bias' towards one version or another, depending on which Greek text it originates from.
Norman Geisler, a world renown Bible scholar echoed this when he states: "Only 400 words of the NT are in doubt, whereas 764 lines of the Iliad are questioned. This five percent textual corruption (in the Iliad) compares with one-half of one percent of similar emendations in the New Testament[2]
Lk 1:3 "from the very first" could also be translated "from above"[3]. In other words, Luke has the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Spirit in his writing.
Little is known about Theophilus, but his name means friend of God, and by Luke's use of the title "most excellent", it is assumed he was some kind of Roman authority who believed in Jesus.
Lk 1:4 Notice Luke's authority: that you may know the certainty of those things. He says his writing is so Theophilus would know for sure, in other words, Luke's account is accurate and truthful.
John's prologue: from pre-incarnation to crucifixion (Jn 1:1-18)
Jn 1:1-2 "was" is in the indicative imperfect tense. This implies a fact of continuous past action[4] .In other words, Jesus has always existed, period. There was never a point in time when he didn't. This immediately crushes the claim of various groups who claim Jesus is a created being.
"Word" in Greek is Logos, and is a title of Jesus Christ.
Jn 1:3 Colossians 1:15-17
Jn 1:4 This should bring to mind Jesus' statement in John 8:12, one of his seven "I AM" statements in this Gospel:
Then Jesus spoke to them again, saying, "I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life." (John 8:12)
Jn 1:5 "comprehend" could also be translated overcome, and is in the aorist indicative active tense. This means an event at a definite and designated time[5]. Since John says "did not comprehend" it means darkness (read that satan and his demon friends) has never, not once overcome the light of Jesus. We should remember this as we face trials. For more on light, see the end of this section.
Jn 1:6-8 More background on John the Baptist will be coming in the other gospels, but it is clear John the Baptist never claimed to be the Christ the Jews were waiting for (v 20). Note in John's gospel, he never refers to himself by name, but only "the disciple whom Jesus loved" or something equivalent. Any specific instances of the name John refer to John the Baptist.
Jn 1:9-11 The tragedy of all mankind's history. The creator of the universe comes down and visits us, and we reject him and crucify him.
Jn 1:12 The hope of mankind. In spite of man's sinful, depraved nature, if we accept His offer, we can become children of God! This verse also has the purpose of John's gospel, that you might believe on His name (John 20:30-31)
Jn 1:13 Ephesians 1:3-5, 2:8-9
Jn 1:14 "beheld" means more than simply observation. It implies scrutiny, inspection or keen interest[6].
Jn 1:15-17 John the Baptist's mission was to point to Jesus, not to bring notice to himself. A lesson for us.
The Mosaic law could never justify us. Only Jesus gives us grace. Read Paul's commentary on this we call the book of Romans (especially chapters 1-8)
Jn 1:18 Recall Phillip's statement to Jesus "Show us the father", and Jesus' response. "He who has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:8-9). A hint of the Trinity. Also, in John 10:30, Jesus claims to be equal to God. Remember these for those groups who try to dethrone Jesus to something other than God.
A Brief divergence (no pun intended) on Light.
The following is not meant to be taken as fact, it's just an interesting thing to think about. I may or may not be right, I share this for whatever it may be worth. From my background in Physics, it is natural. However, if you don't agree, it's not a big deal. Remember to be a berean and search the scriptures for yourself to prove if these things (or anything else) is true. (Acts 17:11)
The Greek for light here is phos, meaning the light of the sun, and has the idea of light that has never had to be started and is never ending[7]. As a Physicist, as soon as light is mentioned, you immediately think of the famous two-slit experiment involving light. The details of this experiment are not important here, but the net result is light can manifest itself two ways, either a wave or a particle. Physicists call this the wave-particle duality of light.
In I John 1:5, we find the statement "God is light [phos]". If we take the Bible literally, as Physicists, we immediately recall the above mentioned duality of light. And we think of the trinity of God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. But light has a dual nature, so it doesn't fit exactly, thus we have a problem. The Bible has an apparent contradiction. Or does it?
Later in John's gospel, we find an interesting characteristic of the Holy Spirit:
"However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. "He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. (John 16:13-14)
Thus, the Holy Spirit never speaks of himself, His testimony is always about Jesus. So we would not expect a third manifestation of light, for the characteristics of the Holy Spirit are to testify of Jesus.
Another Bible "problem" solved.
Jesus' legal lineage through Joseph and natural lineage through Mary (Mt 1:1-17, Lk 3:23b-38)
We have two physical genealogies of Jesus. One by Matthew, one by Luke. But they are not the same. Matthew is a Jew, and as a Jew, starts with the first Jew (Abraham), through David, then to Joseph, the legal father of Jesus. But Luke is different. He is a physician, and as such is interested in Jesus' humanity. He starts with the first man (Adam), but when he gets to David, he doesn't go through the royal line of Solomon, but through another son (Nathan) and to Heli, the father of Mary.
Why the difference? The key is found in the Old Testament. Israel had a series of kings, some good and some bad, but during a period of time they went from bad to worse. In fact, they got so bad, in Jeremiah we find the following passage about a king named Jeconiah (or Coniah).
"As I live," says the LORD, "though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, were the signet on My right hand, yet I would pluck you off; "and I will give you into the hand of those who seek your life, and into the hand of those whose face you fear; the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and the hand of the Chaldeans. "So I will cast you out, and your mother who bore you, into another country where you were not born; and there you shall die. "But to the land to which they desire to return, there they shall not return. "Is this man Coniah a despised, broken idol; A vessel in which is no pleasure? Why are they cast out, he and his descendants, And cast into a land which they do not know? O earth, earth, earth, Hear the word of the LORD! Thus says the LORD: 'Write this man down as childless, A man who shall not prosper in his days; For none of his descendants shall prosper, Sitting on the throne of David, And ruling anymore in Judah.'" (Jeremiah 22:24-30)
God here has just ended the royal line of Israel! He has previously said the Messiah would come through this line, and he has just put a blood curse on it. This ended David's throne, and God says here. How then can the Messiah come?
Back to the genealogies. The curse was placed upon the line of Solomon, which Matthew traces down to Joseph. But because of the virgin birth, the blood curse is avoided. Luke in his genealogy goes through another son of David, Nathan (Don't confuse this Nathan with Nathan the prophet), and comes to Mary, the biological mother of Jesus. The curse doesn't apply to the line of Nathan, so God's word is fulfilled.
Another interesting point is given in Luke 1:32, where Gabriel tells Mary her son (Jesus) would sit on the throne of David. But at anytime in Jesus' earthly ministry did the throne of David exist? No, the Romans had taken over Israel. So this has yet to be fulfilled. This does occur in the book of Revelation, which is another clue to take the book of Revelation literally the way it is written. If we allegorize the book of Revelation, the statement in Luke 1:32 cannot be fulfilled.
Another reason to take your Bible seriously and literally.
[1] Eastman and Missler The Bible: An Extraterrestrial Message page 10
[2] Eastman and Missler The Bible: An Extraterrestrial Message page 11-12
[3] MacArthur, John The MacArthur Study Bible page 1509
[4] Zodhiates page 865
[5] Zodhiates page 862
[6] Zodhiates page 908, Missler The Gospel of John page 6
[7] Zodhiates page 945
Copyright © 1999-2008 Darrin Yeager. http://www.dyeager.org
This page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. In summary, you are free to share (copy and distribute) the work under the following conditions (see the actual license for more information):
- Attribution. You must attribute the work to the author (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Attribution should refer back to this web page and include a copyright notice and the license terms.
- Noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
- No Derivative Works. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.
