聖書注解書

Luke 1:1-2. Forasmuch as many have taken in hand — Who they were to whom the apostle here alludes, who had, from vague reports, (for so his words seem to imply,) rashly published narratives not entirely to be depended on, it is impossible for us now to discover. It is true, the word επεχειρησαν, have undertaken, used here by Luke, does not necessarily imply any censure on the writers of such accounts, but the scope of the place seems to imply it, if not on all, at least on some of them: for if all, or even most of them, had furnished true narratives, the number was an argument rather against a new attempt than for it. Grotius justly observes, that the spurious gospels, mentioned by ancient writers, are forgeries manifestly of a later date than the time of Luke. That there were, however, some such performances at the time when Luke began to write, the words of this evangelist are a sufficient evidence: for, to consider this book merely on the footing of a human composition, what writer of common sense would introduce himself to the public by observing the numerous attempts that had been made by former writers, some of whom at least had not been at due pains to be properly informed, if he himself were actually the first, or even the second, or the third, who had written on the subject; and if one of the two who preceded him had better opportunities of knowing than he, and the other fully as good? But the total disappearance of those spurious writings, probably no better than hasty collections of flying rumours, containing a mixture of truth and falsehood, may, after the genuine gospels were generally known and read, be easily accounted for. At midnight, the glimmering of the taper is not without its use, but it can make no conceivable addition to the light of the meridian sun. It deserves, however, to be remarked by the way, that whatever may be thought to be insinuated here by the evangelist, concerning the imperfect information of former historians, there is no hint given of their bad designs. It is justly observed here by Dr. Campbell, that the very circumstance of the number of such narratives, at so early a period, is itself an evidence that there was something in the first publication of the Christian doctrine, which, notwithstanding the many unfavourable circumstances wherewith it was attended, excited the curiosity and awakened the attention of persons of all ranks and denominations; insomuch that every narrative, which pretended to furnish men with any additional information concerning so extraordinary a personage as Jesus, seems to have been read with avidity. To set forth in order a declaration — Greek, αναταξασθαι διηγησιν, to compose a narrative; of those things which are most surely believed among us — As the great foundation of our common faith. The expression, πραγματων, refers not only to the things believed, but also to the things performed by Christ and his apostles; this first history of Luke being designed to record what Jesus himself said or did, Acts 1:1; and his second, to relate the acts of the apostles: and the participle, πεπληροφορημενων, translated, most surely believed, is rather to be understood as referring to the fulness of that evidence with which the things were attended, than to the confidence with which they were credited. It not only signifies that the doctrines were taught and the things done, but that they were taught and done with such circumstances, as laid a foundation for πληροφορια της πιστεως, a full assurance of faith, as to the truth of the doctrines, and the reality of the facts. Even as they delivered them, which from the beginning — Of Christ’s ministry; were eye-witnesses and ministers of the word — Because the persons, according to whose information the writers referred to by Luke composed their histories, are said to have been eye-witnesses as well as ministers of the word, (του λογου,) several writers have supposed that, by the word, Luke meant Christ himself, one of whose titles is, the Word, John 1:1, and, the Word of God, Revelation 19:13. Others, however, by the word, understand the transactions of our Lord’s public life; his sermons, miracles, death, resurrection, and ascension, because these things were the great subjects of the preaching of the apostles, who were eye and ear witnesses of them. And to Christians these were matters of such moment, that the knowledge, consideration, and remembrance of them, were the great business and comfort of their lives. It is no wonder, therefore, that those who were able should set down in writing such particulars of them as they had learned, whether from the conversations or sermons of the apostles and eye-witnesses. But histories thus drawn up, though they might contain many things highly worthy of the notice of Christians, must needs have been defective both in their matter and manner. Wherefore, Luke, having attained a thorough knowledge of our Lord’s history from the very beginning, thought fit to give a more full, regular, and connected account of it than had hitherto appeared, as he signifies in the next verse.

Luke 1:3-4. It seemed good to me also — That is, I have judged it to be my duty; Luke, doubtless, was moved by the Holy Ghost to write his history, as he was also to write in the manner he has done; but in both he was moved as a reasonable creature, and not as a machine: having had perfect understanding of all things — Greek, παρηκολουθηκοτι ανωθεν πασιν ακριβως, having accurately traced all things from their first rise: “Luke might have this thorough knowledge by intimate conversation with the apostles, and particularly with Paul, whose companion he was for a long time; or perhaps he was present himself at a number of transactions which he has recorded. The assurance with which he speaks of his own knowledge of these things, leads us to think that he was an eye-witness of some of them. On this supposition, his reasoning in this preface will be more conclusive than on any other, and will stand thus: Seeing many have written from the information of the eye-witnesses and ministers, I, who from the very first have had perfect knowledge of all things, both by conversing with the eye-witnesses, and by being present myself at many of the transactions of Jesus, have thought it incumbent on me to write his history, for the more certain information of mankind.” To write unto thee in order — Greek, καθεξης σοι γραψαι, to write an orderly account to thee. So Dr. Doddridge; who observes, “It is chiefly on the authority of this clause that Le Clerc, and many other modern harmonizers (of the gospels) have thought, as Beza also did, that all the other gospels are to be reduced to the order of Luke wherever they differ from it: a conclusion which I apprehend to be an occasion of many errors, and particularly injurious to the character of Matthew. The foundation of it is very precarious; since it is evident this evangelist might, with great propriety, be said to have given an orderly account of the history of Christ, as the leading facts [such as his conception, birth, childhood, baptism, preaching, miracles, passion, resurrection, ascension] are placed in their due series, though some particulars are transposed.” Most excellent Theophilus — As the word Theophilus signifies lover of God, some have thought it is not a proper name here, but a general title, applicable to every true Christian. But, as Dr. Campbell justly observes, if the evangelist meant to address his discourse to all pious Christians, and had no one individually in view, he would certainly have put his intention beyond all doubt, by using the plural number, and saying, κρατιστοι θεοφιλοι, most excellent lovers of God. Besides, to have addressed all true Christians under the appearance of bespeaking the attention of an individual, does not seem agreeable to the simplicity of style used in the gospel; and must have appeared to the writer himself as what could not fail to be misunderstood by most readers, proper names of such a form as Theophilus, and even this very name, being common in Greek and Latin authors. The word is, therefore, undoubtedly the proper name of a person: and the title, κρατιστε, most excellent, is given him, not to describe his character, although doubtless he was a truly pious and excellent Christian, but on account of his office or rank in civil society, the same title being commonly given to persons in high stations of life; and particularly to the Roman governors. Accordingly Paul uses it in addressing Felix and Festus. This Theophilus, as the ancients inform us, was a person of eminent quality at Alexandria. In Acts 1:1, Luke does not give him this title. He was then probably a private man. The evangelist, by inscribing his two books to him, bestowed on him a fame which will last while Christianity subsists. That thou mightest know — More fully and circumstantially; the certainty — The exact and certain truth; of those things in which thou hast been instructed — Namely, formerly, by those who had been made the instruments of initiating him into the Christian faith. The word κατηχηθης, here used, doth with great accuracy express the instructions given to those who were training up for admission to the Christian Church, whose name of catechumens was, as it is well known, derived from hence, and applied without any particular regard to the age of the persons concerned. Compare Acts 18:25. We are not to suppose that Luke had the edification of Theophilus merely in view, in writing his history; he also doubtless meant it for the instruction of persons of all nations and ages into whose hands it should fall.

Luke 1:5. There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea — This is he who is commonly known by the name of Herod the Great, a cruel, ambitious man, who, without any title, obtained the crown of Judea from the Roman senate, to whom he was recommended by Mark Antony. Under his government the Jews were very uneasy, because he was a foreigner. Nevertheless, the Roman generals in those parts having given him possession of the throne, by his own prudence and address he maintained himself in it for the space of forty years. His reign, though celebrated on many accounts, was remarkable for nothing so much as that, toward the conclusion of it, the Messiah and his forerunner were born. Besides Herod the king, there are two others of this name mentioned in Scripture, namely, Herod surnamed Antipas, his son, who was inferior to his father both in dignity and dominion, being only a tetrarch, and having no dominions but Galilee and Perea: it was this Herod that beheaded the Baptist, and with his men of war mocked our Lord. The other was Herod Agrippa, the grandson of Herod the king by Aristobulus, and brother to Herodias, Philip’s wife. He killed James the apostle with the sword, and imprisoned Peter to please the Jews; and was himself eaten up of worms for his affecting divine honours. Agrippa, before whom Paul pleaded his cause, was the son of this Herod, for which reason he is commonly called Agrippa. Of the course of Abia — The priests were become so numerous in David’s time, that they could not all minister at the tabernacle at once. He therefore divided them into twenty-four courses, or companies, who were to serve in rotation, each company by itself for a week. The time of their ministration, as well as the course itself, was called εφημερια, a name which originally belonged to the Athenian magistrates, who being fifty men chosen by lot out of each tribe, and each man governing the city a single day, the days which any tribe governed, as well as its fifty governors succeeding one another, were called εφημεριαι. Now there being a considerable resemblance between this division and succession of the Athenian magistrates, and that of the Jewish priests, the Greek interpreters of the Old Testament applied the same name to the courses of the priests, though somewhat improperly, as their ministry lasted not for a day but a week. The course of Abia, (that is, that of which Abia, or Abijah, was the head in David’s time,) was the eighth. See the notes on 1 Chronicles 24:3-10.

Luke 1:6. They were righteous before God — They were sincerely and really righteous; they were so in God’s sight, whose judgment, we are sure, is according to truth; they approved themselves to him who searcheth the heart; and he was graciously pleased to accept them. It is a happy thing when those that are joined to each other in marriage are both joined to the Lord! And it is especially requisite that the priests, the Lord’s ministers, should, with their yoke-fellows, be righteous before God, that they may be examples to the flock, and give them cause of joy. Walking in all the moral commandments and ceremonial ordinances of the Lord blameless — Thus they manifested their righteousness: it shone forth in the whole course of their conversation; in every branch of piety and virtue. How admirable is the character given of this pious pair! May our behaviour be thus unblameable, and our obedience thus sincere and universal! The two words, εντολαις και δικαιωμασι, here used, are generally interpreted, the former of the moral, the latter of the ceremonial precepts of the divine law. It is certain, however, that they are often taken in a much more extensive sense; and that undoubted examples may be produced, to prove that both terms are used promiscuously in both senses.

Luke 1:7. And they had no child — The providence of God so ordering it, that the birth of John the Baptist might be the more remarkable, and might excite the greater attention; because that Elisabeth was barren — Even when in the flower of her age. And they both were now well stricken in years — Here, then, was a double obstacle in the way of their having children, both the natural barrenness of Elisabeth, and the old age of them both; and, consequently, a double proof of the supernatural agency of God in the birth of John, evidently showing him to be a person miraculously sent by God. It is worthy of observation here, that many eminent persons under the patriarchal and Mosaic dispensations, were born of mothers that had been long barren, as Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Samson, Samuel, and here John the Baptist, to render their birth the more extraordinary, and the blessing of it the more valuable in the eyes of their parents; and to show, that when God keeps his people waiting long for a particular mercy, he is sometimes pleased to recompense them for their patience, by doubling the worth of it when it is given.

Luke 1:9. His lot was to burn incense — “Because some parts of the sacred service were more honourable than others, both the priests and Levites divided the whole among them by lot. The Jews tell us, that there were three priests employed about the service of the incense; one who carried away the ashes left on the altar at the preceding service; another who brought a pan of burning coals from the altar of sacrifice, and, having placed it on the golden altar, departed; a third, who went in with the incense, sprinkled it on the burning coals, and, while the smoke ascended, made intercession for the people. This was the part that fell to Zacharias, and the most honourable in the whole service.” — Macknight. When he went into the temple of the Lord — As the original word here is not το ιερον, but τον ναον, it ought to have been rendered, the house, or sanctuary. The former word, properly signifying the temple, comprehended the whole edifice, with all its enclosures, piazzas, and other buildings; the latter included only what is termed, by way of eminence, the house, consisting of the vestibule, the holy place or sanctuary, and the most holy. The altar of incense, on which the perfumes were burned, was in the sanctuary; the people who were praying without, were in the temple, εν το ιερω, in the court of Israel, though not in what was strictly called the house of God. See note on Matthew 21:12.

Luke 1:10. The whole multitude of the people, &c. — The manner in which the evangelist expresses himself here, shows that a more than ordinary concourse of the people was in the temple on this occasion, from which we may infer that it was a sabbath, or some high festival time; for often on ordinary week-days, few of the people were present at the morning and evening sacrifices, and therefore “four and twenty men were employed to attend this service, as representatives of the people of Israel, to lay their hands on the head of the sacrifice, to pray, and to receive the blessing. These were called, from their office, stationary men.” — Macknight. This circumstance of there being a multitude present, would give great publicity to the facts here recorded, and cause them to become the subject of much inquiry and conversation, both in Jerusalem and through all the country. In consequence of which, doubtless, an expectation would be excited in the minds of many, that God was about to visit his people in some extraordinary way; which would tend greatly to prepare them for the reception of the gospel, when it should be offered to them. The people were praying without at the time of incense — This the pious Jews constantly did, and that not only in the temple, but everywhere else; choosing to present their supplications to God at the hours of sacrifice and incense, while the ministers of religion interceded for the nation. Hence these hours were called the hours of prayer, Acts 3:1. And this was the foundation of that elegant figure, by which prayer is, in Scripture, so often compared to incense. And perhaps one reason of ordaining incense might be, to intimate the acceptableness of those pious prayers which accompanied it, as well as to remind the worshippers of that sacrifice of a sweet-smelling savour, which was in due time to be offered to God for them, and of that incense which was and is continually offered with the prayers of the saints, upon the golden altar that is before the throne, Revelation 8:3-4. Observe, reader, 1st, All the prayers which we offer to God here, in his courts, are acceptable and successful only by virtue of Christ’s intercession in the temple of God above. 2d, We cannot expect to have an interest in his intercession, if we do not unite our own supplications to his, and sincerely and fervently pray for ourselves. Nor, 3d, is it sufficient for us to be present where God is worshipped, if our hearts do not join in the worship, and go along with the minister in all the parts of it. If he burn the incense ever so well; if he pray in ever so pertinent, judicious, and lively a manner, if we be not at the same time engaged in prayer in concurrence with him, what will it avail us?

Luke 1:11-12. There appeared unto him an angel — About four hundred years had passed since God had vouchsafed to his ancient people any supernatural communication, either by prophecy, the ministry of angels, or in any other extraordinary way. But as he was now about to send them the Messiah, and establish through him a new dispensation, by which a new and more spiritual way of intercourse with himself should be opened and settled, he sends an angelic messenger to announce his intentions, and prepare their minds for the reception of so great a blessing. For as the law, an inferior economy, was given at first, in a great measure, by the ministry of angels, it was proper that the gospel, a more excellent institution, should not want at least an equally extraordinary and honourable introduction. When Zacharias saw him, he was troubled — Although he was accustomed to converse with God, yet we see he was thrown into a great consternation at the appearance of his angelic messenger, nature not being able to sustain the sight. Is it not then an instance of the goodness, as well as the wisdom of God, that the services which these heavenly spirits render us are generally invisible?