{"commentary":{"id":"jamieson-fausset-brown","name":"Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary","website":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamieson-Fausset-Brown_Bible_Commentary","licenseUrl":"https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/","licenseNotes":null,"licenseNotice":null,"englishName":"Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary","language":"eng","textDirection":"rtl","sha256":"db3d4c8b3c1f32ef9d1430a57392e02bda3a17aac1f9bbe398461de021a3cb13","availableFormats":["json"],"listOfBooksApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/books.json","listOfProfilesApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/profiles.json","numberOfBooks":66,"totalNumberOfChapters":1187,"totalNumberOfVerses":17056,"totalNumberOfProfiles":0,"languageName":"English","languageEnglishName":"English"},"book":{"id":"LUK","commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","name":"Luke","commonName":"Luke","introduction":"THE writer of this Gospel is universally allowed to have been Lucas (an abbreviated form of Lucanus, as Silas of Silvanus), though he is not expressly named either in the Gospel or in the Acts. From Col 4:14 we learn that he was a \"physician\"; and by comparing that verse with Col 4:10-11 --in which the apostle enumerates all those of the circumcision who were then with him, but does not mention Luke, though he immediately afterwards sends a salutation from him--we gather that Luke was not a born Jew. Some have thought he was a freed-man (libertinus), as the Romans devolved the healing art on persons of this class and on their slaves, as an occupation beneath themselves. His intimate acquaintance with Jewish customs, and his facility in Hebraic Greek, seem to show that he was an early convert to the Jewish faith; and this is curiously confirmed by Act 21:27-29, where we find the Jews enraged at Paul's supposed introduction of Greeks into the temple, because they had seen \"Trophimus the Ephesian\" with him; and as we know that Luke was with Paul on that occasion, it would seem that they had taken him for a Jew, as they made no mention of him. On the other hand, his fluency in classical Greek confirms his Gentile origin. The time when he joined Paul's company is clearly indicated in the Acts by his changing (at Act 16:10) from the third person singular (\"he\") to the first person plural (\"we\"). From that time he hardly ever left the apostle till near the period of his martyrdom (Ti2 4:11). EUSEBIUS makes him a native of Antioch. If so, he would have every advantage for cultivating the literature of Greece and such medical knowledge as was then possessed. That he died a natural death is generally agreed among the ancients; GREGORY NAZIANZEN alone affirming that he died a martyr.\n\nThe time and place of the publication of his Gospel are alike uncertain. But we can approximate to it. It must at any rate have been issued before the Acts, for there the 'Gospel' is expressly referred to as the same author's \"former treatise\" (Act 1:1). Now the Book of the Acts was not published for two whole years after Paul's arrival as a prisoner at Rome, for it concludes with a reference to this period; but probably it was published soon after that, which would appear to have been early in the year 63. Before that time, then, we have reason to believe that the Gospel of Luke was in circulation, though the majority of critics make it later. If we date it somewhere between A.D. 50 and 60, we shall probably be near the truth; but nearer it we cannot with any certainty come. Conjectures as to the place of publication are too uncertain to be mentioned here.\n\nThat it was addressed, in the first instance, to Gentile readers, is beyond doubt. This is no more, as DAVIDSON remarks [Introduction to the New Testament, p. 186], than was to have been expected from the companion of an \"apostle of the Gentiles,\" who had witnessed marvellous changes in the condition of many heathens by the reception of the Gospel. But the explanations in his Gospel of things known to every Jew, and which could only be intended for Gentile readers, make this quite plain--see Luk 1:26; Luk 4:31; Luk 8:26; Luk 21:37; Luk 22:1; Luk 24:13. A number of other minute particulars, both of things inserted and of things omitted, confirm the conclusion that it was Gentiles whom this Evangelist had in the first instance in view.\n\nWe have already adverted to the classical style of Greek which this Evangelist writes--just what might have been expected from an educated Greek and travelled physician. But we have also observed that along with this he shows a wonderful flexibility of style, so much so, that when he comes to relate transactions wholly Jewish, where the speakers and actors and incidents are all Jewish, he writes in such Jewish Greek as one would do who had never been out of Palestine or mixed with any but Jews. In DA COSTA'S'S Four Witnesses will be found some traces of \"the beloved physician\" in this Gospel. But far more striking and important are the traces in it of his intimate connection with the apostle of the Gentiles. That one who was so long and so constantly in the society of that master mind has in such a work as this shown no traces of that connection, no stamp of that mind, is hardly to be believed. Writers of Introductions seem not to see it, and take no notice of it. But those who look into the interior of it will soon discover evidences enough in it of a Pauline cast of mind. Referring for a number of details to DA COSTA, we notice here only two examples: In Co1 11:23, Paul ascribes to an express revelation from Christ Himself the account of the Institution of the Lord's Supper which he there gives. Now, if we find this account differing in small yet striking particulars from the accounts given by Matthew and Mark, but agreeing to the letter with Luke's account, it can hardly admit of a doubt that the one had it from the other; and in that case, of course, it was Luke that had it from Paul. Now Matthew and Mark both say of the Cup, \"This is my blood of the New Testament\"; while Paul and Luke say, in identical terms, \"This cup is the New Testament in My blood\" (Co1 11:25; Luk 22:20). Further, Luke says, \"Likewise also the cup after supper, saying,\" &c.; while Paul says, \"After the same manner He took the cup when He had supped, saying,\" &c.; whereas neither Matthew nor Mark mention that this was after supper. But still more striking is another point of coincidence in this case. Matthew and Mark both say of the Bread merely this: \"Take, eat; this is My body\" (Mat 26:26; Mar 14:22); whereas Paul says, \"Take, eat, this is My body, which is broken for you\" (Co1 11:24), and Luke, \"This is My body, which is given for you\" (Luk 22:19). And while Paul adds the precious clause, \"This do in remembrance of Me,\" Luke does the same, in identical terms. How can one who reflects on this resist the conviction of a Pauline stamp in this Gospel? The other proof of this to which we ask the reader's attention is in the fact that Paul, in enumerating the parties by whom Christ was seen after His resurrection, begins, singularly enough, with Peter--\"And that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures and that He was seen of Cephas, then of the Twelve\" (Co1 15:4-5) --coupled with the remarkable fact, that Luke is the only one of the Evangelists who mentions that Christ appeared to Peter at all. When the disciples had returned from Emmaus to tell their brethren how the Lord had appeared to them in the way, and how He had made Himself known to them in the breaking of bread, they were met, as Luke relates, ere they had time to utter a word, with this wonderful piece of news, \"The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon\" (Luk 24:34).\n\nOther points connected with this Gospel will be adverted to in the Commentary. \n\n\n\nNext: Luke Chapter 1\n\n","order":42,"numberOfChapters":24,"sha256":"204b6ad5a3007ae03d59f0a3f250dc1a4fed154e78ef885292075f6de0b65757","firstChapterNumber":1,"firstChapterApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/LUK/1.json","firstChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","book":"LUK","chapter":1},"lastChapterNumber":24,"lastChapterApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/LUK/24.json","lastChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","book":"LUK","chapter":24},"totalNumberOfVerses":596},"chapter":{"number":20,"content":[{"type":"verse","number":4,"content":["baptism of John--his whole ministry and mission, of which baptism was the seal.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":5,"content":["Why then believed ye him not?--that is, in his testimony to Jesus, the sum of his whole witness.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":7,"content":["could not tell--crooked, cringing hypocrites! No wonder Jesus gave you no answer (Mat 7:6). But what dignity and composure does our Lord display as He turns their question upon themselves!\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":9,"content":["vineyard--(See on Luk 13:6). In Mat 21:33 additional points are given, taken literally from Isa 5:2, to fix down the application and sustain it by Old Testament authority. \n\nhusbandmen--the ordinary spiritual guides of the people, under whose care and culture the fruits of righteousness might be yielded. \n\nwent, &c.--leaving it to the laws of the spiritual husbandry during the whole length of the Jewish economy. (See on Mar 4:26.)\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":10,"content":["beat, &c.-- (Mat 21:35); that is, the prophets, extraordinary messengers raised up from time to time. (See on Mat 23:37.)\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":13,"content":["my beloved son--Mark (Mar 12:6) still more affectingly, \"Having yet therefore one son, his well-beloved\"; our Lord thus severing Himself from all merely human messengers, and claiming Sonship in its loftiest sense. (Compare Heb 3:3-6.) \n\nit may be--\"surely\"; implying the almost unimaginable guilt of not doing so.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":14,"content":["reasoned among themselves--(Compare Gen 37:18-20; Joh 11:47-53). \n\nthe heir--sublime expression of the great truth, that God's inheritance was destined for, and in due time to come into the possession of, His Son in our nature (Heb 1:2). \n\ninheritance . . . ours--and so from mere servants we may become lords; the deep aim of the depraved heart, and literally \"the root of all evil.\"\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":15,"content":["cast him out of the vineyard--(Compare Heb 13:11-13; Kg1 21:13; Joh 19:17).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":16,"content":["He shall come, &c.--This answer was given by the Pharisees themselves (Mat 21:41), thus pronouncing their own righteous doom. Matthew alone (Mat 21:43) gives the naked application, that \"the kingdom of God should be taken from them, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof\"--the great evangelical community of the faithful, chiefly Gentiles. \n\nGod forbid--His whole meaning now bursting upon them.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":17,"content":["written--(in Psa 118:22-23. See on Luk 19:38). The Kingdom of God is here a Temple, in the erection of which a certain stone, rejected as unsuitable by the spiritual builders, is, by the great Lord of the House, made the keystone of the whole. On that Stone the builders were now \"falling\" and being \"broken\" (Isa 8:15), \"sustaining great spiritual hurt; but soon that Stone should fall upon them and grind them to powder\" (Dan 2:34-35; Zac 12:3) --in their corporate capacity in the tremendous destruction of Jerusalem, but personally, as unbelievers, in a more awful sense still.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":19,"content":["the same hour--hardly able to restrain their rage.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":20,"content":["ENTANGLING QUESTIONS ABOUT TRIBUTE AND THE RESURRECTION--THE REPLIES. (Luke 20:20-40)\n\nsent forth--after consulting (Mat 22:15) on the best plan. \n\nspies--\"of the Pharisees and Herodians\" (Mar 12:13). See Mar 3:6.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":21,"content":["we know, &c.--hoping by flattery to throw Him off His guard.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":22,"content":["tribute--(See on Mat 17:24).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":25,"content":["things which be CÃ&brvbrsar's--Putting it in this general form, it was impossible for sedition itself to dispute it, and yet it dissolved the snare. \n\nand unto God--How much there is in this profound but to them startling addition to the maxim, and how incomparable is the whole for fulness, brevity, clearness, weight!\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":27,"content":["no resurrection--\"nor angel nor spirit\" (Act 23:8); the materialists of the day.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":34,"content":["said unto them--In Mat 22:29, the reply begins with this important statement:--\"Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures,\" regarding the future state, \"nor the power of God,\" before which a thousand such difficulties vanish (also Mar 12:24).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":36,"content":["neither . . . die any more--Marriage is ordained to perpetuate the human family; but as there will be no breaches by death in the future state, this ordinance will cease. \n\nequal--or \"like.\" \n\nunto the angels--that is, in the immortality of their nature. \n\nchildren of God--not in respect of character but nature; \"being the children of the resurrection\" to an undecaying existence (Rom 8:21, Rom 8:23). And thus the children of their Father's immortality (Ti1 6:16).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":37,"content":["even Moses--whom they had just quoted to entangle Him.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":38,"content":["not . . . of the dead, . . . for all, &c.--To God, no human being is dead, or ever will be; but all sustain an abiding conscious relation to Him. But the \"all\" here meant \"those who shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world.\" These sustain a gracious covenant relation to God, which cannot be dissolved. In this sense our Lord affirms that for Moses to call the Lord the \"God\" of His patriarchal servants if at that moment they had no existence, would be unworthy of Him. He \"would be ashamed to be called their God, if He had not prepared for them a city\" (Heb 11:16). How precious are these glimpses of the resurrection state!\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":39,"content":["scribes . . . well said--enjoying His victory over the Sadducees. \n\nthey durst not--neither party, both for the time utterly foiled.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":41,"content":["CHRIST BAFFLES THE PHARISEES BY A QUESTION ABOUT DAVID AND MESSIAH, AND DENOUNCES THE SCRIBES. (Luk 20:41-47)\n\nsaid, &c.--\"What think ye of Christ [the promised and expected Messiah]? Whose son is He [to be]? They say unto Him, The son of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit [by the Holy Ghost, Mar 12:36] call Him Lord?\" (Mat 22:42-43). The difficulty can only be solved by the higher and lower--the divine and human natures of our Lord (Mat 1:23). Mark the testimony here given to the inspiration of the Old Testament (compare Luk 24:44).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":46,"content":["Beware, &c.--(See on Mat 23:5; and Luk 14:7).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":47,"content":["devour, &c.--taking advantage of their helpless condition and confiding character, to obtain possession of their property, while by their \"long prayers\" they made them believe they were raised far above \"filthy lucre.\" So much \"the greater damnation\" awaits them. What a lifelike description of the Romish clergy, the true successors of \"the scribes!\"\n\n\n\n\nNext: Luke Chapter 21\n\n"]}],"introduction":"THE AUTHORITY OF JESUS QUESTIONED, AND HIS REPLY--PARABLE OF THE WICKED HUSBANDMEN. (Luke 20:1-19)\n\nthese things--particularly the clearing of the temple.\n\n"},"thisChapterLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/LUK/20.json","thisChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","book":"LUK","chapter":20},"nextChapterApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/LUK/21.json","nextChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","book":"LUK","chapter":21},"previousChapterApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/LUK/19.json","previousChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","book":"LUK","chapter":19},"numberOfVerses":24}