{"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":7,"content":[{"type":"verse","number":5,"content":["loved our nation--Having found that \"salvation was of the Jews,\" he loved them for it. \n\nbuilt, &c.--His love took this practical and appropriate form.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":11,"content":["WIDOW OF NAIN'S SON RAISED TO LIFE. (In Luke only). (Luk 7:11-17)\n\nNain--a small village not elsewhere mentioned in Scripture, and only this once probably visited by our Lord; it lay a little to the south of Mount Tabor, about twelve miles from Capernaum.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":12,"content":["carried out--\"was being carried out.\" Dead bodies, being ceremonially unclean, were not allowed to be buried within the cities (though the kings of David's house were buried m the city of David), and the funeral was usually on the same day as the death. \n\nonly son, &c.--affecting particulars, told with delightful simplicity.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":13,"content":["the Lord--\"This sublime appellation is more usual with Luke and John than Matthew; Mark holds the mean\" [BENGEL]. \n\nsaw her, he had compassion, &c.--What consolation to thousands of the bereaved has this single verse carried from age to age!\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":14,"content":["What mingled majesty and grace shines in this scene! The Resurrection and the Life in human flesh, with a word of command, bringing back life to the dead body; Incarnate Compassion summoning its absolute power to dry a widow's tears!\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":16,"content":["visited his people--more than bringing back the days of Elijah and Elisha (Kg1 17:17-24; Kg2 4:32-37; and see Mat 15:31).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":29,"content":["THE BAPTIST'S MESSAGE THE REPLY, AND CONSEQUENT DISCOURSE. (Luke 7:18-35)\n\nAnd all the people that heard--\"on hearing (this).\" These are the observations of the Evangelist, not of our Lord. \n\nand the publicans--a striking clause. \n\njustified God, being baptized, &c.--rather, \"having been baptized.\" The meaning is, They acknowledged the divine wisdom of such a preparatory ministry as John's, in leading them to Him who now spake to them (see Luk 1:16-17); whereas the Pharisees and lawyers, true to themselves in refusing the baptism of John, set at naught also the merciful design of God in the Saviour Himself, to their own destruction.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":31,"content":["the Lord said, &c.--As cross, capricious children, invited by their playmates to join them in their amusements, will play with them neither at weddings nor funerals (juvenile imitations of the joyous and mournful scenes of life), so that generation rejected both John and his Master: the one because he was too unsocial--more like a demoniac than a rational man; the other, because He was too much the reverse, given to animal indulgences, and consorting with the lowest classes of society. But the children of Wisdom recognize and honor her, whether in the austere garb of the Baptist or in the more attractive style of his Master, whether in the Law or in the Gospel, whether in rags or in royalty, for \"the full soul loatheth an honeycomb, but to the hungry soul every bitter thing is sweet\" (Pro 27:7).\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":37,"content":["CHRIST'S FEET WASHED WITH TEARS. (Luk 7:36-50)\n\na sinner--one who had led a profligate life. Note.--There is no ground whatever for the popular notion that this woman was Mary Magdalene, nor do we know what her name was. (See on Luk 8:2.) \n\nan alabaster box of ointment--a perfume vessel, in some cases very costly (Joh 12:5). \"The ointment has here a peculiar interest, as the offering by a penitent of what had been an accessory in her unhallowed work of sin\" [ALFORD].\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":38,"content":["at his feet behind him--the posture at meals being a reclining one, with the feet out behind. \n\nbegan to wash, &c.--to \"water with a shower.\" The tears, which were quite involuntary, poured down in a flood upon His naked feet, as she bent down to kiss them; and deeming them rather fouled than washed by this, she hastened to wipe them off with the only towel she had, the long tresses of her own hair, \"with which slaves were wont to wash their masters' feet\" [STIER]. \n\nkissed--The word signifies \"to kiss fondly, to caress,\" or to \"kiss again and again,\" which Luk 7:45 shows is meant here. What prompted this? Much love, springing from a sense of much forgiveness. So says He who knew her heart (Luk 7:47). Where she had met with Christ before, or what words of His had brought life to her dead heart and a sense of divine pardon to her guilty soul, we know not. But probably she was of the crowd of \"publicans and sinners\" whom Incarnate Compassion drew so often around Him, and heard from His lips some of those words such as never man spake, \"Come unto Me, all ye that labour,\" &c. No personal interview had up to this time taken place between them; but she could keep her feelings no longer to herself, and having found her way to Him (and entered along with him, Luk 7:45), they burst forth in this surpassing yet most artless style, as if her whole soul would go out to Him.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":39,"content":["the Pharisee--who had formed no definite opinion of our Lord, and invited Him apparently to obtain materials for a judgment. \n\nspake within himself, &c.--\"Ha! I have Him now; He plainly knows nothing of the person He allows to touch Him; and so, He can be no prophet.\" Not so fast, Simon; thou hast not seen through thy Guest yet, but He hath seen through thee.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":40,"content":["Like Nathan with David, our Lord conceals His home thrust under the veil of a parable, and makes His host himself pronounce upon the case. The two debtors are the woman and Simon; the criminality of the one was ten times that of the other (in the proportion of \"five hundred\" to \"fifty\"); but both being equally insolvent, both are with equal frankness forgiven; and Simon is made to own that the greatest debtor to forgiving mercy will cling to her Divine Benefactor with the deepest gratitude. Does our Lord then admit that Simon was a forgiving man? Let us see.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":44,"content":["I entered . . . no water--a compliment to guests. Was this \"much love?\" Was it any?\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":45,"content":["no kiss--of salutation. How much love was here? Any at all?\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":46,"content":["with oil . . . not anoint--even common olive oil in contrast with the woman's \"ointment\" or aromatic balsam. What evidence was thus afforded of any feeling which forgiveness prompts? Our Lord speaks this with delicate politeness, as if hurt at these inattentions of His host, which though not invariably shown to guests, were the customary marks of studied respect and regard. The inference is plain--only one of the debtors was really forgiven, though in the first instance, to give room for the play of withheld feelings, the forgiveness of both is supposed in the parable.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":47,"content":["Her sins which are many--\"Those many sins of hers,\" our Lord, who admitted how much more she owed than the Pharisee, now proclaims in naked terms the forgiveness of her guilt. \n\nfor--not because, as if love were the cause of forgiveness, but \"inasmuch as,\" or \"in proof of which.\" The latter clause of the verse, and the whole structure of the parable, plainly show this to be the meaning. \n\nlittle forgiven . . . loveth little--delicately ironical intimation of no love and no forgiveness in the present case.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":48,"content":["said unto her, &c.--an unsought assurance, usually springing up unexpected in the midst of active duty and warm affections, while often it flies from those who mope and are paralyzed for want of it.\n\n"]},{"type":"verse","number":49,"content":["they that sat . . . Who is this, &c.--No wonder they were startled to hear One who was reclining at the same couch, and partaking of the same hospitalities with themselves, assume the awful prerogative of \"even forgiving sins.\" But so far from receding from this claim, or softening it down, our Lord only repeats it, with two precious additions: one, announcing what was the one secret of the \"forgiveness\" she had experienced, and which carried \"salvation\" in its bosom; the other, a glorious dismissal of her in that \"peace\" which she had already felt, but is now assured she has His full warrant to enjoy! This wonderful scene teaches two very weighty truths: (1) Though there be degrees of guilt, insolvency, or inability to wipe out the dishonor done to God, is common to all sinners. (2) As Christ is the Great Creditor to whom all debt, whether great or small, contracted by sinners is owing, so to Him belongs the prerogative of forgiving it. This latter truth is brought out in the structure and application of the present parable as it is nowhere else. Either then Jesus was a blaspheming deceiver, or He is God manifest in the flesh.\n\n\n\n\nNext: Luke Chapter 8\n\n"]}],"introduction":"CENTURION'S SERVANT HEALED. (Luk 7:1-10)\n\nhe was worthy--a testimony most precious, coming from those who probably were strangers to the principle from which he acted (Ecc 7:1).\n\n"},"thisChapterLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/LUK/7.json","thisChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","book":"LUK","chapter":7},"nextChapterApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/LUK/8.json","nextChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","book":"LUK","chapter":8},"previousChapterApiLink":"/api/c/jamieson-fausset-brown/LUK/6.json","previousChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"jamieson-fausset-brown","book":"LUK","chapter":6},"numberOfVerses":18}