Sunday, June 21, 2020

The writings of Luke the physician starting with his version of the gospel - Luke 3:21-38 comments: Jesus is baptized




Luke 3:21 ¶  Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened, 22  And the Holy Ghost descended
in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased. 23  And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli, 24  Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph, 25  Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge, 26  Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda, 27  Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri, 28  Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er, 29  Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, 30  Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim, 31  Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David, 32  Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson, 33  Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda, 34  Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the
son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor, 35  Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala, 36  Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech, 37  Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan, 38  Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

The baptism of John the Baptist was one of national repentance for the Jews. Note the parallel when Peter called the Jews to regret what they had done to their Messiah in Acts, chapter 2. So, why was Jesus baptized?

Matthew 3:13 ¶  Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. 14  But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15  And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.

Jesus is the Lamb of God, the ultimate sacrifice for sin.

John 1:29  The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

He is our High Priest as spoken of throughout Hebrews and the Aaronic priesthood was washed in Exodus 29 as a part of their consecration. Also, by submitting to John’s baptism He was identifying Himself with the Jewish people as their Messiah. Although He needed no repentance from sin He suffered the ritual to fulfill righteousness, setting in motion His ministry as part of God’s plan of reconciling mankind to Himself becoming not only our High Priest but our sacrifice for sin.

Here we have the three parts of God in one text with the Holy Ghost descending on Christ like a dove (it doesn’t say it was a dove) and then God the Father speaking. Jesus was about 30 years old as mentioned in Numbers 4, the age of service to God.

It is commonly noted that Luke’s genealogy starts with Mary and Joseph, as the text says, was presumed to be Jesus father in the sense of the world. Her genealogy goes backwards all the way to Adam connecting Christ with Adam as the Saviour of all mankind. Matthew’s genealogy would then be Joseph’s genealogy, from Abraham, the first Hebrew, to Joseph connecting Jesus under the Law as the Saviour of the Jewish people specifically. Joseph adopting Jesus as his son would with full rights of being a legal heir would give this perfect meaning. Both Joseph and Mary come from the line of David but through a different son of David; Mary through Nathan and Joseph through Solomon. Paul said to his young proteges, Timothy and Titus.

1Timothy 1:4  Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.

Titus 3:9  But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.

So, I will leave discussions about seeming conflicts in the genealogies in Matthew and Luke to expert commentators and Bible students like Matthew Henry and Peter Ruckman as we could endlessly discuss possibilities for things like why Cainan is inserted where he is here. I’m not saying that any Bible study is not important. This would be a fascinating study all by itself worthy of a book long dissertation, but I don’t feel it has a place here other than to say that we must ask two questions; why was it written and why was it preserved?

The argument that Luke got his genealogy from the mythological Septuagint, supernaturally translated from Hebrew into Greek at the behest of an Egyptian king is absurd. The only physical evidence for any BC Septuagint is a fraudulent “Letter of Aristeas”, a mention by a Jew steeped in Greek philosophy named Philo, and Origen’s Hexapla in the early third century. The name Septuagint wasn’t given to it until the fifth century and it is often conflated by most people with other Greek translations of the Hebrew Bible with which it has no connection.  There is no real evidence for this Septuagint to exist until the after the Bible was published in the Old Latin in the second century, translated from various common, called Vulgate meaning the vernacular language of the people, Greek versions and the Hebrew. H.C. Hoskier, early twentieth century Bible scholar, pointed out how the Bible was translated back and forth between Latin, Greek, and other languages in the era of Christ and the Apostles and their disciples.

The Bible is not only given by inspiration, which does not mean word-for-word dictation but wisdom and understanding…

Job 32:8  But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding.

2Timothy 3:16a  All scripture is given by inspiration of God…

2Peter 3:15  And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

…but it was preserved through the centuries of usage.

Psalm 12:6  The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7  Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

So, were there two Cainans with one omitted in the Old Testament genealogy of Genesis? I don’t know and neither does anyone else on earth. But while this genealogical issue is very intriguing I intend to move on. We have issues like this because modern man wants to read the Bible like a textbook or the instructions for his or her computer rather than a conversation with God. For those of us, like myself, who believe in Biblical inspiration, not just in the original autographs but in copies and translations if God’s hand was on them…

Jeremiah 36:32  Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire: and there were added besides unto them many like words.

…I realize there must be a reason for the insertion of this Cainan here as well as other minor issues, worthy of discussion in another venue.

 One thing to note is the reference here to Adam as the son, small ‘s’, of God. It is important to note the different meaning of the phrases Son, large ‘S’, of God and son, small ‘s’, of God. Son of God refers to God in the flesh, walking on the earth, the Lord Jesus Christ. But son of God refers to those beings both spiritual and human who are directly created by God either here as in the first creation or in the following regarding the new birth, being born again.

John 1:12  But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13  Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

This act of God is referenced in the Psalm that Jesus quoted part of the first verse of from the Cross to direct us to it.

Psalm 22: 1 ¶  « To the chief Musician upon Aijeleth Shahar, A Psalm of David. » My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?...30  A seed shall serve him; it shall be accounted to the Lord for a generation.

Matthew 27:46  And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

No comments: