The Gospel According to Luke by G. Campbell Morgan

503 Pages·2010·1.52 MB·English

by  Michael Andrews

www.gcampbellmorgan.com

The Gospel
According to Luke

by

G. Campbell Morgan

The G. Campbell Morgan Archive                                                                                                                                                       http://www.gcampbellmorgan.com
FOREWARD
s in my volumes on Matthew, Mark and Acts, this consists of stenegraphically reported
Lectures.
he Introduction to the Book itself is found in the chapter dealing with Luke's own Preface.
t goes without saying that these Lectures are not exhaustive. They are intended to be
suggestive, an introduction to a more detailed study of this wonderful story of Jesus, so
scientifically careful in statement, and yet radiant with artistic form and colour.
ere the sovereignty of the King, and the sacrifice of the Servant , revealed in Matthew and
Mark, are interpreted in the Presentation of the Person of the Word made flesh, the lonely, unique
Being of the cycles of time, of our very humanity, and yet more, infinitely more.
o I send it forth "at eventide," knowing its imperfections, but praying if may fulfil some
ministry of helpfulness.
G.C.M.
Philadelphia, PA.

The G. Campbell Morgan Archive                                                                                                                                                       http://www.gcampbellmorgan.com
1:1-4
S introducing the study of the Gospel according to Luke, two matters demand our attention,
those namely of the Writer of the book; and his Writing, as he himself introduces it to us in the
preface.
OW, when I say that we are going to consider the writer, I do not mean by that I am going to
enter into any debate as to who the writer was. We assume at the commencement that Luke wrote
the book, and with that assumption today all scholarship agrees. We owe much to Sir William
Ramsey for his scholarly examination of the documents, and also to the honesty of Harnack, who
admitted the case proven as to the Lucan authorship.
hat, then, do we know of Luke? We have no information other than that found in the New
Testament. There, the only references to Luke are from the pen of Paul. We will begin by reading
those references. The first in order is found at the close of the second of Paul's letters to the
Corinthians, and the last chapter. In the King James' Version, we find a subscription, something not
part of the letter. In the Revised Version, that subscription is omitted. We may, however, read it.
"The second epistle to the Corinthians was written from Philippi, a city of Macedonia, by Titus and
Lucas."
he next reference is found in Colossians, chapter four, verse fourteen :
"Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas salute you.”
n Philemon, at verse twenty-four, he is named again.
"Epaphras, my fellow-prisoner in Christ Jesus, saluteth thee; and so do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas,
Luke, my fellow-workers."
nce more, II Timothy, chapter four, verses nine to eleven.
The G. Campbell Morgan Archive                                                                                                                                                       http://www.gcampbellmorgan.com
"Give diligence to come shortly unto me; for Demas forsook me, having loved this present world,
and went to Thessalonica, Crescens to Galatia, Titus to Dalmatia. Only Luke is with me. Take
Mark, and bring him with thee; for he is useful to me for ministering."
hese are the only direct references which we find to Luke in the New Testament.
is name is suggestive. Loukas is really a pet name for Loukios. We have other illustrations of
that nature in the New Testament. Silas is Silvanus; and Prisca is Priscilla; Apollonius is called
Apollos; and Antipatris is called Antipas. It is a Greek name, and in the Colossian letter when Paul
was ending with salutations, he said of some, these "are of the circumcision;" then he sent other
salutations from others not of the circumcision; and Epaphras and Luke are named among those.
Luke, then, was a Gentile, and in that the book is peculiar.
gain, he appears in both his books as the friend of Theophilus. His method of addressing
Theophilus in the preface to this book, and in the introduction to the Acts, "Most excellent
Theophilus," might be accurately rendered, "Your Excellency Theophilus." This whole subject is
dealt with fully in a book by Professor Robertson, Luke the Historian in the Light of Research. His
suggestion is that probably Luke was a freed man, who had been in slavery, and that Theophilus
was his patron. who gave him his freedom, and remained his friend after both had become
followers of Jesus Christ. What is perfectly clear is that Luke wrote his story for a man whom he
calls "Your Excellency," his patron; and also his friend.
here are evidences in the style of Luke that he was a Greek, and an educated Greek. Experts
agree that the dialect employed was employed with a literary perfection, which is lacking in the
other writings. Dr. Robertson suggests that probably he studied in the Schools of Tarsus, as also did
Apollos, and Saul. The suggestion is that all three may have been students there together.
rom Paul we learn that Luke was a physician, and in his writings we constantly find medical
terms. I believe also that he was a ship's doctor. Read again, merely from the literary standpoint, the
account of the long voyage (Acts xxvii). That never could have been written except by a man
familiar with a ship, and the methods of the sailor. Now, all this has a bearing on the study of the
book. The Divine element in the Bible is never perfectly discovered and realized, until the human
element is recognized. These men who wrote these books of the New Testament were not
automata. God wrought through the personality, selected by the Holy Spirit. I am prepared to go
The G. Campbell Morgan Archive                                                                                                                                                       http://www.gcampbellmorgan.com
further. He always selected men who were by natural gifts, when controlled by Divine guidance,
fitted for their work.
et us go a step further at this point. There are those who believe that, even though a Greek, he
was a proselyte to the Jewish faith, before he became a Christian. I do not believe it for a moment. I
believe he came straight out of paganism to Jesus Christ. I do not think that he passed through the
gateway of the Hebrew faith or religion at all. Trained in the Greek school, the university of Greece
in Tarsus, or Athens, he had imbibed, from his youth up, all the Greek outlook on life, and that was
entirely different from the Hebrew outlook on life. This man Luke, born a Greek, educated in
Greek schools, had imbibed the Greek philosophy. The master passion of Greek idealism and
Greek philosophy was that of the perfection of personality. The thinking, in those about three
centuries of virile thought in Greek history, was not particularly concerned with human inter-
relationships. but with personality, and the question of the perfecting of personality. Take the old-
fashioned illustration, for it has been used very many times. Compare China with Greece. The
history of China stretches back over millenniums. The history of Greece was virile for about three
centuries only. In those three centuries, Greece flung up more outstanding personalities than China
has in all the millenniums of her history. I am not speaking disrespectfully of China. I am
comparing two great, but entirely different outlooks on life. China has stood through all the
centuries and millenniums of her history for the solidarity of the race, the worship of ancestors has
proved it, and reinforced it; her passion has not been that of the perfecting of individuals, but that of
maintaining racial relationship. Greece was not so concerned; she sought for the perfecting of the
individual; and she wrought her ideal out into marble, and until this day, the canon and criterion of
all accuracy in presentation, and beauty in sculpture is that of Greece.
his, then, is Luke, a man, somewhere, somehow, somewhen,-and none knows when it
happened,-was led to Christ, and he found in Jesus--I am taking the human name for a moment
resolutely,-he found in Jesus the Personality Who fulfilled all his dreaming. and smashed the mould
of Greek thinking by His greatness, for it was too small to hold Him. This Gospel draws the
personality of our Lord from that standpoint, as fulfilling the ideal of uttermost and absolute
perfection. As far as I am concerned, I say without any hesitation, Matthew could not have written
from that standpoint; Mark certainly could not have done so, neither could John. They all had the
same material and Person ; but differing men, chosen of the Holy Spirit, saw different phases of
truth. Here, then. is the writing of a Greek, cultured. educated, refined, with Greek idealism
colouring his outlook, coming to Christ, and finding in Christ that which fulfilled the highest in his
thinking before he found Christ, and correcting and destroying everything that was false in that
thinking. This is the man who writes this story.
wo elements merged in him, which are very rarely found in one person. He was a man of
scientific mind. He claims that. This was a scientific treatise, the result of scientific examination of
The G. Campbell Morgan Archive                                                                                                                                                       http://www.gcampbellmorgan.com
the personality of Jesus. But he is also an artist. There is an old legend of the Church that a painting
of the Virgin Mother was found in Jerusalem from the brush of Luke. The early Church writers all
spoke of him as an artist. Somebody has said that he was a poet, too, and gives as a proof, that he
caught and preserved for us the great songs that burst upon the world with the coming of Jesus into
it. Here, then, is a remarkable man, artistic in temperament and scientific in mentality. And yet
once more, and this is of supreme importance. This man was the close friend and fellow-traveller of
Paul for years. There is something very beautiful about that. Whether it is true or not, as Dr.
Robertson suggests, that they were students together in Tarsus, we do know that Paul was born in
Tarsus, and all the early years of his life he lived in Tarsus. Although Paul was a Jew, a Hebrew,
and a Jew of Jewry, of the tribe of Benjamin ; whereas Paul was all that, and whereas that was the
dominant passion in all his mental outlook, he was certainly influenced by those early years and
surroundings. Paul, therefore, could sympathize with all the Greek that was in Luke.
e know when he became his companion from Acts xvi.11. He had been recording the work of
others in the third person, and suddenly he employs the first person as he said, "We made." Luke
joined him just at the beginning of the European campaign. At Philippi he was with him. He was
with him, too, in Thessalonica. Then the brethren sent Paul up to Berea, and presently he went on to
Athens. Then Luke was left behind; but he soon joined him again. We pick up the reference in v.5,
6, and then right on to the end, he was with Paul. He was with him all the two years in Caesarea,
during Paul's imprisonment there. Do not forget here, how near Caesarea was to Jerusalem. There
he was in the neighbourhood of the things which had happened. He was with Paul on the journey
and voyage to Rome; and there can be no doubt that some years after he was with him in his last
imprisonment; and he certainly passed under the influence of Paul's interpretation of Christ and
Christianity. He investigated under that influence.
ere, then, let us turn aside for a moment to consider Paul's interpretation of the humanity of
Jesus. There are certain references which we may note. Romans v.15, I Cor. xv.47, Phil. ii.8, I Tim.
ii.5. Those are the only places in the writings of Paul where Paul refers to Jesus as a Man, that is,
the only places where he names Him Man. If Paul wrote the letter to the Hebrews, then we may add
Heb. iii.3, vii.24, viii.3, x.12; but in the Revised Versions, the word "man" is not in either of these
references. So I shall, in this connection, leave Hebrews out altogether. Then we have four places
where Paul definitely refers to Jesus as Man. If we consider them in their context, we shall find
Paul's interpretation of Christ. That is a much larger matter. I refer only to his interpretation of the
human in our Lord. There is one pregnant phrase and reference and description in the Corinthian
passage, in which Paul called Jesus the "second Man." He also called Him the "last Adam." Do not
make the stupid blunder of calling Jesus the second Adam. He called Him the second Man, and the
last Adam. If you say second, you postulate a third, fourth, fifth, and a succession. The second Man
He was, and from that second Man a whole race of new men has sprung. But He is the last Adam;
the race springing from Him will be final, in that it will meet the Divine ideal. Paul saw Jesus as
God's second Man, as man's last Adam. Luke's story, the story of a Greek, a physician, educated,
trained, of scientific mind, of artistic temperament, and the friend and companion of Paul, sets
Jesus forth as being the second Man, the last Adam, fulfilling everything in His idealism, the
The G. Campbell Morgan Archive                                                                                                                                                       http://www.gcampbellmorgan.com
perfect One, the perfect Personality, and exceeding Greek idealism as revealing Him as Head of a
race.
ow let us read the Preface which is contained in the first four verses. A preface is always
written to introduce the reader to the book; and the writer always writes it last. There is no question
that the first four verses in this Gospel were written last by Luke; the tenses he used prove this. He
referred to the writing as completed.
"Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to draw up a narrative concerning those matters which
have been fulfilled among us, even as they delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were
eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word, it seemed good to me also, having traced the course of all
things accurately from the first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus that thou
mightest know the certainty concerning the things wherein thou wast instructed."
here are four things Luke tells us in this preface. He names his subject; gives the sources of
his information; describes the method of his work; and reveals the purpose of his writing.
e names the subject. "The Word" "eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word." That is his final
name for Jesus. He had written his story about Jesus in His human nature and His human life; but
when he came to write the preface he summed up, and he does not say, Those who were
eyewitnesses and ministers of Jesus of Nazareth, or of the Christ, but "of the Word." That is as
definitely a title there, as it is in the Gospel of John.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . And the
Word became flesh and tabernacled among us . . . full of grace and truth."
n reading that, we know John is using a title for Jesus. Translators have always spelled the
word "Word” with a capital letter in John, but they have spelled it in Luke with a small letter. Now,
there is no reason from the standpoint of translation why o logos in the Gospel of John, and Luke's
inflected tou logou, should not be treated in the same way. In each case the definite article is used.
Dr. Robertson says concerning this book:
"The humanity of Jesus in Luke is not the deity of humanity so much as the humanity of deity."
The G. Campbell Morgan Archive                                                                                                                                                       http://www.gcampbellmorgan.com
t is the human we see, but He is here, God manifest in the flesh. When Luke writes, it is the
story of the perfect Man, but when the story is finished, he does not talk about Jesus; when he
speaks of Him, he calls Him "The Word."
hen he gives us the sources of his information. He tells us that many had taken in hand to
write a narrative. The reference may include the story Mark had written, and the story which
Matthew had written; but it includes many more. He said many had taken in hand to write. Thus we
first see him collecting every such story he could find. But there was another source of information.
"Those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word"-those who had
actually seen Jesus, and served Him in the days of His flesh. To them he talked. His word for these
people is arresting: " eyewitnesses," Autoptai. This is a medical term. We are familiar with it in its
English form, autopsy. What is an autopsy? Strictly it is a personal, first-hand investigation.
Autopsy means seeing for yourself. Generally, medical men now use it in connection with post-
mortem examinations. But it is personal investigation. Not merely those who had seen Jesus
personally, but living ministers to Jesus, who had investigated Jesus for themselves. He got first-
hand stories. The word, "ministers," is equally interesting Uperetai. It also was a word in medical
use. Literally it means underrowers. This word was used for doctors who were in attendance upon
the principal physician in any case, internes, as we might call them. Thus this doctor is using
medical terms. He said, I obtained my information from those who personally investigated Jesus,
those who served Him in the days of His flesh, those under-rowers, who were in attendance upon
Him, the Great Physician, as He went out upon His work everywhere.
ll this reveals the fact that this book was probably the work of years. He collected the
writings; talked to anyone who had first-hand stories to tell him. I have no doubt that somewhere he
was introduced to the Mother of Jesus, and from her had the matchless story that he could have
gained from none other.
hen he reveals the method of his work. First he says that he traced the course of all things
accurately from the beginning. That is an important alteration from the old Version, which makes it
look as though Luke meant, he knew all from the beginning. He means the exact opposite. He
obtained all the material ; and then he traced the course of all things accurately. This was the work
of scientific investigation of the whole of the stories he had gathered about Jesus.
n this connection he employed a word which arrests us. He says he traced the course of all
things "omthen." We have rendered that, "from the first." Now, that word in Greek use does
The G. Campbell Morgan Archive                                                                                                                                                       http://www.gcampbellmorgan.com
sometimes mean "from the first," but it also means "from above." In strict etymology, I think the
probability is that it means "from above” Note one or two occurrences of the same word. Jesus was
talking to Nicodemus, and said: "Ye must be born anothen." The old Version rendered that "again!'
The Revisers have rendered it, "anew," and "born from above" in the margin. I am quite sure Jesus
meant, "from above." Take another illustration. "The wisdom that cometh down anothen." There it
must be "from above." My own view is that when Luke says he traced the course of all things
accurately "amthen," he meant from above; and that he was claiming that his scientific work was
under the guidance of heaven itself, that he not only brought to bear upon his work his own
scientific ability to sift and trace; but he sought guidance from heaven. That is how he prepared his
material.
nd then he says he wrote "in order” This phrase "in order" is one word in the Greek,
Kathezes, which is the word of the artist. He claims that having obtained his material, and sifted
and examined it, and put it in proper relationship, he wrote it in artistic order.
inally, he reveals the purpose of the writing. "That thou mightest know the certainty
concerning the things wherein thou wast instructed." Certainty here means more than intellectual
conviction; it signifies safety, security. Then carefully observe the word "instructed," in the phrase
"concerning the things wherein thou wast instructed." It should be rendered "instructed by word of
mouth." That is very important. Theophilus, his friend, had been instructed, not through writing,
but by oral instruction. It is the Greek word from which we derive our word "catechism," which
strictly is instruction by word of mouth. Theophilus evidently was not in possession of a writing
upon which he could depend. Luke wrote that he might have certainty, safety, that he may know
security. That indicates the value of all historic documents. The writing gives fixity to the truth.
Oral teaching is never safe for finality. I may tell you the story of Jesus, and I tell it to you honestly
as I know it. You repeat it, as the result of your hearing from me, with equal honesty. Inevitably
there will be some deflection. By the time this process has gone far enough, the story may not be
the same at all. Luke wrote in order that Theophilus might have a document, a writing, giving fixity
to the truth, and in it find certainty, certitude. Thus the value of the writing is that it gives the truth
in germ and in norm. In germ, that is, it needs development, consideration, amplification. In norm,
that is, that in all such processes it is the standard of examination, and the test of accuracy.
uch, in brief, is what we know of the writer, and of the writing. With these things in mind we
may go forward with our study of the book.

The G. Campbell Morgan Archive                                                                                                                                                       http://www.gcampbellmorgan.com
1:5-25
"And he shall go before His face in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers
to the children, and the disobedient to walk in the wisdom of the just; to make ready for the Lord a
people prepared." -Luke i.17.
HERE are two more words in our translation, " for Him," but they are supplied. We end
where the text really ends, "a people prepared."
his was the statement of the angel Gabriel concerning John. It is central to the paragraph
which begins at verse five, and ends at verse twenty-five. Luke begins his story of Jesus with an
account of His forerunner. This in itself is immediately arresting and significant; significant of the
greatness of John, and of the glory of that for which is ministry prepared. When we read these
twenty-five verses we are already standing on the threshold of the most marvellous period in all the
history of humanity, that comparatively brief period of a generation, as we measure generations
now, of about three and thirty years. The life of Jesus is the central and pivotal generation in human
history. There was nothing like it before; and everything before it led up to it. There has been
nothing like it since; but everything since has been related to the things that happened then.
his story of John constitutes a link, connecting the work of our Lord with everything that had
gone before. The story is the link between the old economy and the new. To use Biblical phrasing,
it is the link between that period in human history when in times past God spoke unto the fathers by
prophets in divers portions and divers manners, and that period in which God was about to speak to
men finally in His Son. The story shows that from the Divine standpoint there is no break, but
continuity.
ere we see all the things of the past economy, and this remarkable man, John, linking up that
past with that which was to come. The old and the new are seen to be a continuous movement in
the programme of God. Sharp the break in many ways between the old and the new on the level of
humanity's experience; but in the economy of God everything moved forward.
he time note is marked in the fifth verse:
"There was in the days of Herod, king of Judea, a certain priest, named Zacharias."
The G. Campbell Morgan Archive                                                                                                                                                       http://www.gcampbellmorgan.com