[Propertalk] Fw: Luke 3:1-6

[Joe Parrish]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <bstoffregen at roadrunner.com>
To: <brian.stoffregen at gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 4:33 PM
Subject: Luke 3:1-6


> Attached are notes on Luke 3:1-6 for December 6. Happy Thanksgiving.
>
> Brian

2 Advent C: Exegetical Notes on Luke 3:1-6



In all three years of the Revised Common Lectionary, the 2nd and 3rd Sundays 
in Advent center on John the Baptist. Perhaps if we want to properly prepare 
for the coming of Jesus, rather than looking in the manger, or decorating 
trees and houses, or buying and wrapping presents, we need to listen to 
John. While only two gospels mention the nativity, all four talk about John 
who prepares the way for the coming of Jesus. Could John's preparatory 
preaching be more important than Jesus' birth? It is for some gospel 
writers.



Only in Year C do we have a continuous reading for these two "John the 'B' 
Sundays." Next week's lesson is Luke 3:7-18.



THE WHOLE SECTION ON THE BAPTIST'S MINISTRY (Luke 3:1-20)



Luke's account of John the Baptist's ministry in chapter 3 comes from a 
variety of sources.

            vv. 1-2a -- the list of historical rulers are unique to Luke

            vv. 2b-3a -- some different language than Mark (1:4)

            vv. 3b-4 -- nearly identical to Mark (1:2a, 3)

            vv. 5-6 -- only Luke extends the quote from Isaiah.

            vv. 7-9 -- a Q saying (Mt 3:7-10)

            vv. 10-14 -- unique to Luke

            v. 15 -- unique to Luke

            v. 16 -- very similar to Mark (1:7-8)

            v. 17 -- a Q saying (Mt 3:12)

            v. 18 -- unique to Luke

            vv. 19-20 -- different language and location than Mark (6:17-18)

            [Luke omits Mark's description of John's food & clothing (Mk 
1:5-6)]



I will use the first part of the above breakdown as an outline for a more 
detailed look at this week's text.



HISTORICAL RULERS -- THE TIME OF THE MINISTRY (Luke 3:1-2a)



The chronological data of these verses reflects the conventions of 
Greco-Roman historiography as well as a pattern found in some Jewish 
prophetic books (Jer 1:1-3; Ezek 1:1-3; Hos 1:1; Isa 1:1). Luke seeks to 
place his "orderly account" (Lk 1:1) within the context of "world" history. 
In addition, this writing, addressed to "Most Excellent Theophilus" (Lk 
1:3), places the events within the context of the rulers and times (and some 
historiographic forms) that Theophilus would know. It is likely that he was 
some type of Roman official.



Even though six different people are named, that doesn't allow us to 
pinpoint the exact date that John began his ministry. First of all, our 
standard time reckoning of "year of the Lord" (A.D.) did not begin until 533 
AD. Our year of 365+ days and 12 months was not standard in the first 
century. There were at least four different calendars back then. Each 
reckoned the years differently. We can't be sure how long "15 years" would 
have been.



Secondly, we are not sure when Tiberius began his reign or when Luke started 
counting the years. There were two or three years when Tiberius was 
co-regency with Augustus starting in 11 or 12 AD. Augustus died in 14 AD. 
Did the counting start in 11 or 12 or 14? Our best guess is that Luke refers 
to a time around 28 AD.



The date ranges of the other rulers (from Culpepper, Luke New Interpreter's 
Bible):

            Pontius Pilate 26-36 AD

            Herod Antipas 4 BC-39 AD

            Philip 4 BC-34 AD

            Lysanias ruler of Abilene is unknown

            Annas was high priest from 6-15 AD

            Caiaphas was high priest from 18-36 AD [p. 40]



Note that Luke includes both civil and religious leaders in his list. There 
is also a sense of narrowing the focus: starting with the ruler of the Roman 
Empire -- nearly the whole world -- and ending up at the temple in 
Jerusalem -- where the high priests did their work.



What is the significance of this information? First of all, they indicate 
that the historical context was important to Luke. Secondly, I think that 
Luke tries to show to Theophilus (and all Roman rulers) that Jesus and the 
Christians were not subversive to Rome. The charges that Jesus was putting 
himself up against Caesar were created by Jesus' enemies (see Lu 23:2; 
compare to 20:21-25). Thirdly, Luke seeks to speak in a form (language) that 
Theophilus will understand. He places his Gospel in the form and in the 
historical context that will make sense to his audience.



THE PLACE OF JOHN'S PROPHETIC MINISTRY (Luke 3:2b-3a)



Whereas the first verse and a half follow a more Greco-Roman historiography 
and set the time (although not precisely) of John's ministry; the form in 
2b-3a is that of the call of a prophet and it sets the place of John's 
ministry -- it is in the region around the Jordan.



More importantly is the phrase: "The word of God came to John." As Green 
states (The Gospel of Luke): "... we are reminded that, though the narrative 
spotlight turns first on John then on Jesus, this is not their story. God is 
the primary actor around whose purpose the narrative develops" [p. 160].



Luke adds "son of Zechariah." The designation "son of" is quite common in OT 
prophetic books: Isaiah 1:1; Jeremiah 1:1; Ezekiel 1:3; Hosea 1:1; Joel 1:1; 
Jonah 1:1; Zephaniah 1:1; Zechariah 1:1. Luke also uses forms from Jewish 
literature. It doesn't completely abandon the Jewishness of John, Jesus, and 
the disciples. This also connects this story with the opening chapter of 
Luke. What was promised to Zechariah is now being fulfilled.



JOHN'S PROCLAMATION (Luke 3:3b)



"a baptism of repentance for forgiveness of sins"



<<<BAPTISM>>>



The basic meaning of the verb βαπτίζω (baptizō) is "to wash," which is how 
it is translated in Lu 11:38. Usually it also has some ritual or purifying 
aspects to the washing. This image is used by Luke in Acts 22:16: "Get up, 
be baptized, and have your sins washed away ἀπολούω (apoloyō), calling on 
his name."



Luke has a very high opinion of baptism. In what is assumed to be a 
narrator's aside (7:29-30), Luke says:



            All the people who heard -- including tax collectors --

                        having been baptized with the baptism of John

                                    proved God right. (δικαιόω - dikaioō)

            But the Pharisees and lawyers

                        not having been baptized by him

                                    reject for themselves the purpose of 
God.



John's baptism put one on God's side -- perhaps even in a right relationship 
with God -- (a possible meaning for δικαιόω - dikaioō) -- even for the tax 
collectors. Refusing John's baptism was a rejection of God's purpose -- even 
for those who lived moral, obedient lives.



As important as Luke makes John's baptism, he also makes a clear distinction 
in his Gospel, and even more so in Acts, between John's baptism and 
Christian or Holy Spirit baptism (Lu 3:16; Ac 1:5; 11:16; 18:25; 19:3-5).



<<<REPENTANCE>>>



"Repentance" and "repenting" are important words in Luke/Acts. The verb 
occurs in these books 14 times (34 total times in the NT); and the noun 11 
times (22 times in the NT).



A listing of the 14 times this word occurs in the Gospel of Luke and their 
assumed sources.



from "Mark"

            3:3 baptism of repentance (Mk 1:4; Mt 3:2)



from Q

            3:8 bear fruit worth of repentance (Mt 3:8)

            10:13 Tyre & Sidon would have repented (Mt 10:13)

            11:32 men of Ninevey repented at preaching of Jonah (11:32)



unique to Luke

            5:32 call sinners to repentance (added by Luke to Mk 2:17; Mt 
9:13)

            13:3 Unless you repent you will all perish.

            13:5 Unless you repent you will all perish.

            15:7 more joy over one sinner who repents than over 99 who don't 
need to repent

            15:10 joy over one sinner who repents

            16:30 if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent

            17:3 if a brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents forgive 
him (cf. Mt 18:15)

            17:4 if brother sins seven times and seven times says "I 
repent," forgive him (cf. Mt 18:22)

            24:47 repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached



Perhaps for Luke, the foremost characteristic of Christians is repentance. 
The Greek word group μετανοέω/μετάνοια (metanoeō/metanoia) is a combination 
of a word for "mind" (νοέω/νοῦς - noeō/nous) and a prefix (μετα - meta) 
meaning (1) "after" = "after-thought" or "second thoughts"; or meaning (2) 
"change" = "change in one's mind or thinking (upon reflection)".



What is it about our thinking that needs changing? Simply stated, I think 
that it is the idea that we can do it by ourselves. We are justified before 
God by our good lives. We are pretty good people because we obey the 
commandments. We aren't as bad as those sinners. And, if we find we are 
coming up short in some of these areas, we might reflect on our misdeeds 
only to discover ways that we can stop doing the bad things and start doing 
good things. The problem with this type of repentance is that it doesn't 
seek outside help. The mind still thinks, "I can do it by myself." It hasn't 
been changed.



Darrell Bock (Luke) writes:



The product of repentance, as far as John is concerned, is elaborated in the 
comments found in 3:10-14. It is reflected in a concern for one’s fellow 
humans, which makes an effort to meet needs. It is motivated by a 
preparation for God’s coming and the possibility of God’s wrath (3:7-9). 
Repentance produces a life lived with a sense of responsibility before a 
sovereign God. It is an internal attitude that aims at a product. (p. 287)



By this definition, repentance contains both an inner attitude and 
motivation that results in behaviors towards others.



I think that reason that Jesus had so much trouble with the scribes and 
Pharisees was because they were doing pretty well by themselves. They were 
living good, moral, obedient lives before God and neighbor, but they didn’t 
have the proper attitude and motivation for those behaviors. In contrast, 
the sinners and tax collectors were quite aware that they didn't measure up 
to God's or society's standards. They knew that they couldn't do it by 
themselves. They needed help. I've suggested in a number of previous notes 
that repentance is declaring to self and God, "I can't."



12-Step programs begin with the first step, which is an acknowledgment that 
I can't do it by myself: "We admitted we were powerless over _______ -- that 
our lives had become unmanageable."



In working as a part-time chaplain at an alcoholic hospital, it was clear 
that the more serious they took this first step, the more likely the clients 
were to follow through the program and find the needed help in the other 
steps. They knew that can't do by themselves. They know they need their 
higher power. They know they need the care and support of the AA community. 
If they continued to think that they had some power over their drinking, 
recovery and sobriety were very unlikely. It was also generally true that 
the first step back into their addictions was a failure to keep up with 
their daily devotions -- (AA has its own devotional book) -- and 
participation in the "community" -- (going to meetings). How important are 
devotions and church attendance for staying strong in the Christian faith?



<<FORGIVENESS OF SINS>>>



The other side of confessing "I can't" is "God can." God can "remove" 
(ἀφίημι - aphiēmi) our sinfulness. Every time the word "sin" (ἁμαρτία - 
hamartia) is used in Luke, the words for "to forgive" or "forgiveness" 
(ἀφίημι/ἄφεσις - aphiēmi/aphesis) are also present (1:77; 3:3; 5:20, 21, 23, 
24; 7:47, 48, 49; 11:4; 24:47). Twice, when the verb "to (commit) sin" is 
used (ἁμαρτάνω - hamartanō), the word for "to forgive" (ἀφίημι - aphiēmi) is 
also present (17:3, 4). The other two instances of the verb are in the 
parable of the prodigal son (15:18, 21), and although the word "forgiveness" 
doesn't occur. It is illustrated by the father's actions.



Similar statistics can be found in Acts. These are all the verses containing 
"sin".

            "sin" and "forgiveness" (2:38, 5:31; 10:43; 13:38; 26:18)

            "sin" and "wiped out" (3:19)

            "sin" and "don't hold it against them" (7:60)

            "sin" and "washed away" (22:16)



At least for Luke -- and I believe for us -- we cannot talk about sin 
without the offer of forgiveness. Robert Capon in Hunting the Divine Fox, 
points out the church's real job.



The church is not in the morals business. The world is in the morals 
business, quite rightfully; and it has done a fine job of it, all things 
considered. The history of the world's moral codes is a monument to the 
labors of many philosophers, and it is a monument of striking unity and 
beauty. As C.S. Lewis said, anyone who thinks the moral codes of mankind are 
all different should be locked up in a library and be made to read three 
days' worth of them. He would be bored silly by the sheer sameness.



What the world cannot get right, however, is the forgiveness business -- and 
that, of course, is the church's real job. She is in the world to deal with 
the Sin which the world can't turn off or escape from. She is not in the 
business of telling the world what's right and wrong so that it can do good 
and avoid evil. She is in the business of offering, to a world which knows 
all about that tiresome subject, forgiveness for its chronic unwillingness 
to take its own advice. But the minute she even hints that morals, and not 
forgiveness, is the name of her game, she instantly corrupts the Gospel and 
runs headlong into blatant nonsense.



The church becomes, not Ms. Forgiven Sinner, but Ms. Right. Christianity 
becomes the good guys in here versus the bad guys out there. Which, of 
course, is pure tripe. The church is nothing but the world under the sign of 
baptism. [pp. 132-133]



ISAIAH 40:3-5 (Luke 3:4-6)



Mark and Matthew only quote Isaiah 40:3. Luke adds the other verses -- those 
about the transformation of the ups and downs, and sideways-ness of life 
into straight and smooth and level paths. While this image can lead to the 
idea of reversal. That is, the rich become poor and the poor become rich. It 
seems more likely that Luke intends a meaning of equality. That is, the rich 
and poor meet in the middle. I think that part of this equality is Luke's 
emphasis that in God's kingdom (and church) human differences don't matter. 
There will be rich and poor. There will be slaves and free. There will be 
males and females. There will be young and old. There will be Jews and 
Gentiles. (Might there also be "straights" and "gays"?) All are invited. We 
might say, there is a level playing field for all people.



This thought is emphasized in the last line of the quote: "All flesh will 
see the salvation of God." Luke stresses the universal aspect of God's 
salvation.



<<<SEEING GOD'S SALVATION>>>



The only other time this particular word for "salvation" is used (σωτήριον - 
sōtērion) in all of the gospels, is when Simeon sings: "My eyes have seen 
your salvation, which you have prepared in the presence of all peoples, a 
light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to your people Israel" 
(2:30-32). [Other NT occurrences of the word: Ac 28:28; Ep 6:17]



What did Simeon see when he declares he has seen God's salvation? He had 
seen the infant Jesus and there was a change in Simeon's thinking about 
death.



Later in the gospel a closely related word is used (σωτηρία - sōtēria) when 
Jesus tells Zacchaeus, "Today salvation has come to this house" (19:9). What 
had come to his house? Jesus had invited himself over and there was change 
in Zacchaeus' thinking about wealth. [Other occurrences of this word in 
Luke/Acts: Lu 1:69, 71, 77; Ac 4:12; 7:25; 13:26, 47; 16:17; 27:34 -- it 
does not occur in the other Synoptics and once in John (4:22).]



Only Luke and John use "savior" (σωτήρ - sōtēr) in their writings: Lu 1:47; 
2:11; Jo 4:42.



Neither Matthew or Mark use any of the words related to sōt-, but Luke does. 
All of the gospels use the related verb σῴζω (sǭzōo) = "to save, heal, 
deliver." Perhaps Luke's audience was more familiar with sōt- terms. 
Protecting gods were frequently given the title "sōtēr," e.g., Zeus Soter.



At the same that they may have been more familiar with such terms, the word 
group -- as well as their Hebrew equivalents -- carried the idea of "victory 
over enemies." Enemies were outside forces -- an invading army or a disease 
that had invaded the body. Salvation meant defeating and driving out the 
army or healing the disease.



Jesus, the Savior, has come, and enemies are still all around us. There are 
still armies that invade and suppress people. There are still germs that 
invade bodies. There is still sin in the world and in our lives. The world 
isn't what it should be. Our lives aren't what we would like them to be. How 
can we say that God's salvation has come? Nothing seems to have changed. 
There are still hills and valleys and crooked and rough roads. There are 
inequalities between people. All are not treated equally. Many people do not 
see God's salvation.



Often people miss God's salvation because they are looking in the wrong 
places. They want to see a powerful military leader or a great physician. 
The savior is a baby in a manger. The salvation is seen in the face of an 
infant or in an adult who invites himself for supper. Seeing God's salvation 
means seeing Jesus -- one who doesn't save himself from death on the cross.



We don't live in a perfect world. There are still wars. There are still 
diseases. There are still rough roads to travel. But we don't look to the 
world to see God's salvation, we look to Jesus -- Jesus present in 
Scriptures -- Jesus in the manger -- Jesus on the cross -- Jesus present in 
the sacraments -- Jesus present in our coming together in his name -- Jesus 
present in the lives of his followers -- Jesus present and eating with 
sinners. Do we see Jesus' presence in the person next to us in the pew -- or 
behind and in front of us?



Perhaps when we begin to see Jesus in each other and in ourselves and treat 
one another (and ourselves) as we would treat Jesus; more of the world might 
have a glimpse of God's salvation. Perhaps this is the change in attitude, 
motivations, and actions that John is talking about.



Brian Stoffregen

Faith Lutheran Church, 2215 S 8th Avenue, Yuma, AZ

e-mail: brian.stoffregen at gmail.com