[Page 48]
CHAPTER FOUR
St. Luke’s Account
When we come to consider the Gospel of Luke, it is as well to remember the special circumstances relating to him. There is little reason why we should not retain the traditional belief that his education was above that of the ordinary man of his day, and that he was a doctor of medicine by profession.
Paul in one of his inestimable letters, this one to the believers known as the Colossians, refers to Luke as “—the beloved physician.” And, too, in Luke’s own account of the life and work ofjesus, we find him frequently using the special touches one might imagine a doctor using, as when he refers to illness. He speaks of“—a great fever,” (4:38) and “—full of leprosy.” (5:12). We find such references not only in the Gospel, but also in the Acts of the Apostles.
Most likely Luke was a Gentile and, as tradition tells us he was born at Antioch in Syria, not far from Paul’s own City of Tarsus. He could very well have met Paul there; he could even have been a school friend.
Tarsus was a University city: it is quite probable they attended the same University. Their close companionship in later life would seem to indicate a prior acquaintanceship, as well as proving the unifying spirit of Christianity. For while Luke appears most certainly to be a Gentile, Paul was undoubtedly a Jew of the Jews. Yet it is evident there was a Close companionship. Luke accompanied Paul on some of his missionary journeys.
This relationship could also have tended to colour Luke’s thinking. In his ministry, Paul never ceases to think as ajew and to interpret jesus’ life and teachings from aJew’s point of view. This could have had an influence on Luke’s conclusions.
Most likely these two men would have spent long hours in conversation, discussing what Jesus had taught and its significance when viewed in the light of formerJewish teachings. They would have tried to thrash out what He meant by His teachings; and they most surely would have discussed the public’s reaction to it. Looked at in this way, one can more readily understand why Luke approached his
48
[Page 49]
task of writing an account of Jesus in a more consciously scientific spirit
than did his predecessors.
It also helps us to appreciate his opening words in the Gospel bearing his name. Addressing himself to Theophilus, he writes: “For as much as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us . . . It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty of those things wherein thou hast been instructed.”
Luke, we feel confident, went with Paul, Silas and Timothy to Neapolis and Philippi and if not a Christian at that time, he certainly became one then. It has been suggested by some of our leading biblical scholars that Luke may have lived, and had a medical practice in Philippi, remaining there while Paul went on his other Journeys, coming together again after Paul’s return from his third journey. (Acts 20:56)
It is quite probable that Luke became Head of the Church at Philippi, and this makes it more understandable why he should leave Philippi to accompany Paul to Jerusalem and Rome. We know he was with him during Paul’s first imprisonment (Col.4:14) and also during the second term of imprisonment (2 Tim.4:11).
As we have learnt already, there is no absolute certainty about the dates of the Gospels. All that one can say with reasonable accuracy is that it does seem likely that Luke used Mark’s writings, similarly to what Matthew did; that the Gospel was written before Acts, and that it almost certainly was written before the fall of Rome. One could really assume all the Gospels were written during the first sixty or seventy years after the death of jesus.
Both the Gospel and the Acts are dedicated to the same Theophilus, and he appears to be an important Gentile convert. But that is no reason for supposing that Luke’s letter was for his eyes only. Rather, I think, we should regard him as a ‘patron’ to whom Luke dedicated his work, as did many literary men in past ages dedicate their works to influential, or prominent persons.
In its wider sense, the Gospel was written for circulation among the Gentile Christians. Even as today the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh are not only for Persians, or Muslims, or Christians, but are for all men whowill read them.
However, there is another interesting point about Luke’s writing.
49
[Page 50]
Unlike Matthew, Luke rarely refers to Old Testament prophecy as
being fulfilled in jesus. And when tracing the genealogy of Jesus, he
goes back to Adam rather than to Abraham. Also, note his habit of
transcribing Hebrew words for Greek, e.g. “Master” for “Rabbi”,
“Lawyer” for “Scribe”, “Verily” for “Amen.”
As we have seen in Matthew and Mark, each Gospel has a special feature about it, and Luke’s distinguishing characteristic is so well marked that it has been called the universal or catholic Gospel. This because it emphasises that Christ’s salvation is for all, and not for the jews alone. He makes many references to Jesus’ friendship with Publicans and sinners; he alone tells of the conversion of Zaccheus and the Penitent Robber; and he alone records the parables of the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal Son and the Pharisee and the Publican.
It might be helpful to our understanding of how transforming was Jesus’ Message in Luke’s eyes, if we know what he meant by ‘Publican’. He did not mean an hotel keeper. During the time of Roman domination, the jews were heavily taxed. To facilitate the collection of taxes and Customs dues, sections of the taxable community were lumped together and auctioned as being worth so much per annum in taxes. A man wouId make a bid for one of these groups, or block of taxes. Such a buyer was known as a Publican. He paid the Government, thus making easy its problem of collecting taxes from the people. It was then up to the Publican to get the money out of the people as best he could. This led to so many abuses, that the people were sometimes charged three times, the Roman Governors frequently being in league with the Publican and shutting their eyes to injustices—for a consideration, of course!
The Publicans became so hated and despised by the people that the term ‘Publicans and Sinners’ became one and the same hateful term.
Luke’s Gospel has also been called the Gospel of Women, because he mentions so many women with sympathy and understanding. (A forerunner of Bahá’u’lláh— teaching the equality of men and women!) Some of the women mentioned are Elizabeth, the Virgin Mary, Anna, Mary Magdalene, Martha and Mary of Bethany, the woman that was a sinner, Susanna, Joanna, and several others. The Gospel is generally marked by such tenderness and feeling that one can easily imagine Luke as the Physician, deeply interested in humanity.
On the other hand, Luke’s has been called the Gospel of the Poor, for it is he who stresses Jesus’ words to the poor. Luke does not say: “Blessed are the poor in spirit,” but “Blessed are ye poor.”
50
[Page 51]
It is in Luke that we find the Song of Mary, or Magnificat (1 :46-55);
the Song of Zacharias or Benedictus (1 :68-79); and Gloria in Excelsis,
the Song of the Angels (2:14) and Nunc Dimittis, (2:29-32); The Song
of Simeon. The result being that Luke’s has been called by some The
Gospel of Praise. ‘
Others again have referred to Luke as the Gospel of Prayer. He refers to our Lord’s praying more often than do the other Writers; it has also been designated the The Gospel of The Holy Spirit, this because Luke stresses the working of the Holy Spirit, rather than simply speaking of It.
In this twentieth century, which is witnessing a marked clash of rising nationalism on one hand, and an almost feverish activity among certain Christian sects to bring about religious unity on the other hand, Luke’s Gospel is singularly interesting. It is the one Gospel which stresses Oneness. Where we find Matthew appealing to the Jews to remove their prejudices against the Christians, we find Luke addressing himself to the Roman Empire and its Officials; this at the very time when the Government was beginning its campaign of persecution. Luke endeavours to present Christ’s teachings as being for all mankind; as something the world should welcome, and not as being something any Government should fear.
Whether it was because he moved among the people more than did the other Gospel Writers, visiting them when sick and hopeless; or whether it was because he had an acute recollection of the young, arrogant Saul of Tarsus, boasting of his superior knowledge when compared with the knowledge possessed by the humble Christians, and the ease with which he could hunt them out and persecute them, one can never be sure. But Luke must have known full well how bodily sick some of the people were, whom neither he nor his fraternity could cure. Yet Jesus healed them, going among them with blessing and healing irrespective of class, creed, or rank, Offering one remedy to all—that they believe!
He must have recalled, at times, Saul’s prowess at the University; his brilliant intellect; his popularity with the people, yet—he knew, he must have known! —what happened to Saul when in the presence of the Holy Spirit.
Saul cracked!
And it is just as well for the world that Saul did crack. It would not be irreligious to say that, through that crack there seeped into Saul of Tarsus the Holy Spirit of God which set up a permeation which,
51
[Page 52]
in time, caused a complete metamorphosis, giving to the world a new
man—Paul the Apostle! Paul, who was one day to write to the
Christians at Corinth saying: “And I, brethren, when I came to you,
came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you
the testimony of God. For I determined not to know anything among
you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.”
And we would do well today, to remind ourselves constantly that this transformation came about through the teachings of a NE W prophet; through a MAN, one despised by all the best authorities; through a teaching which was anathema to all orthodox religious beliefs and practices; through the activities of a strange, dzfierent religious group of people from that generally acceptable.
Luke reminds us: “The men who were guarding Jesus mocked at him. They beat him, they blindfolded him, and they kept asking him, ‘Now prophet, who hit you? Tell us that!’ And so they went on heaping insults upon him.
“When day broke, the elders of the nations, chief priests, and doctors of the Law assembled, and he was brought before their Council. ‘Tell us’ they said, ‘are you the Messiah?’ ‘If I tell you,’ he replied, ‘you will not believe me; and if I ask questions, you will not answer. But from now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of Almighty God.’ ‘You are the Son of God, then?’ they all said, and he replied, ‘It is you who say I am.’ They said, ‘Need we call further witnesses? We have heard it ourselves from his own lips.’
“With that the whole assembly rose, and they brought him before Pilate.” (Luke 22:63-71, 23:1)
I feel we should note thatJesus spoke of Himself as the son of man. It was his accusers who charged him with saying He was the Son of God.
Whether it was because Luke knew all this, I can’t say. I do feel, however, that it must have made a profound impression on his mind; such as to cause him to see in Jesus the Divine Physician, One Who would cure every ill that afflicted both the individual and the corporate body of men. Therefore, his ministry became a mission to all men and to every nation.
In this century, even in the last decade, the need for such a concept of religion has been growing stronger and stronger. Today mankind knows itself to be in dire need of one unifying Faith capable of fusing together the hearts of men into one heart.
The supreme directing body of the Bahá’ís of the world (known to
52
[Page 53]
them as the Universal House of Justice) has issued a call to the peoples
of the world wherein they say: “In contemplating the supreme
importance of the task now challenging the entire world, we bow our
heads in humility before the awesome majesty of the Divine Creator,
Who out of His infinite love has created all humanity from the same
stock; exalted the gem-like reality of man; honoured it with intellect
and wisdom, nobility and immortality; and conferred upon man the ‘
‘unique distinction and capacity to know Him and to love Him’, a
capacity that ‘must needs be regarded as the generating impulse and
the primary purpose underlying the whole of creation’.”
Such a role was not that ofJesus, even though Luke did not realise it at the time. What Luke missed in his appreciation of Jesus’ doctrine, was that before such a united world could evolve, every man of every race, of every nation must not only be personally convinced of the vastness of the planet, but of the vastness of the truth that every man is a citizen of that one planet. And he must also be convinced that the Creator-God requires the unity of His creatures as being a natural, evolutionary process to be accomplished in the fullness of time.
Thus Jesus exhorts His followers in the prayer we call The Lord’s Prayer, to pray for that Day when the Kingdom of God would be established on earth, and when there would be only One Fold and One Shepherd—God.
But Jesus knew such a vision was beyond the minds of the people of His day. Their world was a very small world. Later generations of men would venture over the dark waters of the world, finding new Islands and Continents peopled by creatures fashioned by the same Creator. And they would find these people worshipping a Messenger Who claimed to come from the same Source as their own Prophet and bringing to His people a similar message of the knowledge of God and His Will concerning them.
And because these people would appear to have a different Messenger, and a foreign religion to that of the new-comers, there would arise disputes as to the authenticity of the other’s belief. There would be a questioning of the right of either to hold to that belief; there would be efforts to disparage each other’s Prophet. It was for such reasons as these that Jesus warned the people of His day, and the generations to come after them, that a time would come when the Spirit of God would again be personalised—actualised in their very midst—in the form of Man. And this Man, He said, would come in the role of the Spirit of Truth.
'53
[Page 54]
This Prophet—this Man would reveal all truth. He would draw
together all the races of men, with varying religious beliefs, and weld
them into one spiritual whole. He would reveal to them the Oneness
of God, the Oneness of all the realms of God, and in that realisation
they would find the Key to all truth.
This, the Bahá’ís believe, has happened. They believe Bahá’u’lláh to be the embodiment of Truth, as revealed by God; they believe Him to be created by God to fulfil the role of Manifestor of God’s Will; they believe Him to be the sole Source available today Who can make known unto humanity what God requires from each human soul.
Such a Man" can be likened to a new garment for the reclothing of mankind; a garment that will replace the old, wornout garments used in the past. Such new garment does not imply that the garments formerly supplied were unsuitable or insufficient. To the contrary; it means only that mankind has outgrown the garments that formerly suited its needs. Today a larger garment is needed, one that will cover all men, at all times and under all conditions. For it to do this, it is necessary that it come from the same Maker who knows full well the needs of Mankind at the date of supply; and Who, also, can design for Man’s future needs in order that he may attain to his perfect state.
On more than one occasion and in different ways, Jesus referred to the Prophets Who had come before Him, indicating to the people of His generation that He had come through the same spiritutal line of succession. And He told them point blank that He anticipated from them the same fate as had befallen His predecessors. (Luke 11:47-49) Thus there is no foundation for maintaining a groundless claim that Jesus is distinct from former Prophets other than in His bodily appearance, and in the particular role in which He came, and in the Message He brought, a message applicable to His age and capable of sustaining mankind for centuries to come. He warned His listeners of a Successor Who would come after Him: One Who would make all things clear to their understanding.
In other words, the idea of progressive revelation should not strike a Christian as being a new or offensive teaching; Jesus stressed it constantly. And not only did He emphasise it, but He cautioned His followers to prepare themselves, so that they would be able to recognise the New Manifestation when He did appear.
Such a concept could be said to be the theme of Luke’s Gospel. Luke sought to present Christianity as a Gospel for all mankind; as a
54
[Page 55]
narrative of what he believed Jesus taught, rather thanas being a
religious history of his times.
Bahá’u’lláh is equally as direct about this: He says: “And since there can be no tie of direct intercourse to bind the one true God with His creation, and no resemblance whatever can exist between the transient and the Eternal, the contingent and the Absolute, He hath ordained that in every age and dispensation a pure and stainless Soul be made manifest in the kingdoms of earth and heaven. Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself.”*
- Gleamings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p.66
