A subtle attack

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by stilllearning, Mar 31, 2016.

  1. stilllearning

    stilllearning
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    From the very beginning(Genesis 3:1), the target of Satan’s attack has not been on the institutions of the Faith, but on the foundation of our Faith; God’s Word, ... “Yea, hath God said?”

    The “subtle attack”, that this thread is about is the lie, that Luke was a gentile!
    On the surface, this may not seem like a very important issue or question; But the door that this opens, is very important.

    If a Believer is convinced that Luke was a gentile, the door that this opens, is the lie that everything that God used Luke to write, will be influenced by the fact that He is a gentile.
    ------------------------
    The Lord foresaw this lie, therefore he gave us Luke 1:1-4
    V.1 ¶ Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
    V.2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
    V.3 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,
    V.4 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.


    On the surface, this passage seems to support the notion, that the book of Luke, was influenced by Luke’s personal opinions....
    “Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word”

    This appears to be saying, that Luke was going to relay to Theophilus, information that he had acquired by interviews with “eyewitnesses”. But just as with the rest of the entire Bible, you need to dig deeper(pay closer attention), to get the truth about what is being said.

    Therefore, it becomes clear when you closely study verses 1-4, that Verse 2, is talking about all the secular writings about the Lord and His life that were being written. But then we come to verses 3 & 4. In Luke 1:3, Luke tells us, that what he says in Luke, comes from a “perfect understanding of all things”.

    By the way, no human being can have “a perfect understanding of all things”! We are all sinners and all of “our opinions” have been tainted by sin! Therefore, where did Luke get this “perfect understanding”. Look at the next 4 words, “from the very first”. These 4 English words, are translated from 1 Greek word(anothen), and in this context, that means “from the LORD”!

    Other places you find this word is.......
    "Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." (John 3:7)
    and
    "Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power [at all] against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin." (John 19:11)
    ------------------------
    Therefore the LORD used Luke to give us GOD’S WORDS, not man’s words!
    And if we can be convinced that Luke was a Gentile, than this is a subtle attack on God’s Word!
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 4
    • Like Like x 1
  2. ReformedBaptist

    ReformedBaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,894
    Likes Received:
    27
    So, what is the point being made? That Luke was a Jew?
     
  3. stilllearning

    stilllearning
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Yes! And that he was no more than a pen, that God used to give us Luke and Acts.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 3
  4. FrigidDev

    FrigidDev
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2016
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'm a Jew.

    "You shall not eat pizza w/ mushrooms"
     
  5. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,123
    Likes Received:
    1,297
    I don't know of a single competent biblical scholar who thinks Luke was a Gentile. Every one I am aware of believes Luke was a Hellenistic Jew.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  6. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,647
    Likes Received:
    187
    I reject that concept that Luke was simply "a pen" - that is, he simply took dictation. That goes against what he wrote and many clues within his gospel.

    At the same time, I also reject the idea that just because Luke's specific heritage and ways of thinking (Greek-influenced) played a role in the way the Luke's Gospel was written and organized, that it must be something less than divinely inspired.

    God used the personalities, language, education, and knowledge of the human authors of the scriptures to express Himself.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  7. Iconoclast

    Iconoclast
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    13,374
    Likes Received:
    728
    This idea is D.OA.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,968
    Likes Received:
    128
    Was Luke included among those of the circumcision?

    Colossians 4:10–15


    (NIV)
    My fellow prisoner Aristarchus sends you his greetings, as does Mark, the cousin of Barnabas. (You have received instructions about him; if he comes to you, welcome him.) Jesus, who is called Justus, also sends greetings. These are the only Jews among my co-workers for the kingdom of God, and they have proved a comfort to me. Epaphras, who is one of you and a servant of Christ Jesus, sends greetings. He is always wrestling in prayer for you, that you may stand firm in all the will of God, mature and fully assured. I vouch for him that he is working hard for you and for those at Laodicea and Hierapolis. Our dear friend Luke, the doctor, and Demas send greetings. Give my greetings to the brothers and sisters at Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church in her house.

    (AV)
    Aristarchus my fellowprisoner saluteth you, and Marcus, sister’s son to Barnabas, (touching whom ye received commandments: if he come unto you, receive him;) and Jesus, which is called Justus, who are of the circumcision. These only are my fellowworkers unto the kingdom of God, which have been a comfort unto me. Epaphras, who is one of you, a servant of Christ, saluteth you, always labouring fervently for you in prayers, that ye may stand perfect and complete in all the will of God. For I bear him record, that he hath a great zeal for you, and them that are in Laodicea, and them in Hierapolis. Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas, greet you.

    Rob
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. ReformedBaptist

    ReformedBaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,894
    Likes Received:
    27
    Perhaps there is an opportunity here to teach concerning the nature of how God penned His Word. It seems the OP gives the impression that God worked through men in the way we have seen or heard about with the cultist practice of automatic writing. Well, this is certainly nothing of the kind with our Bibles. Nor was it in such a fashion with the prophets when they spoke by the Holy Spirit. We do not have holy men becoming "possessed" and losing control of themselves because they have been taken over by our Lord. No. This is not the way the Lord has spoken to men and through men either by word or pen.

    But that said, what say ye? Should we outline the teaching about how God inspired Scripture?
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  10. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,071
    Likes Received:
    101
    This seems to be one of the many places your penchant for archaic language leads you astray. "Accurate," the ASV reads, not "perfect."

    Besides, if Luke were a Gentile, and not a Jew, how would that invalidate his writing? After all, didn't you say he was simply God's pen?
     
    • Useful Useful x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,071
    Likes Received:
    101
    Again, you are misled by your reading of the text. Luke is not talking about "secular" writings, but the writings of those who were eyewitnesses of Jesus' ministry.

    "Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
    Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; "

    Thus, the ones who delivered the declaration "of those things which are most surely believed among us" were not "secularists" but "eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word."

    Really, sometimes this is just pathetic.

    I know you desperately want to defend the King James Version, but these kind of posts prove you can't understand it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,071
    Likes Received:
    101
    Yes. You cannot read the Bible without realizing that, though there is a thread of continuity from fall to redemption to restoration, God has chosen to express himself through men. You won't confuse Genesis with the Psalms or the Gospels with the Pauline Epistles of James. Yet all are inspired.

    Now, we could have a homogenized scripture, as the Muslims do with the recension of the Koran, but we don't.

    I admit this can be a little semantic. Did God select the individual words he wanted disseminated or did he choose men whose experiences would lead them to write exactly what he wanted written. The answer may be the first, the second, or both. I tend to think the latter. In each age, God chose the men who would write just what he wanted written in the way those men would present it. At least that's my own view.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  13. beameup

    beameup
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Messages:
    915
    Likes Received:
    2
    I understand that Luke wrote with the defense of Paul, before Caesar, in mind.
     
  14. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,535
    Likes Received:
    206
    I'm not sure I understand the point of this thread. If we say Luke is a Gentile (I'm not saying that), how does it undermine God's Word?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,647
    Likes Received:
    187
    I will freely confess that I have always thought of Luke as non-Jewish convert. Not sure where I came to that conclusion, but it seemed like several places in Acts where Luke is not considered part of the ethnic Jews.

    However, I have not given it any serious consideration or study.
     
  16. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,273
    Likes Received:
    777
    Col 4:10 Aristarchus my fellow prisoner greets you, and Mark the cousin of Barnabas (concerning whom you have received instructions—if he comes to you, welcome him),
    Col 4:11 and Jesus who is called Justus. These are the only men of the circumcision among my fellow workers for the kingdom of God, and they have been a comfort to me.
    Col 4:12 Epaphras, who is one of you, a servant of Christ Jesus, greets you, always struggling on your behalf in his prayers, that you may stand mature and fully assured in all the will of God.
    Col 4:13 For I bear him witness that he has worked hard for you and for those in Laodicea and in Hierapolis.
    Col 4:14 Luke the beloved physician greets you, as does Demas.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,273
    Likes Received:
    777
    "A suggestion that has greater merit is that Luke was a god-fearer, a gentile who had strong sympathies for Judaism without becoming a convert. Such hypothesis explains, on the one hand, Colossians 4:10-14 and the Gentile focus of Luke's writings, and, on the other hand, the author's intimate knowledge of the Old Testament (in Greek) and Judaism."

    Douglas Moo; D.A. Carson, An Introduction to the New Testament. (Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 2005) pg.206
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  18. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,123
    Likes Received:
    1,297
    The phrase "of the circumcision" is more likely used to differentiate between those Christians who strictly observed the rituals of Judaism and those who did not. Luke, being a Hellenized Jew, obviously did not. (See: Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. "The Gospels" pp. 266–268.

    Strelan, Rick. Luke the Priest – the Authority of the Author of the Third Gospel – Was Luke a Jew or Gentile? Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., May 1, 2013, pages 102–110.

    Encyclopædia Britannica, Micropædia vol. 7, p. 554–555. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc, 1998. ISBN 0-85229-633-9.

    And here is an excellent article by Thomas S. McCall, Th.D. Was Luke a Gentile?

    http://www.levitt.com/essays/luke

    Romand 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
    2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  19. JonShaff

    JonShaff
    Expand Collapse
    Fellow Servant

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2015
    Messages:
    587
    Likes Received:
    86
    Is it any consolation that Paul has grouped himself with many Gentile Ministers? Titus, Timothy(half), Luke? Wouldn't it make sense to have Godly Gentiles with him as he ministered to the gentiles? Just a thought
     
  20. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    It is possible that Luke was of Jewish ancestry, but his own writings show us clearly that he was raised and educated in a Gentile environment with his first language being Greek rather than Aramaic or Hebrew. Moreover, the Apostle Paul refers to Luke as “the beloved physician” in Col. 4:14, and first-century physicians in the Hellenistic world were Gentiles rather than Jews. Furthermore, the name ‘Luke’ is a shortened version of the Latin name ; “Lucanus.” Are we to suppose that Hebrew parents would give their child a Roman name?

    Every Christian who has even a basic knowledge of the world into which Jesus was born knows that Jesus was not born while Quirinius was governor of Syria,” but at least ten years earlier. However, we read in verse 2,

    Luke 2:2 αυτη απογραφη πρωτη εγενετο ηγεμονευοντος της συριας κυρηνιου

    Luke 2:2 This was the first census taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. (NASB, 1995)

    How can this be? Luke tells us very clearly how this can be,

    1. Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us,
    2. just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word,
    3. it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write {it} out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus;
    4. so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught. (NASB, 1995)


    Luke, according to is own testimony, “investigated everything carefully from the beginning,” but being a human being, he made a mistake. God did not make a mistake—Luke made the mistake, and his error has been preserved for us in his gospel. Many people, however, have made the mistake of not carefully reading Luke 1:1-4, and have jumped to the conclusion that that such an error would constitute an error in inspired Scripture. Conversely, inspired Scripture tells us that Luke “investigated everything carefully from the beginning,” and it tells us the result in this particular case.
     

Share This Page

Loading...