home > P - to dream > Luke ch 5 st 1 11 interpretation. Large Christian Library

Luke ch 5 st 1 11 interpretation. Large Christian Library

1 The calling of Simon Peter, James and John. 12 Healing of the leper and paralytic. 27 The calling of Levi; "Not righteous, but sinners." 33 Fasting during the days of the "groom"; "new wine"

1 One day, when the people were crowding to Him to hear the word of God, and He was standing by the lake of Gennesaret,

2 He saw two boats standing on the lake; and the fishermen, coming out of them, washed out the nets.

3 Entering into one boat, which was Simon's, He begged him to put out a little from the shore, and sat down and taught the people from the boat.

4 And when he had ceased to teach, he said to Simon, sail out into the deep, and let down your nets to catch.

5 Simon answered him, Master! we toiled all night and caught nothing, but at your word I will cast down the net.

6 Having done this, they caught a great multitude of fish, and even their net broke.

7 And they signaled to their comrades who were in the other boat to come and help them; and they came and filled both boats, so that they began to sink.

8 Seeing this, Simon Peter fell on Jesus' knees and said, Get out of me, Lord! because I am a sinful person.

9 For terror seized him, and all who were with him, from this fishing of the fishes which they had caught;

10 also James and John, the sons of Zebedee, who were partners with Simon. And Jesus said to Simon: don't be afraid; from now on you will catch people.

11 And having pulled both boats ashore, they left everything and followed him.

12 While Jesus was in a certain city, a man came in covered with leprosy, and when he saw Jesus, he fell on his face, imploring him and saying, Lord! if you want, you can cleanse me.

13 He stretched out his hand, touched him, and said, I am willing, be cleansed. And immediately the leprosy left him.

14 And he commanded him not to tell anyone, but to go and show himself to the priest and bring sacrifice for their cleansing, as Moses commanded, as a testimony to them.

15 But the more the rumor spread about Him, and a great multitude of people flocked to Him to listen and be healed by Him from their diseases.

16 But He went into deserted places and prayed.

17 One day, while he was teaching, and the Pharisees and the teachers of the law were sitting there, who had come from all the places of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem, and the power of the Lord appeared in healing sick, –

18 Behold, some brought on the bed of a man who was paralyzed, and tried to bring him to the house and put before Jesus;

19 And, not finding where to carry him beyond the multitude, they climbed on top of the house and let him down through the roof with his bed into the middle before Jesus.

20 And he, seeing their faith, said to that man: your sins are forgiven you.

21 The scribes and Pharisees began to reason, saying, Who is this that blasphemes? Who can forgive sins except God alone?

22 Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said to them, what do you think in your hearts?

23 Which is easier to say, "Your sins are forgiven you," or to say, "Get up and walk"?

24 But that you may know that the Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins He said to the paralytic: I say to you, get up, take up your bed and go to your house.

25 And immediately he stood before them, took what he had been lying on, and went into his house, glorifying God.

26 And terror seized them all, and they glorified God, and being filled with fear, they said, We have seen marvelous things today.

27 After this Jesus went out and saw a publican named Levi sitting at the tax office, and he said to him, Follow me.

28 And he left everything and got up and followed him.

29 And Levi made a great feast for him in his house; and there were multitudes of publicans and others who reclined with them.

30 But the scribes and the Pharisees murmured and said to his disciples, Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?

31 Jesus answered and said to them: those who are not healthy need a doctor, but the sick;

32 I came to call not the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

33 And they said to him, Why do the disciples of John fast often and pray, also the Pharisees, but yours eat and drink?

34 He said to them: Can you force the sons of the bridal chamber to fast when the bridegroom is with them?

35 But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast in those days.

36 And he said to them a parable: no one puts patches on shabby clothes, tearing them off new clothes; otherwise it will tear the new one, and the patch from the new one will not fit the old one..

37 And no one pours new wine into old wineskins; otherwise, the young wine will break through the wineskins, and it will flow out by itself, and the wineskins will be lost.;

38 but new wine must be poured into new wineskins; then both will be saved.

39 And no one drinking old wine, does not immediately want the young, for he says: "the old is better".

Found a mistake in the text? Select it and press: Ctrl + Enter

Gospel of Luke 5

1–11. Calling Simon. - 12-26. Healing the leper and the paralytic. - 27-39. A feast at the publican Levi.

Luke 5:1. Once, when the people crowded to Him to hear the word of God, and He stood by the Lake of Gennesaret,

During the sermon that Christ was holding, standing on the very shore of the Lake of Gennesaret (cf. Mt. 4:18), the people began to press Him so hard that it was difficult for Him to stay on the shore longer (cf. Mt. 4:18; Mk. 1 :16).

Luke 5:2. He saw two boats standing on the lake; and the fishermen, coming out of them, washed out the nets.

"Washed out the nets." Evangelist Luke pays attention only to this work, other evangelists speak about mending nets (Mk. 1:19) or only about casting nets (Mt. 4:18). It was necessary to wash the nets in order to free them from shells and sand that got into them.

Luke 5:3. Entering one boat, which was Simon's, He asked him to sail a little from the shore and, sitting down, taught the people from the boat.

Simon was already a disciple of Christ (see John 1 et seq.) - only he was not yet called, like the other apostles, to constantly follow Christ and continued to fish.

For the position of Christ in the boat during the sermon, see Mk. 4:1.

Luke 5:4. When he had ceased to teach, he said to Simon, Set sail into the deep, and let down your nets for fishing.

Luke 5:5. Simon said to Him in answer: Master! we toiled all night and caught nothing, but at your word I will cast down the net.

Luke 5:6. Having done this, they caught a great number of fish, and even their net broke.

Luke 5:7. And they gave a sign to the comrades who were on the other boat to come to help them; and they came and filled both boats, so that they began to sink.

The Lord invites Simon to swim away to a deep place and cast nets there to catch fish. Simon, addressing the Lord as a “Mentor” (ἐπιστάτα! – instead of “rabbi”, which is often used by other evangelists), notices that the catch can hardly be expected, he and his comrades tried to catch even at night - at the best hours for fishing. catching - and yet they didn't catch anything. But nevertheless, by faith in the word of Christ, which, as Simon knows, has miraculous power, he fulfills the will of Christ and receives a huge booty as a reward. This prey is so great that the nets have already begun to break through in some places, and Simon and his companions began to signal with their hands to the fishermen who remained in another boat near the shore, so that they would quickly go to their aid, but it was unnecessary to shout because of the distance Simon's boats from the shore. The “comrades”, obviously, were watching Simon’s boat all the time, as they heard what Christ said to Simon.

Luke 5:8. Seeing this, Simon Peter fell on Jesus' knees and said, Get out of me, Lord! because I am a sinful person.

Luke 5:9. For horror seized him and all who were with him from this fishing of the fishes they caught;

Both Simon and the others who were there were extremely frightened, and Simon even began to ask the Lord to get out of the boat, because he felt that his sinfulness might suffer from the holiness of Christ (cf. Luke 1:12, 2:9; 1 Sam. 17:18).

“From this catch” - more precisely: “the catch that they took” (in Russian translation it is inaccurate: “caught by them”). Simon was especially struck by this miracle, not because he had not seen the miracles of Christ before, but because it happened according to some special intentions of the Lord, without any request from Simon himself. He realized that the Lord wanted to give him some special assignment, and fear of an unknown future filled his soul.

Luke 5:10. also James and John, the sons of Zebedee, who were partners with Simon. And Jesus said to Simon, Do not be afraid; from now on you will catch people.

Luke 5:11. And having pulled both boats ashore, they left everything and followed Him.

The Lord reassures Simon and reveals to him the purpose that he had when miraculously sent Simon the richest catch of fish. This was a symbolic act that pointed out to Simon the success he would have when he began to convert whole masses of people to Christ with his preaching. Evangelist, obviously, was presented here with that great event, which took place mainly due to the preaching of the Apostle Peter on the day of Pentecost, namely, the conversion of three thousand people to Christ (Acts 2:41).

"They left everything." Although the Lord spoke only to one Simon, but, apparently, other disciples of the Lord realized that the time had come for all of them to leave their usual activities and travel with their Teacher. However, this was not yet the calling of the disciples to the apostolic ministry, such was done after (Lk. 6 et seq.).

Negative criticism points out that the first two evangelists say nothing about the miraculous catch of fish, and concludes that the evangelist Luke here merged into one event two completely different times: the calling of the disciples to be fishers of people (Matt. 4:18-22 ) and miraculous fishing after the resurrection of Christ (John 21). But the miraculous fishing in the Gospel of John and the miraculous fishing in the Gospel of Luke have completely different meanings. The first speaks of the restoration of the Apostle Peter in his apostolic ministry, and the second speaks only of the preparation for this ministry: here Peter is just beginning to think about the great activity to which the Lord calls him. Therefore, there is no doubt that this is not at all the catch reported by the Evangelist John. But in this case, how can the two first evangelists and the third be reconciled? Why do the first two evangelists say nothing about the slave's catch? Some interpreters (for example, Keil), conscious of their impotence to resolve this issue, argue that the Evangelist Luke does not have in mind the calling that the first two evangelists talk about (Explanation on Heb. Matt. ch. IV). But the whole situation of the event does not allow us to think that it could repeat itself and that the evangelist Luke was not talking about the moment in the gospel history that the evangelists Matthew and Mark have in mind. Therefore, it would be better to say that the first two evangelists did not attach as much importance to the symbolic fishing that it had in the eyes of Luke. In fact, the Evangelist Luke, who described in the book of Acts the preaching activity of the Apostle Peter and, obviously, had long been interested in everything that had to do with this apostle, it seemed very important to note in the Gospel that symbolic foreshadowing of the success of the future activity of the Apostle Peter, which is contained in the story of the miraculous catch of fish.

Luke 5:12. When Jesus was in a certain city, a man came in covered with leprosy, and when he saw Jesus, he fell on his face, imploring Him and saying: Lord! if you want, you can cleanse me.

Luke 5:13. He stretched out his hand, touched him and said: I want, be cleansed. And immediately the leprosy left him.

Luke 5:14. And He commanded him not to tell anyone, but to go and show himself to the priest and offer a sacrifice for his cleansing, as Moses commanded, as a testimony to them.

(See Matt. 8:2-4; Mark 1:40-44).

Evangelist Luke follows Mark here more.

Luke 5:15. But the more the rumor spread about Him, and a great multitude of people flocked to Him to listen and be healed by Him from their diseases.

Luke 5:16. But He would go to deserted places and pray.

The evangelist Luke kept silent about the disobedience of the leper (cf. Mark 1:45).

"Moreover", i.e. to an even greater extent than before (μᾶλλον). The prohibition to speak only further encouraged people to spread the rumor about the Miracle Worker.

Luke 5:17. One day, when He was teaching, and the Pharisees and the teachers of the law were sitting there, who had come from all the places of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem, and the power of the Lord appeared in healing the sick, -

Luke 5:18. behold, some brought on a bed a man who was paralyzed, and tried to bring him into the house and put him before Jesus;

Luke 5:19. and, not finding where to carry him for the crowd, they climbed on top of the house and lowered him through the roof with his bed into the middle before Jesus.

Luke 5:20. And He, seeing their faith, said to that man, Your sins are forgiven you.

Luke 5:21. The scribes and Pharisees began to reason, saying, Who is this that blasphemes? Who can forgive sins except God alone?

Luke 5:22. Jesus, understanding their thoughts, said to them in answer, What are you thinking in your hearts?

Luke 5:23. Which is easier to say, Your sins are forgiven you, or to say, Arise and walk?

Luke 5:24. But so that you may know that the Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins, He said to the paralytic: I say to you, Arise, take up your bed, and go to your house.

Luke 5:25. And he immediately stood up before them, took what he was lying on, and went to his house, glorifying God.

Luke 5:26. And terror seized them all, and they glorified God, and being filled with fear, they said: We have seen marvelous things today.

(See Matt. 9:2-8; Mark 2:3-12).

Evangelist Luke makes some additions to the narrative of the first two evangelists.

“In one day”, i.e. on one of those days, precisely during the journey undertaken by the Lord (see Luke 4 et seq.).

"Teachers of the Law" (see Matt. 22:35).

"Out of all places" is a hyperbolic expression. The motives for the arrival of the scribes and Pharisees could be very diverse, but, of course, an unfriendly attitude towards Christ prevailed among them.

"The power of the Lord", i.e. the power of God. Evangelist Luke, where he calls Christ the Lord, writes the word κύριος with the article (ὁ κύριος), but here κυρίου is put - without the article.

"Through the roof", i.e. through the tiles (διὰ τῶν κεράμων), which laid the roof of the house. They dismantled the tiles in one place (in Mk 2:4, the roof appears to be such that you need to “dig through”).

“He said to the man: they say goodbye ...” - more correctly: “he said to him: man! are forgiven…” Christ calls the paralytic not a “child,” as in other cases (for example, Matt. 9:2), but simply a “man,” probably referring to his former sinful life.

"Knowing their thoughts." Some critics here point to the contradiction of the Evangelist Luke to himself: just now he said that the scribes reasoned aloud among themselves, so that Christ could hear their conversations, and now he says that Christ penetrated into their thoughts, which they kept to themselves, as Evangelist Mark noted. But there is no contradiction here. Christ could hear the conversation of the scribes among themselves - Luke kept silent about this - but at the same time He penetrated the thought into the secret thoughts that they hid. They, therefore, according to the Evangelist Luke, did not say everything they thought...

The impression made by this miracle on the people (verse 26), according to the Evangelist Luke, was stronger than Matthew and Mark portrayed.

Luke 5:27. After this, Jesus went out and saw a tax collector named Levi sitting at the tax office, and he said to him, Follow me.

Luke 5:28. And he, leaving everything, got up and followed Him.

Luke 5:29. And Levi made a great feast for him in his house; and there were multitudes of publicans and others who reclined with them.

Luke 5:30. But the scribes and Pharisees murmured and said to His disciples: Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?

Luke 5:31. Jesus answered and said to them: It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick;

Luke 5:32. I came to call not the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Luke 5:33. They said to Him: why do the disciples of John fast often and pray, also the Pharisees, but yours eat and drink?

Luke 5:34. He said to them, Can you force the sons of the bridal chamber to fast when the bridegroom is with them?

Luke 5:35. But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast in those days.

Luke 5:36. At the same time, he told them a parable: no one puts patches on old clothes, having torn them off from new clothes; otherwise, the new one will be torn apart, and the patch from the new one will not fit the old one.

Luke 5:37. And no one pours new wine into old wineskins; otherwise, the new wine will break through the wineskins and flow out by itself, and the wineskins will be lost;

Luke 5:38. but new wine must be poured into new wineskins; then both will be saved.

Luke 5:39. And no one, having drunk old wine, immediately wants new, for he says: the old is better.

The evangelist Luke describes the calling of the publican Levi and the feast arranged by him in accordance with Mark (Mark 2:13-22; cf. Matt. 9:9-17), only occasionally supplementing his story.

"Left out" - out of the city.

“I saw” is more correct: “began to look, observe” (ἐθεάσατο).

“Leaving everything”, i.e. his office and everything that was in it!

“Followed” - more precisely: “followed” (the imperfect past tense verb ἠκολούθει, according to the best reading, means constant following of Christ).

"And others who reclined with them." This is how the Evangelist Luke replaces Mark's expression "sinners" (Mark 2:15). About the fact that there were "sinners" at the table, he says in verse 30.

Why are the disciples of John... The Evangelist Luke does not mention that the disciples of John themselves turned to Christ with questions (cf. Matthew and Mark). This is because he reduces this picture, which the first two evangelists divide into two scenes, into one scene. Why the disciples of John found themselves this time with the Pharisees, this is due to the similarity in their religious exercises. In fact, of course, the spirit of the Pharisees' fasts and prayers was completely different from that of the disciples of John, who at one time denounced the Pharisees quite a lot (Matt. 3). The prayers that the disciples of John said - only the Evangelist Luke mentions this - were probably set for different hours of the day, the so-called Jewish "shma" (cf. Mt. 6:5).

"At this he told them a parable..." Having explained that the Pharisees and the disciples of John cannot make claims about the failure of the disciples of Christ to fast (there is no question of prayer, because, of course, the disciples of Christ prayed), the Lord further explains that, on the other hand, His disciples should not severely condemn Pharisees and disciples of John because they strictly adhere to the Old Testament decrees or, better, the habits of antiquity. It is really impossible to take one piece from new clothes in order to mend old ones: a piece from new clothes will not fit the old clothes, and the new one will also be spoiled by such a clipping. This means that to the Old Testament worldview, on the basis of which even the disciples of John the Baptist, not to mention the Pharisees, continued to stand, one should not attach only one piece of the new, Christian worldview, in the form of a free attitude to the fasts established by Jewish tradition (not by the Law of Moses) . What will happen if the disciples of John borrow only this freedom from the disciples of Christ? For the rest, after all, their worldview will not change in anything, but meanwhile they will violate the integrity of their own view, and at the same time the new teaching, Christian, with which they will later have to get acquainted, will lose for them the impression of integrity.

"And no one pours ...". Here is another parable, but of exactly the same content as the first. New wine has to be poured into new wineskins because it has to ferment and the wineskins will stretch very much. Old wineskins will not withstand this fermentation process, they will burst - and why donate them in vain? They may come in handy for something: It is clear that Christ here again points to the futility of forcing the disciples of John, unprepared to accept His teaching in general, to learn one rule of Christian freedom. For the time being, let the bearers of this freedom be people who are able to perceive and assimilate it. He, so to speak, excuses the disciples of John for the fact that they still form some kind of separate circle, standing out of fellowship with Him: The same excuse to the disciples of John is contained in the last parable that old wine tastes better (verse 39). The Lord wants to say by this that for Him it is quite understandable that people who are accustomed to certain orders of life and have adopted certain views for themselves long ago hold on to them with all their might and that the old seems pleasant to them.

Found a mistake in the text? Select it and press: Ctrl + Enter

Once, when the people crowded to Him to hear the word of God, and He stood by the Lake of Gennesaret,

He saw two boats standing on the lake; and the fishermen who came out of them washed their nets.

Entering one boat, which was Simon's, He asked him to sail a little from the shore and, sitting down, taught the people from the boat.

When he had ceased to teach, he said to Simon, Set sail into the depths, and let down your nets for fishing.

Simon said to Him in answer: Master! we worked all night and caught nothing; but at your word I will cast down the net.

Having done this, they caught a great number of fish, and even their net broke.

And they gave a sign to the comrades who were on the other boat to come to help them; and they came and filled both boats, so that they began to sink.

Seeing this, Simon Peter fell on Jesus' knees and said, Get out of me, Lord! because I am a sinful person.

For horror seized him and all who were with him from this fishing of the fishes they caught; Also James and John, the sons of Zebedee, who were partners with Simon. And Jesus said to Simon, Do not be afraid; from now on you will catch people.

And having pulled both boats ashore, they left everything and followed Him.

The famous lake of Galilee is known under three names: the Sea of Galilee, the Sea of Tiberias and the Lake of Gennesaret. The lake has a length of 21 kilometers, and in wide places it reaches 12 kilometers. It lies in a depression in the earth's crust 208 meters below sea level, as a result of which the climate there is almost tropical. Currently, the lake is not very popular, but at the time of Jesus, nine cities were located on its shores, each with a population of at least 15 thousand inhabitants.

In fact, Gennesaret is the name of the beautiful plain that spreads out on the western side of the lake; the land of this plain is very fertile. The Jews were great fans of explaining the meaning of various words in their own way, and to explain the name Gennesaret they found three options, each of which shows how beautiful this area was. They formed these names from the words:

1) kinnor, meaning harp, because "the fruits of this valley are as sweet as the sound of a harp," or because "the sound of the waves of the lake is as sweet as the sound of a harp."

2) gan garden, and sar - prince, that is, "the king of gardens."

3) Gan - garden; and Asher - wealth, abundance, that is, the "garden of abundance."

Here is a turning point in the life of Jesus. When we last heard him preach, he was in the synagogue; now He preaches by the lake. True, He will again preach in the synagogue; but the time is coming when the door of the synagogue will be closed to him, and the lakeside or the road will be his church, and the boat will be his pulpit. He will be in all places where people will listen to Him. “Our churches,” says John Wesley, “were founded by those who walked the dark mountains and did not belong to any Christian church; but they were awakened by the Methodists who followed them through the deserts of the world, along the high roads of life, into the back alleys, to the bazaars and fairs, over mountains and valleys; and erected the banner of the Crucifixion on the streets and alleys of cities, in villages, in barns, in peasant kitchens and in other places, but they did it in such a way and on such a scale that people have not seen since the era of the Apostles. “I love a comfortable room,” Wesley said, “a soft pillow and a beautiful pulpit, but preaching in the field saves souls.” When the door of the synagogue was closed to Him, Jesus spoke to the people on the highways.

This passage gives the conditions under which a miracle can be performed.

1) Seeing eyes. A person needs eyes that really see. Many people have seen steam lift the lid of a boiler, but only James Watt and Polzunov built a steam engine. Many people have seen an apple fall, but only Isaac Newton was inspired by the law of gravitation to think about the law of gravity. To the eye that can see, the world is full of wonders.

2) Enterprise. When Jesus invited the fishermen to cast their nets, no matter how tired Simon was, he was ready to try his luck again. The misfortune of many people is that they fold their hands when they only need to make one effort.

3) Faith. Willingness to do what seems hopeless. The night, the time for fishing, passed, all circumstances seemed unfavorable for fishing, but Simon said: “Let the circumstances be against us, but according to Your word we will try again.” Too often we wait because the time is not favorable. If we waited for the perfect set of circumstances, we would never start any business at all. If we want a miracle, we must take Jesus at his word when he calls you to do the impossible.

Luke 5:12-15 Touching the Untouchable

When Jesus was in a certain city, a man came in covered with leprosy, and when he saw Jesus, he fell on his face, imploring Him and saying: Lord! if you want, you can cleanse me.

He stretched out his hand, touched him and said: I want, be cleansed. And immediately the leprosy left him.

And He commanded him not to tell anyone, but to go and show himself to the priest and offer a sacrifice for his purification, as Moses commanded, as a testimony to them.

But even more so, the rumor about Him spread, and a great multitude of people flocked to Him - to listen and be healed by Him from their diseases.

In Palestine, two kinds of leprosy were common. One of them, although it looked like a very terrible skin disease, was actually not as serious as the second one. One of them was a disease that began as a small spot and ate away the flesh of a person until the stump of an arm or leg remained. Such a person was literally a walking death.

In Leviticus chapters 13 and 14 there are provisions concerning lepers. The worst thing for the patient was isolation. The leper had to shout: “Unclean! unclean!" Wherever he went, he was doomed to loneliness; "he must live alone, outside the camp of his dwelling" (A lion. 13, 45.46). He was expelled from human society and forced to leave their home. As a consequence of all this, the psychological effects of leprosy were—and still are—as dire as the physical ones.

Dr. A. B. McDonald, in an article on the Utu leper colony he ran, wrote: “The leper suffers as much in soul as in body. For some reason, people treat leprosy differently than they treat all other disfiguring diseases. It causes shame and horror in people and for some reason carries with it a sense of guilt, although it is infected with it just as accidentally as other infectious diseases. Lepers are shunned and despised, and therefore they often contemplate suicide, and some even commit it.”

Everyone hated the leper until he began to hate himself. And such a man came to Jesus; he was unclean and Jesus touched him.

1) Jesus touched the untouchable. His hand turned to a man that everyone would turn their backs on. We are faced with two tasks: first, even when we ourselves despise ourselves, when our hearts are filled with shame, the hand of Christ is stretched out to us. Mark Rutherford wanted to add another beatitude: "Blessed are those who heal us of self-contempt." After all, this is what Jesus Christ did and does all the time. And, firstly, the essence of Christianity lies precisely in touching the untouchable, in loving those who are unworthy of love, in forgiving those who do not deserve forgiveness. Jesus did it, and so should we.

2) Jesus sent the cured to offer the statutory sacrifice of atonement. The provisions of this rite are given in A lion. 14. In other words, His miracle took into account here the positive medicine of the time. It did not exempt a person from the fulfillment of legal norms. We will never be able to perform miracles if we lose sight of the gifts and wisdom God has given us. Miracles happen when a person's talent is combined with the grace and mercy of God.

3) Verse 15 speaks of the glory that Jesus enjoyed. But people praised Him only because they wanted to use Him. Many would like to possess the gifts of God, but deny His commandments. And this is the most dishonorable of all.

Luke 5:16-17 Opposition intensifies

But He would go to deserted places and pray.

One day when He was teaching, and the Pharisees and the teachers of the law were sitting there, who had come from all the places of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem, and the power of the Lord appeared in healing the sick, -

We have only two verses. But, after reading them, we think, because we see that it has come important point in the ministry of Jesus: Pharisees and teachers of the law appeared, His opponents, who will not rest until they kill Him; appeared without any disguise, in broad daylight.

In order to understand Jesus, one must understand His attitude to the law, as well as the attitude of the teachers of the law and the Pharisees to Him. Upon their return from the Babylonian captivity about 44 BC, the Jews realized that their hopes for the greatness of their people had sunk forever. Therefore, they decided that they would gain their greatness by keeping the law. And since then they have put all their efforts into learning and keeping the law of God.

The basis of the law consisted of the Ten Commandments, which set out the general principles of life. They are not normative in relation to each given incident or event under any circumstances. However, some Jews considered this interpretation of the commandments insufficient. What they wanted was not general principles, but a rule governing every possible position. And on the basis of the Ten Commandments, they worked out these rules.

For example, the Commandments say: “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy,” and further that no work can be done on the Sabbath ( Is. 20:8-11). But the Jews then asked: "What is work?" and further refined this concept in thirty-nine paragraphs, which they called the "fathers of the case." But this was not enough for them: each of these points was, in turn, detailed. These rules were called verbal law and they even began to be preferred over the Ten Commandments.

Let's look at another example. Among the work that was forbidden on the Sabbath was the carrying of weights. In Jer. 17:21-24 it is said: “Thus says the Lord: take care of your souls, and do not carry burdens on the Sabbath day ...” But, the teachers of the law argued, it should be precisely defined what is meant by the word burden. And such a definition was given: under the burden one should understand “food by weight equal to the dried fruit of a fig, a sip of milk, a cup of wine; enough fragrant oil to anoint one small penis human body; water sufficient for the manufacture of eye ointment; a piece of paper large enough for a small entry at customs; ink that can write two letters; a reed from which you can make a stick for writing ... "and so on, and so on without end. So, if a tailor wore a needle in his clothes on Saturday, this was considered a violation of the law and a sin; picking up a stone to throw at a bird was considered sinful on the Sabbath. Virtue began to be identified with these innumerable rules and regulations.

Let's take another example. Treating a person on the Sabbath was considered work. The rules stated that treatment could only be carried out if a person's life was really in danger; moreover, only steps could be taken that prevented further deterioration of health, but did not improve it. A simple bandage could be applied to the wound, but without any medication. A sore ear could be plugged with a swab, but again without any medicine. From this it is clear that there was no end to the restrictions.

The teachers of the law were experts in the law, for they knew all the rules and norms, and they themselves deduced them from the law. The name is Pharisee means: “isolated” and the Pharisees really separated themselves from people and normal life in order to comply with all norms and charters. Let's note two points. First, for the Pharisees and scribes, these rules were a matter of life and death: breaking one of them was considered a mortal sin. Secondly, only people sincerely confident in the importance of these rules tried to follow them, because the observance of all the rules made a person's life extremely inconvenient. Only the best of the people generally tried to fulfill all these requirements.

Jesus saw no need to keep such rules. In His eyes, the need of man was above all these statutes. But to the scribes and Pharisees, He was a lawbreaker, a dangerous man who taught other people to do the same. That is why they hated and eventually crucified Him. The tragedy of Jesus' life is that it was precisely those people who were most serious about religion who demanded His crucifixion. The irony was precisely that the best people of that time crucified Him.

Since that time, He has not been given rest. He was always watched closely by hostile and critical eyes. His opponents realized the impending danger and united, and there could be only one way out of the situation.

Jesus knew this, and therefore, before meeting with his opponents, he retired to pray. The love of God rewarded Him for the hatred of men. The approval of God gave Him strength and courage to resist the critical attitude of some people towards Him. The peace of God gave Him strength in the struggle, and the disciples should have become like their Lord.

Luke 5:18-26 Forgiven and Healed

Behold, some brought on a bed a man who was paralyzed, and tried to carry him into the house and put him before Jesus;

And not finding where to carry him, for the crowd, they brought him to the top of the house and through the roof they let him down with his bed in the middle before Jesus

And He, seeing their faith, said to that man, your sins are forgiven you.

The scribes and Pharisees began to reason, saying, who is this that blasphemes? Who can forgive sins except God alone"

Jesus, understanding their thoughts, said to them in answer, What are you thinking in your hearts?

Which is easier to say 1 “your sins are forgiven you” or to say “arise and walk” 9

But so that you know that the Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins, He said to the paralytic: I say to you, get up, take up your bed and go to your house.

And he immediately stood up before them, took what he was lying on, and went to his house, glorifying God.

And horror seized everyone, and glorified God; being filled with fear, they said: We have seen marvelous things today.

Here is an impressive miracle. The roofs of houses in Palestine were flat; they had only a slight slope, just enough for rainwater to run off. The roofs were made of beams, which were laid from wall to wall at a small distance from each other, and these gaps were laid with tight bundles of branches fastened with lime mortar and smeared on top with the same solution. There was nothing easier than to take out such a bundle of branches lying between the beams. As a matter of fact, the coffin was delivered to the house and carried out of it often through the roof.

But what is the meaning of this passage about the forgiveness of sins? It must be remembered that in the minds of the inhabitants of Palestine, sin and suffering were inextricably linked. It was unconditionally believed that if someone suffers, then he has sinned. And so the patient suffered even more from feelings of guilt and sinfulness. That is why Jesus first told the paralytic that his sins were forgiven. Without it, the person would not believe that he could be healed. This shows how, in the ensuing dispute, Jesus utterly shattered the theory of the Pharisees and the scribes. They knew that Jesus did not have the power to forgive people's sins. But, according to their own statements and assumptions, man is sick precisely because he has sinned; and if this person received healing, then this is evidence that his sin is forgiven. The Pharisees' argument boomeranged against them and silenced them.

It is amazing that a man was saved by the faith of his friends. When Jesus saw faith the passionate faith of people who were not stopped by anything to bring their friend to Jesus, this faith contributed to the healing of the sick. This still happens today.

1) There are people who have been influenced by the faith of their parents. Carlisle used to say that for many years he heard the voice of his mother: "Believe in God and do what is right." When Augustine led a reckless and immoral life, his devotedly loving mother came to the Christian bishop for help. “It is inconceivable,” he said, “that the child of such prayers and tears should perish.” Many of us will gladly testify that everything we are, and can ever be, we owe to our godly parents.

2) Others are constantly influenced by the faith of those who love them. When the newly married and prosperous HG Wells began to overcome new temptations and temptations, he once said: “What a blessing for me that such a sweet and clean creature was sleeping in my house that I could not even think of appearing before her dirty, drunk or downcast. ". Many of us do not commit immoral acts because we could not bear the pain and sadness in the eyes of loved ones.

Thank God that in life itself and in love there are hidden factors that guide the soul and heart of a person.

Luke 5:27-32 Outcast guest

After this, Jesus went out and saw a publican named Levi sitting at the tax office, and he said to him, Follow me.

And he, leaving everything, got up and followed Him.

And Levi made a great feast for him in his house; and there were multitudes of publicans and others who reclined with them.

But the scribes and Pharisees murmured and said to His disciples: Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?

Jesus answered and said to them: It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick;

I came to call not the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Before us is the story of the calling of Matthew (cf. Matt. 9, 9-13). The most hated people in Palestine were the tax collectors. Palestine was under the yoke of the Romans, and the publicans were in the service of the Romans, and therefore they were looked upon as traitors and traitors.

The Romans usually farmed out the collection of taxes. They set a certain amount of tax for each district, and then the right to charge it to the highest bidder. If at the end of each year the tax-farmer paid a fixed amount into the Roman treasury, he was entitled to keep everything he could collect in excess of this amount. And due to the fact that there were no newspapers, no radio, no television, or any other way to inform the population, the common people had no idea what really had to be paid.

This system has been so abused that it was already abolished in New Testament times. Of course, taxes still had to be paid, and there were also corrupt publicans, abuses and exploitation.

There were two types of taxes. First, state taxes were collected. This included the poll tax paid by all men between 14 and 65 years of age and by all women between 12 and 65 years of age. This also included a land tax, amounting to a tenth of the grain harvest and a fifth of the wine and oil harvest. This tax could be paid in kind or money. This also included income tax, which amounted to one percent of all human income. The collection of these taxes did not promise great opportunities for personal enrichment and extortion.

Secondly, various duties were collected. Fees were levied for the use of the main roads, harbors, markets. It was necessary to pay for the cart, for each of its wheels and for the draft animal harnessed to it. Fees were levied on the sale of certain goods, as well as import and export duties. And the tax collector could stop anyone on the road, force him to unpack his luggage and often demand to pay whatever he pleases. If a person had nothing to pay with, the toll collector often offered him money at extortionate interest and entangled him even more in his nets.

People put publicans along with robbers and murderers. They were forbidden to enter the synagogue. A Roman writer mentions that he once saw a monument to an honest tax collector. Honesty among publicans was so rare that a monument was erected to him.

And yet, Jesus chose Matthew, the tax collector, to be His disciple.

2) The scribes and Pharisees objected. They would never have fellowship with a publican. Jesus gave them an excellent answer. Epictetus once called his teaching "the medicine of salvation." Jesus pointed out that only a sick person needs a doctor; and it was those like Matthew and his friends who needed Him the most. It would be good if we looked at the sinner not as a criminal, but as a sick person, and if we looked at a person who made a mistake, not as deserving contempt and condemnation, but who needs help and love to find the right one. road.

Luke 5:33-35 happy community

They said to Him: why do the disciples of John fast often and pray, also the Pharisees, but yours eat and drink?

He said to them, Can you force the sons of the bridal chamber to fast when the bridegroom is with them?

But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast in those days.

The scribes and Pharisees were unpleasantly struck by the fact that the disciples of Christ led a normal life. Collie Knox relates that a well-respected priest told him, "Dear Knox, don't make your religion all misery." It is said that the poet Robert Burns was driven rather than helped by religious conviction. Orthodox Jews believed that a person only becomes religious when he feels uncomfortable in life. This is often true even today.

The Jews carefully observed the system of their religious rites. They fasted on Mondays and Thursdays, and as proof they often painted their faces white. True, this fast was not so serious, because it lasted only from sunrise to sunset, after which it was possible to eat normally. They painted their faces in order to attract the attention of God, and sometimes they imagined that they were making a sacrifice with this. When they fast, they offer their flesh as a sacrifice to God. But the Jews systematized even the procedure of prayer. It was necessary to pray at 12 o'clock in the afternoon, at 3 o'clock and at 6 o'clock in the evening.

Jesus, on the other hand, strongly opposed a religion regulated by rules. And he brings a vivid picture. In Palestine, newlyweds did not go on a honeymoon trip during their honeymoon, but stayed at home and welcomed guests for a whole week. They put on their best clothes, often wore crowns; and were considered king and queen; they obeyed in everything. After all, in all their hard life, they will not have such a week again. And the chosen guests who spent this festive week with them were called the sons of the bridal chamber.

1) It is extremely important to note that Jesus repeatedly compared the life of a Christian to a wedding celebration. Joy is the main feature of the Christian life. One student said of a well-known American teacher, "She made me feel like I was bathed in sunshine." Too many feel that Christianity forces them to do what they would not want to do and prevents them from doing what they would like to do. Cheerfulness, for example, came to be considered a sin, while Paul Phil. 4, 4 calls “Rejoice in the Lord always; and again I say: rejoice,” and one famous philosopher called joy “a fleeting bliss.” Robert Louis Stevenson was right when he wrote in The Heavenly Healer:

“If I did not cope with Your call: rejoice! If I communicated with people with a joyful smile, But I did not answer gratefully to her, If the joyful looks of the oncoming

Extinguished in my stubborn eye,

If morning beauty, summer rain, books

They tried in vain to soften my heart,

You, Lord, pierce with Your love

My spirit and shake it

But if I'm still stubborn, send me torment,

So that even before death

to know and love you."

2) But at the same time, Jesus knew that the day would come "when the bridegroom is taken away from them." Death did not take Him by surprise. Even then He saw His cross ahead; but even this did not prevent Him from radiating that joy that no one can take away, for it is from God, and He is always near.

Luke 5:36-39 New knowledge

At the same time, he told them a parable: no one puts patches on old clothes, tearing them off from new clothes; otherwise, the new one will be torn apart, and the patch from the new one will not fit the old one.

And no one pours new wine into old wineskins; otherwise, the new wine will break through the wineskins and flow out by itself, and the wineskins will be lost;

But young wine must be poured into new wineskins; then both will be saved.

And no one, having drunk old wine, immediately wants new; for he says: the old is better.

Religious people are somehow partial to the past. Progress is felt least in the church. Jesus' views on religion were so progressive that the Pharisees did not want to assimilate them and therefore did not accept them. Over time, the mind loses the flexibility of common sense and refuses new ideas. Jesus gave two examples. “You can’t put a patch on old clothes,” He said, “for new fabric will only tear the old fabric more.” Vessels for wine were made in the East from skins. When young wine was poured into them, it began to ferment and give off gases. Vessels made of new skin had sufficient elasticity to withstand the increasing pressure, and if the vessel was old, it became dry and hard and could easily burst. “Do not allow,” Jesus says, “your mind to become like an old hardened skin.” They say old wine is better. At the moment, this may be so, but people forget that the time will come, and the young wine will be just as aged, and no other will compare with it.

In this passage, Jesus denounces the rigid way of thinking and encourages people not to turn away from new knowledge.

1) People should not be afraid of risky ideas. Since the Holy Spirit exists, God leads us to new knowledge. (Of course, what is said here does not concern the foundations of salvation, since the truth in Christ (Heb. 4, 21).)

Fostick somewhere asks the question: “How would medicine develop if doctors used only medicines and methods three hundred years ago? A person with new knowledge has to fight for their recognition. Galileo was considered a heretic when he declared that the earth revolves around the sun. Lister had to fight for the use of antiseptics in surgery. Simpson had to fight for the use of chloroform, which alleviates the suffering of people. Remember, if we are against new ideas, we demonstrate the inflexibility and decrepitude of our mind; therefore it is worth considering to know His wisdom and power.

2) Never be afraid of new methods. The fact that so all time did, may lead to the cessation of this practice, since, on the contrary, the mere fact that no one has ever done so may turn out to be a strong argument for doing just that. The outdated way cannot be used to conduct business, but the church still uses it. Any community that has lost as many visitors as

the church (in the west) would have turned to new methods long ago, but the Church still tries to turn away from everything new.

During one round-the-world voyage, Rudyard Kipling saw General Booth climbing aboard to the sound of a tambourine. The orthodox and strict soul of Kipling did not like this music. He met General Booth and told him how much he disliked tambourines and anything like them. General Booth looked at him and said, "Young man, if one more soul could be brought to Christ by standing on my head and kicking my tambourine, I would learn it."

Conservatism is wise and unwise. We must always strive to ensure that in thoughts and deeds not to be limited. But at the same time, one must try to stay on the narrow path.

Comments on Chapter 5

INTRODUCTION TO THE GOSPEL OF LUKE

A BEAUTIFUL BOOK AND ITS AUTHOR

The Gospel of Luke has been called the most delightful book in the world. When one day an American asked Denney to advise him to read one of the biographies of Jesus Christ, he replied: "Have you tried reading the Gospel of Luke?" According to legend, Luke was a skilled artist. In one Spanish cathedral, a portrait of the Virgin Mary, allegedly painted by Luke, has survived to this day. As for the Gospel, many researchers believe that it is the best biography of Jesus Christ ever compiled. According to tradition, it has always been believed that Luke was the author, and we have every reason to support this point of view. In the ancient world, books were usually attributed to famous people, and no one contradicted this. But Luke never belonged to prominent figures in the early Christian Church. Therefore, it would never have occurred to anyone to attribute this Gospel to him if he had not actually written it.

Luke came from Gentiles. Of all the writers of the New Testament, only he was not a Jew. He is a doctor by profession (Col. 4:14), and perhaps this explains the sympathy he inspires. They say that a priest sees the good in people, a lawyer sees the bad, and a doctor sees them for who they are. Luke saw people and loved them.

The book was written for Theophilus. Luke calls him "Venerable Theophilus". Such treatment was applied only to high-ranking officials in the Roman government. There is no doubt that Luke wrote this book to tell the serious and interested person more about Jesus Christ. And he succeeded in this, painting Theophilus a picture that undoubtedly awakened him. big interest to Jesus, about whom he had heard before.

SYMBOLS OF THE EVANGELISTS

Each of the four gospels was written from a particular angle. Evangelists are often depicted on church stained glass windows, usually each with their own symbol. These symbols do change, but the following are the most typical:

Symbol brand is human. The Gospel of Mark is the simplest, most concise of all the Gospels. It was well said about him that his excellent feature is realism. It most closely matches its purpose - the description of the earthly life of Jesus Christ.

Symbol Matthew is a lion. Matthew was a Jew, and wrote for the Jews: he saw in Jesus the Messiah, a lion "from the tribe of Judah," whose coming was predicted by all the prophets.

Symbol John is eagle. The eagle can fly higher than all other birds. They say that of all God's creations, only an eagle can look at the sun without squinting. The gospel of John is a theological gospel; the flight of his thoughts is higher than all other Gospels. Philosophers draw topics from it, discuss them all their lives, but resolve them only in eternity.

Symbol Luke is Taurus. The calf is meant to be slaughtered, and Luke saw Jesus as a sacrifice for the whole world. In the Gospel of Luke, moreover, all barriers are overcome, and Jesus becomes accessible to both Jews and sinners. He is the savior of the world. With that in mind, let's look at the features of this gospel.

LUCA IS A DEMANDING HISTORIAN

The gospel of Luke is primarily the result of painstaking work. His Greek is exquisite. The first four verses are written in the finest Greek in the entire New Testament. In them, Luke states that his gospel was written "by careful study." He had great opportunities and reliable sources for this. As Paul's trusted companion, he must have been well aware of all the major details of the early Christian Church, and they no doubt told him everything they knew. For two years he was together with Paul in prison in Caesarea. In those long days, he certainly had many opportunities to study and explore everything. And he did it thoroughly.

An example of Luke's thoroughness is the dating of the appearance of John the Baptist. At the same time, he refers, no less, to six contemporaries. "In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar (1), when Pontius Pilate ruled in Judea (2), Herod was tetrarch in Galilee (3), Philip, his brother, tetrarch in Iturea and the Trachotnite region (4), and Lysanius tetrarch in Abilineus (5), under the high priests Anna and Caiaphas (6), there was a word of God to John, the son of Zechariah, in the wilderness " (Onion. 3.1.2). Undoubtedly, we are dealing with a diligent author who will adhere to the greatest possible accuracy of presentation.

GOSPEL FOR THE GENTIANS

Luke primarily wrote to Gentile Christians. Theophilus, like Luke himself, was from the pagans; and there is nothing in his Gospel that the pagan did not realize and would not understand, a) As we can see, Luke begins his dating Roman emperor and Roman governor, that is, the Roman dating style comes first, b) Unlike Matthew, Luke is less interested in depicting the life of Jesus in the sense of the incarnation of Jewish prophecies, c) He rarely quotes the Old Testament, d) Luke usually uses them instead of Hebrew words Greek translations, so that every Greek could understand the content of what was written. Simon Kananite becomes Simon the Zealot (cf. Matt. 10,4and Luke. 5.15). He calls Golgotha not a Hebrew word, but a Greek one - Kraniev mountain, the meaning of these words is the same - the Place of execution. He never uses the Hebrew word for Jesus, rabbi, but the Greek word for teacher. When Luke cites the genealogy of Jesus, he traces it not to Abraham, the founder of the people of Israel, as Matthew does, but to Adam, the forefather of mankind (cf. Matt. 1,2; Onion. 3,38).

That is why the Gospel of Luke is the easiest to read. Luke did not write for the Jews, but for people like us.

GOSPEL OF PRAYER

The Gospel of Luke places particular emphasis on prayer. More than any other, Luke shows us Jesus immersed in prayer before important events in His life. Jesus prays during His baptism (Luke 3, 21) before the first encounter with the Pharisees (Luke 5, 16), before the calling of the twelve apostles (Luke 6, 12); before asking the disciples who they think he is (Onion. 9:18-20); and before predicting his own death and resurrection (9:22); during the transformation (9.29); and on the cross (23:46). Only Luke tells us that Jesus prayed for Peter during his trial (22:32). Only Luke gives a parable-prayer about a friend who comes at midnight (11:5-13) and a parable about an unrighteous judge (Onion. 18:1-8). For Luke, prayer was always an open door to God, and the most precious thing in the whole world.

GOSPEL WOMEN

The woman occupied a secondary position in Palestine. In the morning, the Jew thanked God that He did not create him "a heathen, a slave or a woman." But Luke gives women a special place. The story of the birth of Jesus is told from the point of view of the Virgin Mary. It is in Luke that we read about Elizabeth, about Anna, about the widow in Nain, about the woman who anointed the feet of Jesus in the house of Simon the Pharisee. Luke gives us vivid portraits of Martha, Mary and Mary Magdalene. It is very probable that Luke was a native of Macedonia, where a woman occupied a freer position than anywhere else.

GOSPEL OF GLOCATION

In the Gospel of Luke, glorifications of the Lord occur more frequently than in any other part of the New Testament. This praise reaches its apogee in the three great hymns sung by all generations of Christians - in the hymn to Mary (1:46-55), in the blessing of Zechariah (1:68-79); and in the prophecy of Simeon (2:29-32). The gospel of Luke spreads rainbow light, as if the radiance of heaven would illuminate the earthly vale.

GOSPEL FOR ALL

But the most important thing about the Gospel of Luke is that it is a gospel for all. It overcomes all obstacles, Jesus Christ appeared to all people, without exception.

a) The kingdom of God is not closed to the Samaritans (Onion. 9, 51-56). Only in Luke do we find the parable of the Good Samaritan (10:30-36). And that one leper who returned to give thanks to Jesus Christ for healing was a Samaritan (Onion. 17:11-19). John gives a proverb that the Jews do not associate with the Samaritans (John. 4.9). Luke, on the other hand, does not prevent anyone from accessing God.

b) Luke shows that Jesus speaks with approval of Gentiles who would be considered unclean by orthodox Jews. In him, Jesus cites the widow at Zarephath of Sidon and Naaman the Syrian as exemplary examples (4:25-27). Jesus praises the Roman centurion for his great faith (7:9). Luke cites the great words of Jesus: "And they shall come from the east and the west, and the north and the south, and shall lie down in the kingdom of God" (13:29).

c) Luke pays great attention to the poor. When Mary offers a sacrifice for cleansing, it is the sacrifice of the poor (2:24). The pinnacle of the answer to John the Baptist is the words "the poor preach the gospel" (7:29). Only Luke cites the parable of the rich man and the poor Lazarus (16:19-31). And in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus taught, "Blessed are the poor in spirit." (Matt. 5:3; Luke 6, twenty). The gospel of Luke is also called the gospel of the destitute. Luke's heart is with every person whose life is unsuccessful.

d) Luke portrays Jesus better than others as a friend of exiles and sinners. Only he speaks of a woman who anointed his feet with ointment, shed tears on them and wiped them with her hair in the house of Simon the Pharisee (7:36-50); about Zacchaeus the head of publicans (19:1-10); about the penitent thief (23:43); and only Luke cites the immortal parable of the prodigal son and loving father (15:11-32). When Jesus sent his disciples to preach, Matthew indicates that Jesus told them not to go to the Samaritans or the Gentiles (Mat. 10.5); Luke doesn't say anything about it. The authors of all four Gospels, reporting on the preaching of John the Baptist, quote from Is. 40: "Prepare the way of the Lord; make straight the paths of our God"; but only Luke brings the quotation to its triumphant end: "And all flesh shall see the salvation of God." Is. 40,3-5; Mat. 3,3; Mar. 1,3; John. 1,23; Onion. 3.4. 6). Of the gospel writers, Luke teaches most emphatically that the love of God is infinite.

BEAUTIFUL BOOK

When studying the Gospel of Luke, one should pay attention to these features. Somehow, of all the authors of the Gospels, I would most like to meet and talk with Luke, because this pagan doctor, who surprisingly felt the boundlessness of God's love, was in all likelihood a man of a beautiful soul. About the boundless mercy and incomprehensible love of the Lord, Frederic Faber wrote:

God's mercy is infinite

Like a boundless ocean.

In justice unchanged

Deliverance is given.

Do not comprehend the love of the Lord

To our feeble minds

We find only at His feet

Peace to tormented hearts.

The Gospel of Luke clearly shows the veracity of this.

CONDITIONS FOR A MIRACLE (Luke 5:1-11)

As a matter of fact, Gennesaret is the name of the beautiful plain that spreads out on the western side of the lake; the land of this plain is very fertile. The Jews were great lovers of explaining the meaning of various words in their own way, and to explain the name Gennesaret they found three options, each of which shows how beautiful this area was. They formed these names from the words:

1) kinnor, meaning harp, because "the fruits of this valley are as sweet as the sound of a harp," or because "the sound of the waves of the lake is as sweet as the sound of a harp."

2) Gan - garden, and sar - prince, that is, "the king of gardens."

3) Gan - garden; and usher - wealth, abundance, that is, the "garden of abundance."

Here is a turning point in the life of Jesus. When we last heard him preach, he was in the synagogue; now He preaches by the lake. True, He will again preach in the synagogue; but the time is coming when the door of the synagogue will be closed to him, and the lakeside or the road will be his church, and the boat will be his pulpit. He will be in all places where people will listen to Him. "Our churches," says John Wesley, "were founded by those who walked the dark mountains and did not belong to any Christian church; but they were awakened by the Methodists who followed them through the deserts of the world, along the high roads of life, into the back streets, on bazaars and fairs, over mountains and valleys and setting up the banner of the Crucifixion on the streets and alleys of cities, in villages, in barns, in peasant kitchens and in other places, but doing it in such a way and on such a scale that people have not seen since the era of the Apostles. " I love a comfortable room,” Wesley said, “a soft cushion and a beautiful pulpit, but preaching in the field saves souls.” As the synagogue door closed to Him, Jesus spoke to the people on the highways.

This passage gives the conditions under which a miracle can be performed.

3) Faith. Willingness to do what seems hopeless. The night, the time of fishing, has passed, everything

Circumstances seemed unfavorable for fishing, but Simon said, "Let the circumstances be against us, but according to Your word we will try again." Too often we wait because the time is not favorable. If we waited for the perfect set of circumstances, we would never start any business at all. If we want a miracle, we must take Jesus at his word when he calls us to do the impossible.

TOUCHING THE UNTOUCHABLE (Luke 5:12-15)

In Leviticus chapters 13 and 14 there are provisions concerning lepers. The worst thing for the patient was isolation. The leper had to shout: "Unclean! Unclean!" Wherever he went, he was doomed to loneliness; "he must live alone, outside the camp of his dwelling" (A lion. 13.45.46). He was expelled from human society and forced to leave his home. As a result of all this, the psychological consequences of leprosy were - and still are - just as terrible as the physical ones.

Dr. A. B. McDonald, in an article on the leper colony at Utu, which he ran, wrote: “The leper suffers as much in soul as in body. For some reason, people treat leprosy differently than all other disfiguring diseases. It causes shame and horror in people and carries with it, for some reason, a feeling of guilt, although it is contracted as accidentally as other infectious diseases.Lepers are shunned and despised, and therefore they often contemplate suicide, and some commit it. ".

Everyone hated the leper until he began to hate himself. And such a man came to Jesus; he was unclean and Jesus touched him.

1) Jesus touched the untouchable. His hand turned to a man that everyone would turn their backs on. We are faced with two tasks: first, even when we despise ourselves, when our hearts are filled with shame, the hand of Christ is stretched out to us. Mark Rutherford wanted to add another bliss:

"Blessed are those who heal us of self-contempt." After all, this is what Jesus Christ did and does all the time. And, firstly, the essence of Christianity lies precisely in touching the untouchable, in loving those who are unworthy of love, in forgiving those who do not deserve forgiveness. Jesus did it, and so should we.

2) Jesus sent the cured to offer the statutory sacrifice of atonement. The provisions of this rite are given in A lion. 14. In other words, His miracle took into account here the positive medicine of the time. It did not exempt a person from the fulfillment of legal norms. We will never be able to work miracles if we lose sight of the gifts and wisdom God has given us. Miracles happen when a person's talent is combined with the grace and mercy of God.

OPPOSITION IS GREATERING (Luke 5:16-17)

We have only two verses. But, after reading them, we think, for we see that an important moment has come in the ministry of Jesus: the Pharisees and the teachers of the law appeared, His opponents, who will not rest until they kill Him; appeared without any disguise, in broad daylight.

For example, the Commandments say: "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy," and further that no work can be done on the Sabbath. (Is. 20:8-11). But the Jews then asked: "What is work?" and further refined this concept in thirty-nine paragraphs, which they called the "fathers of the case." But this was not enough for them: each of these points was, in turn, detailed. These rules were called verbal law and they even began to be preferred over the Ten Commandments.

Let's look at another example. Among the work that was forbidden on the Sabbath was the carrying of weights. In Jer. 17:21-24 says: "Thus says the Lord take care of your souls, and do not carry burdens on the Sabbath day ..." But, the teachers of the law argued, it is necessary to define exactly what is meant by the word burden. And such a definition was given: a burden should be understood as "food equal in weight to a dried fig fruit, a sip of milk, a cup of wine; an amount of fragrant oil sufficient to anoint one small member of the human body; water sufficient to make an eye ointment; a piece of paper enough for a small note at customs; ink with which to write two letters; a reed from which one can make a writing stick..." and so on and so forth. So, if a tailor wore a needle in his clothes on Saturday, this was considered a violation of the law and a sin; picking up a stone to throw at a bird was considered sinful on the Sabbath. Virtue began to be identified with these innumerable rules and regulations.

The teachers of the law were experts in the law, for they knew all the rules and norms, and they themselves deduced them from the law.

The name is Pharisee means: "isolated" and the Pharisees really separated themselves from people and normal life in order to comply with all norms and statutes. Let's note two points. First, for the Pharisees and scribes, these rules were a matter of life and death: breaking one of them was considered a mortal sin. Secondly, only people sincerely confident in the importance of these rules tried to follow them, because the observance of all the rules made a person's life extremely inconvenient. Only the best of the people generally tried to fulfill all these requirements.

Jesus saw no need to keep such rules. In His eyes, the need of man was above all these statutes. But to the scribes and Pharisees, He was a lawbreaker, a dangerous man who taught other people to do the same. That's why they hated and eventually crucified Him. The tragedy of Jesus' life is that it was precisely those people who were most serious about religion who demanded His crucifixion. The irony was precisely that the best people of that time crucified Him.

FORGIVEN AND HEALED (Luke 5:18-26)

But what is the meaning of this passage about the forgiveness of sins? It must be remembered that in the minds of the inhabitants of Palestine, sin and suffering were inextricably linked. It was unconditionally believed that if someone suffers, then he has sinned. And so the patient suffered even more from feelings of guilt and sinfulness. That is why Jesus first told the paralytic that his sins were forgiven. Without it, the person would not believe that he could be healed. This shows how, in the ensuing controversy, Jesus utterly shattered the theory of the Pharisees and the scribes. They knew that Jesus did not have the power to forgive people's sins. But, according to their own statements and assumptions, man is sick precisely because he has sinned; and if this person received healing, then this is evidence that his sin is forgiven. The Pharisees' argument boomeranged against them and silenced them.

1) There are people who have been influenced by the faith of their parents. Carlisle used to say that for many years he heard the voice of his mother: "Believe in God and do what is right." When Augustine led a reckless and immoral life, his devotedly loving mother came to the Christian bishop for help. "It is inconceivable," he said, "that the child of such prayers and tears should perish." Many of us will gladly testify that everything we are, and can ever be, we owe to our godly parents.

Thank God that in life itself and in love there are hidden factors that guide the soul and heart of a person.

THE GUEST OF THE REJECTED (Luke 5:27-32)

Before us is the story of the recognition of Matthew (cf. Matt. 9:9-13). The most hated people in Palestine were the tax collectors. Palestine was under the yoke of the Romans, and the publicans were in the service of the Romans, and therefore they were looked upon as traitors and traitors.

This system has been so abused that it was already abolished in New Testament times. Of course, taxes still had to be paid, and there were also corrupt publicans, abuses and exploitation.

People put publicans along with Nubian robbers. They were forbidden to enter the synagogue. A Roman writer mentions that he once saw a monument to an honest tax collector. Honesty among publicans was so rare that a monument was erected to him.

And yet, Jesus chose Matthew, the tax collector, to be His disciple.

A HAPPY COMMUNITY (Luke 5:33-35)

1) It is extremely important to note that Jesus repeatedly compared the life of a Christian to a wedding celebration. Joy is the main feature of the Christian life. One student said of a well-known American teacher, "She made me feel like I was bathed in sunshine." Too many feel that Christianity forces them to do what they would not want to do and prevents them from doing what they would like to do. Cheerfulness, for example, came to be considered a sin, while Paul Phil. 4:4 calls "Rejoice in the Lord always; and again I say: rejoice," and one famous philosopher called joy "a fleeting bliss."

NEW KNOWLEDGE (Luke 5:36-39)

Over time, the mind loses the flexibility of common sense and refuses new ideas. Jesus gave two examples. "You can't put a patch on old clothes," He said, "for new fabric will only tear the old fabric more." Vessels for wine were made in the East from skins. When young wine was poured into them, it began to ferment and give off gases. Vessels made of new skin had sufficient elasticity to withstand the increasing pressure, and if the vessel was old, it became dry and hard and could easily burst. "Do not allow," Jesus says, "your mind to become like an old hardened skin." They say old wine is better. At the moment, this may be so, but people forget that the time will come, and the young wine will be just as aged, and no other will compare with it.

In this passage, Jesus denounces the rigid way of thinking and encourages people not to turn away from new knowledge.

1) People should not be afraid of risky ideas. Since the Holy Spirit exists, God leads us to new knowledge. Fosdick once wondered: "How would medicine develop if doctors used only medicines and methods three hundred years ago?" A person with new knowledge has to fight for their recognition. Galileo was considered a heretic when he declared that the earth revolves around the sun. Lister had to fight for the use of antiseptics in surgery. Simpson had to fight for the use of chloroform, which alleviates the suffering of people. Remember, if we are against new ideas, we demonstrate the inflexibility and decrepitude of our mind; therefore it is worth considering to know His wisdom and power.

Any community that has lost as many visitors as the church (in the west) would have turned to new methods long ago, but the Church still tries to turn its back on everything new.

During one round-the-world voyage, Kipling saw General Booth climbing aboard to the sound of a tambourine. The orthodox and strict soul of Kipling did not like this music. He met General Booth and told him how much he disliked tambourines and anything like them. General Booth looked at him and said, "Young man, if one more soul could be brought to Christ by standing on one's head and kicking the tambourine, I would learn it."

Conservatism is wise and unwise. We must always strive to ensure that in thoughts and deeds not to be limited. But at the same time, one must try to stay on the narrow path.

Commentaries (introduction) to the entire book "From Luke"

Comments on Chapter 5

"The most beautiful book in existence."(Ernest Renan)

Introduction

I. SPECIAL STATEMENT IN THE CANON

The most beautiful book in existence is praise, especially from the mouth of a skeptic. And yet, this is precisely the assessment given to the Gospel of Luke by the French critic Renan. And what can a sympathetic believer who reads the inspired masterpiece of this evangelist object to these words? Luke is perhaps the only pagan writer chosen by God to record His Scriptures, and this partly explains his special appeal to the heirs of Greco-Roman culture in the West.

Spiritually, we would be much poorer in our appreciation of the Lord Jesus and His ministry without the unique expressiveness of Dr. Luke.

It emphasizes our Lord's special interest in individuals, even the poor and outcasts, His love and salvation offered by Him to all people, not just Jews. Luke also emphasizes doxology (when he gives examples of early Christian hymns in chapters 1 and 2), prayer, and the Holy Spirit.

Luke - a native of Antioch, and a doctor by profession - was a companion of Paul for a long time, talked a lot with other apostles and in two books left us samples of the medicine for souls that he received from them.

External evidence Eusebius in his "History of the Church" about the authorship of the third Gospel is consistent with the general early Christian tradition.

Irenaeus widely cites the third gospel as being written by Luke.

Other early evidence in support of Luke's authorship includes Justin Martyr, Hegesippus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian. In the extremely tendentious and abridged edition of Marcion, the Gospel of Luke is the only one accepted by this famous heretic. Muratori's fragmentary canon calls the third Gospel "according to Luke".

Luke is the only evangelist who wrote a continuation of his gospel, and it is from this book, the Acts of the Apostles, that Luke's authorship is most clearly seen. The passages with the word "we" in the Acts of the Apostles are a description of events in which the writer took a personal part (16:10; 20:5-6; 21:15; 27:1; 28:16; cf. 2 Tim. 4, eleven). After going through everyone, only Luka can be recognized as a participant in all these events. From the dedication to Theophilus and the style of writing, it is quite clear that the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles are written by the same author.

Paul refers to Luke as "the beloved physician" and speaks of him specifically, not confusing him with Jewish Christians (Col. 4:14), which points to him as the only pagan writer in the NT. The Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles are larger than all of Paul's letters combined.

Internal evidence reinforce external documents and church traditions. The lexicon (often more precise in medical terms than other New Testament writers), along with the literary style of the Greek language, attests to the authorship of a cultured Gentile Christian physician who is also intimately familiar with Jewish characteristics. Luke's love for dates and precise studies (eg 1:1-4; 3:1) puts him in the ranks of the first historians of the Church.

III. WRITING TIME

The most probable date for the writing of the Gospel is the very beginning of the 60s of the 1st century. Some still attribute it to 75-85 years. (or even by the 2nd century), which is caused, at least, by a partial denial that Christ could accurately predict the destruction of Jerusalem. The city was destroyed in 70 AD, so the Lord's prophecy must have been written before that date.

Since almost everyone agrees that the Gospel of Luke should predate the writing of the book of Acts, and that Acts ends with Paul's stay in Rome around 63 AD, the earlier date seems to be correct. The great fire in Rome and the subsequent persecution of Christians, whom Nero declared responsible (64 AD), as well as the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, would hardly have been ignored by the first church historian if these events have already happened. Therefore, the most obvious date is 61-62 AD. AD

IV. PURPOSE OF WRITING AND THEME

The Greeks were looking for a person endowed with divine perfection and at the same time combining the best features of men and women, but without their shortcomings. This is how the Luke represents Christ - the Son of Man: strong and at the same time full of compassion. It emphasizes His human nature.

For example, here, more than in other Gospels, His prayer life is emphasized. Feelings of sympathy and compassion are often mentioned.

Perhaps that is why women and children occupy such a special place here. The gospel of Luke is also known as the missionary gospel.

This gospel is directed to the Gentiles, and the Lord Jesus is presented as the Savior of the world. And finally, this gospel is a manual for discipleship. We trace the path of discipleship in the life of our Lord and hear it detailed as He instructs His followers. In particular, it is this feature that we will trace in our presentation. In the life of a perfect Human, we will find elements that create an ideal life for all people. In His incomparable words we will find the way of the Cross to which He calls us.

As we begin our study of the Gospel of Luke, let us heed the call of the Savior, leave everything and follow Him. Obedience is a tool spiritual knowledge. The meaning of Holy Scripture will become clearer and dearer to us when we delve into the events described here.

Plan

I. PREFACE: LUKE'S PURPOSE AND HIS METHOD (1:1-4)

II. THE COMING OF THE SON OF MAN AND HIS FOREIGNER (1.5 - 2.52)

III. PREPARATION OF THE SON OF MAN FOR SERVICE (3.1 - 4.30)

IV. THE SON OF MAN PROVES HIS POWER (4.31 - 5.26)

V. THE SON OF MAN EXPLAINS HIS MINISTRY (5:27 - 6:49)

VI. THE SON OF MAN EXPANDS HIS MINISTRY (7.1 - 9.50)

VII. INCREASING RESISTANCE TO THE SON OF MAN (9.51 - 11.54)

VIII. TEACHING AND HEALING ON THE WAY TO JERUSALEM (Ch. 12 - 16)

IX. THE SON OF MAN INSTRUCTS HIS DISCIPLES (17:1 - 19:27)

X. THE SON OF MAN IN JERUSALEM (19:28 - 21:38)

XI. THE SUFFERING AND DEATH OF THE SON OF MAN (Ch. 22-23)

XII. THE VICTORY OF THE SON OF MAN (Ch. 24)

E. Authority to instruct others: calling disciples (5:1-11)

Several important lessons emerge from the simple message of Peter's call:

1. The Lord used boat Peter as the pulpit from which He preached to the people. If we give the Lord all the property that belongs to us, then He will use it in an amazing way, and also reward us.

2. He showed Peter exactly where to find a lot of fish, after Peter and the others all night long hard and unsuccessful work. The omniscient Lord knows where the fish swim. Service done in our own wisdom and strength will fail. The secret of successful Christian work is to be directed by the Lord.

3. Although Peter himself was an experienced fisherman, he took advice from the Carpenter, and as a result, the nets were filled. "...At your word I will cast down the net," - these words show the value of meekness, receptivity to instruction, and inward obedience.

4. They were at a depth, when net filled to capacity and yet broke through. So we must stop crowding on the shore and go out to the open sea. Faith has its own depth, and so does suffering, grief, and loss. It is these depths that fruitfully fill the nets.

5. Their network began to break through, and the boats started to sink(vv. 6-7). Ministry under the leadership of Christ causes problems - but how much pleasure from these problems. These are the problems that make the heart of a true angler rejoice.

6. Seeing the glory of the Lord Jesus caused Petra an overwhelming sense of one's own insignificance. So it was with Isaiah (6:5); the same happens to all who see the King in His beauty.

7. Christ Called Peter to Be a Fisher people when he was busy with his usual work. While waiting for guidance, do the work that your hands find. Put all your energy into this. Do it from the heart, as to the Lord. Just as a rudder only guides a ship when it is in motion, so God directs people when they are also in motion.

8. Christ called Peter from catching fish to catching people, or, if translated literally, "to take people alive." What are all the fish in the ocean compared to the immense joy of seeing one soul being won for Christ and for eternity!

9. Peter, James and John pulled both boats ashore, left everything and followed Jesus on one of the best days of my life.

And how much depended on their decision! We probably would never have heard of them if they had preferred to stay by their boats.

F. Authority over leprosy (5:12-16)

5,12 The physician Luke specifically mentions the fact that human was all in leprosy. It was a neglected case of leprosy and, in human terms, absolutely hopeless. But the leper had wonderful faith. He said: "God! If you want, you can cleanse me." He couldn't have said that to any other person in the world. However, he absolutely trusted the force Lord. When he said "if you want", he did not thereby express doubt about the will of Christ. Rather, he came as a suppliant, having no right to healing, but giving himself to the mercy and grace of the Lord.

5,13 Touching a leper was medically dangerous. This was a defilement from a religious point of view and degradation from a social point of view, but the Savior did not become infected with any impurity. On the contrary, a cascade of healing and health flowed into the body of the leper. This was not a gradual recovery: the leprosy left him at once. Think what must have meant for this hopeless, helpless leper, full recovery in a moment of time!

5,14 Jesus told him not to tell anyone about recovery. The Savior did not want to attract crowds of curious people or stir up a popular movement to proclaim Him King. On the contrary, the Lord commanded the leper go see the priest and bring the prescribed Moses sacrifice(Lev. 14:4). Every detail of the sacrifice spoke of Christ.

In function priest was to examine the leper and determine that he was indeed healed. The priest could not heal; he could only announce person healed. This priest had never seen a cleansed leper before. This was a unique case; through him he was to understand that the Messiah had at last come. This event was to serve evidence to all priests. However, their hearts were blinded by unbelief.

5,15-16 Despite the Lord's command not to divulge the miracle, the word nevertheless quickly spread, and great crowd of people went to Him for healing. Jesus often went to desert places to spend time in prayer. Our Savior was a Man of prayer. It is justified that this gospel, which presents Him as the Son of Man, tells more about His prayer life than others.

G. Power over paralysis (5:17-26)

5,17 As word spread about the ministry of Jesus Pharisees and lawyers became more and more hostile. Here we read how they gathered in Galilee with the obvious intention of finding any charges against Him. The power of the Lord is in healing sick. In fact, Jesus always had the power to heal, but circumstances didn't always favor it. In Nazareth, for example, He could not do many great things because of the unbelief of the people (Matthew 13:58).

5,18-19 To the house where Jesus taught, four people brought on the bed relaxed person. They couldn't bring it to Jesus because of crowd, so we climbed to the roof by the outer ladder. Then, having dismantled the tiles, they lowered the man through a hole in the roof.

5,20-21 Jesus drew attention to faith, prompting them to bring the needy to Him. And He, seeing their faith, that is, the faith of four plus a disabled person, said relaxed: "Your sins are forgiven." These unprecedented words hurt scribes and Pharisees. They knew that no one but one God can not forgive sins. Unwilling to admit that Jesus is God, they raised a murmur that He was blaspheming.

5,22-23 Then Jesus began to prove to them that He had indeed forgiven the sins of man. First of all, He asked them what Is it easier to say, "Your sins are forgiven you," or to say, "Get up and walk"? In a certain sense to tell one is as easy as the other, but quite another matter commit both, because both are impossible for people. The point here seems to be to say: "Your sins are forgiven" easier because it's impossible to see if it happened. If you say: "Get up and walk" then you can see if the patient is healed.

The Pharisees could not see, whether the sins of man are forgiven, so they did not believe. So Jesus performed a miracle that they could see, as proof that He did indeed forgive the sins of man. He gave the paralytic the strength to walk.

5,24 "But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins." Title "Son of Man" emphasizes the perfect human nature of the Lord. In a sense, we are all sons of men, but the title "Son of Man", with a capital "S", sets Jesus apart from all people who have ever lived. He portrays Him as a Man corresponding to God, one who has moral perfection, who will suffer, bleed and die, and to whom universal headship will be given.

5,25 Obedient to His word, relaxed got up, took up his bed and went to his house, glorifying God.

5,26 And literally hugged everyone horror, and they also glorified God, saying that seen incredible affairs in that day, namely, the proclamation of forgiveness and the miracle confirming it.

V. THE SON OF MAN EXPLAINS HIS MINISTRY (5:27 - 6:49)

A. Calling Levi (5:27-28)

Levi was Jewish publican, collecting tolls for the Roman government. Jewish tribesmen hated such people not only for their cooperation with Rome, but also for their dishonesty. One day, while Levi was at work, Jesus passed by and invited him to become His follower. With surprising readiness Levi, leaving everything, he got up and followed him. Think of the wonderful consequences of such a simple decision. Levi, or Matthew, became the writer of the first gospel. It is worth it to heed the call of the Lord and follow Him.

B. Why does the Son of Man call sinners (5:29-32)

5,29-30 There is an assumption that by arranging great treat, Levi pursued three goals. He wanted to honor the Lord, testify to his new convictions in front of everyone, and introduce his friends to Jesus. Most Jews would not sit down at a table with a lot of publicans. Jesus was eating with publicans and sinners. He certainly did not take a familiar view of their sins or do anything that might compromise His testimony, but He used these meetings as an opportunity to teach, rebuke, and bless.

The scribes and the Pharisees criticized Jesus for dealing with these despised people, the dregs of society. (NU says "the Pharisees and their scribes," meaning those scribes who shared the beliefs of the Pharisees.)

5,31 Jesus answered them, that His actions are in perfect harmony with the purpose of His coming into the world. Healthy people don't need a doctor, they only need one. sick.

5,32 The Pharisees considered themselves righteous. They did not have a deep sense of sin or need. Consequently, they could not benefit from the ministry of the great Physician. But publicans and sinners realized that they sinners and need to be saved from their sins. The Savior came for just such people. Actually the Pharisees not were righteous. They were just as in need of salvation as the publicans. But they were unwilling to confess their sins and admit their guilt. And so they criticized the Physician for visiting the seriously ill.

C. Why Jesus' Disciples Didn't Fast (5:33-35)

5,33 The next action of the Pharisees was to ask Jesus about the tradition of fasting. After all John's disciples The Baptist imitated the ascetic life of their teacher. Followers Pharisees also observed numerous ritual fasts. But Jesus' disciples didn't. Why?

5,34-35 The Lord replied that there was no reason for His disciples to fast, since He with them. Here He associates fasting with grief and mourning. When he will be taken from them(obviously by death), they will fast, by expressing his grief.

D. Three parables about the new covenant (5:36-39)

AT first old parable clothing symbolizes the system or times of the law, and new clothes displays the time of grace. They are incompatible. An attempt to mix law and grace will spoil both as a result.

A patch taken from new clothes will ruin the new clothes and won't fit the old one on appearance and for the fortress. JN Darby put it well: "Jesus would never mold Christianity to Judaism. Flesh and law go together, but grace and law—God's righteousness and man's—never mix."

5,37-38 Second the parable teaches that it is unwise to pour new wine in old wineskins. The fermenting young wine puts pressure on the skins, which they no longer have enough firmness or elasticity to withstand. bellows break through and the wine flow out. The forms, institutions, traditions and rituals of Judaism that had developed over the centuries were too rigid to contain the joy, abundance and strength of the new era. New furs reflected in this chapter in the unconventional methods of the four who brought the paralytic to Jesus.

Young wine can be seen in the freshness and diligence of Levi. Furs are shabby depicted in the boredom and cold formalism of the Pharisees.

5,39 Third the parable states that no one drinking old wine will give preference young. For he says: "The old is better." Here is shown the natural reluctance of people to leave the old for the sake of the new, Judaism for the sake of Christianity, law for the sake of grace, shadow for the sake of the object! As Darby says, "A man accustomed to forms, human orders, the religion of the fathers, etc., will never like the new principle and power of the Kingdom."

Commentary on the book

Section comment

8 "Come out of me" - Peter felt awe and fear of the power of God at work in Jesus.

14 cm Mark 1:44.

27-28 "Levi" - ap Matthew; Wed Mark 2:14.

29 Wed Mt 9:10.

34-35 "The sons of the bridal chamber... will be taken away" - cm Mt 9:15.

36-38 Wed Mt 9:16-17.

39 The new wine offered by Christ is not to the taste of those accustomed to drinking the old wine of the Law. To accept the gospel teaching, one must reject the obsolete prescriptions of the synagogue.

1. Luke, "beloved physician", was one of the closest associates of St. Paul (Col 4:14). According to Eusebius (Church East 3:4), he came from Syrian Antioch and was brought up in a Greek pagan family. He received a good education and became a doctor. The history of his conversion is unknown. Apparently, it happened after his meeting with ap Paul, whom he joined c. 50 AD He visited with him Macedonia, the cities of Asia Minor (Acts 16:10-17; Acts 20:5-21:18) and remained with him during his stay in custody in Caesarea and in Rome (Acts 24:23; Acts 27; Acts 28; Col 4:14). The narration of Acts was brought to the year 63. There is no reliable data on the life of Luke in subsequent years.

2. Very ancient information has come down to us, confirming that the third Gospel was written by Luke. St. Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3, 1) writes: "Luke, the companion of Paul, expounded the Gospel taught by the Apostle in a separate book." According to Origen, "the third gospel is from Luke" (see Eusebius, Church. East 6, 25). In the list of sacred books that have come down to us, recognized as canonical in the Roman Church since the 2nd century, it is noted that Luke wrote the Gospel on behalf of Paul.

Scholars of the 3rd Gospel unanimously recognize the writer's talent of its author. According to such a connoisseur of antiquity as Eduard Mayer, ev. Luke is one of the best writers of his time.

3. In the preface to the gospel, Luke says that he used previously written "narratives" and the testimonies of eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word from the very beginning (Luke 1:2). He wrote it, in all probability, before the year 70. He undertook his work "by carefully examining everything from the beginning" (Luke 1:3). The gospel is continued by Acts, where the evangelist also included his personal memories (starting with Acts 16:10, the story is often told in the first person).

Its main sources were, obviously, Mt, Mk, manuscripts that have not come down to us, called "logy", and oral traditions. Among these traditions, a special place is occupied by stories about the birth and childhood of the Baptist, which developed among the admirers of the prophet. At the heart of the story of the infancy of Jesus (chapters 1 and 2) lies, apparently, a sacred tradition in which the voice of the Virgin Mary herself is still heard.

Not being a Palestinian and speaking to Gentile Christians, Luke reveals less knowledge than Matthew and Jn of the setting in which the gospel events took place. But as a historian, he seeks to clarify the chronology of these events, pointing to kings and rulers (eg Luke 2:1; Luke 3:1-2). Luke includes prayers that, according to commentators, were used by the first Christians (the prayer of Zechariah, the song of the Virgin, the song of the angels).

5. Luke views the life of Jesus Christ as a path to voluntary death and victory over it. Only in Lk the Savior is called κυριος (Lord), as was customary in the early Christian communities. The Evangelist repeatedly speaks of the action of the Spirit of God in the life of the Virgin Mary, Christ Himself, and later the apostles. Luke conveys the atmosphere of joy, hope and eschatological expectation in which the first Christians lived. He lovingly paints the merciful appearance of the Savior, clearly manifested in the parables of the merciful Samaritan, the prodigal son, the lost drachma, the publican and the Pharisee.

As a student of Paul Luk emphasizes the universal character of the Gospel (Lk 2:32; Luk 24:47); He leads the genealogy of the Savior not from Abraham, but from the forefather of all mankind (Luke 3:38).

INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

The Holy Scriptures of the New Testament were written in Greek, with the exception of the Gospel of Matthew, which is said to have been written in Hebrew or Aramaic. But since this Hebrew text has not been preserved, Greek text is considered the original for the Gospel of Matthew. Thus, only the Greek text of the New Testament is the original, and numerous editions in various modern languages all over the world are translations from the Greek original.

Greek language in which it was written New Testament, was no longer a classical ancient Greek language and was not, as previously thought, a special New Testament language. This is the colloquial everyday language of the first century A.D., spread in the Greco-Roman world and known in science under the name "κοινη", i.e. "common speech"; yet the style, and turns of speech, and way of thinking of the sacred writers of the New Testament reveal the Hebrew or Aramaic influence.

The original text of the NT has come down to us in a large number of ancient manuscripts, more or less complete, numbering about 5000 (from the 2nd to the 16th century). Until recent years, the most ancient of them did not go back beyond the 4th century no P.X. But lately, many fragments of ancient manuscripts of the NT on papyrus (3rd and even 2nd c) have been discovered. So, for example, Bodmer's manuscripts: Ev from John, Luke, 1 and 2 Peter, Jude - were found and published in the 60s of our century. In addition to Greek manuscripts, we have ancient translations or versions into Latin, Syriac, Coptic and other languages (Vetus Itala, Peshitto, Vulgata, etc.), of which the oldest existed already from the 2nd century AD.

Finally, numerous quotations from the Church Fathers in Greek and other languages have been preserved in such quantity that if the text of the New Testament were lost and all ancient manuscripts were destroyed, then specialists could restore this text from quotations from the works of the Holy Fathers. All this abundant material makes it possible to check and refine the text of the NT and to classify its various forms (the so-called textual criticism). Compared with any ancient author (Homer, Euripides, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Cornelius Nepos, Julius Caesar, Horace, Virgil, etc.), our modern - printed - Greek text of the NT is in an exceptionally favorable position. And by the number of manuscripts, and by the brevity of time separating the oldest of them from the original, and by the number of translations, and by their antiquity, and by the seriousness and volume of critical work carried out on the text, it surpasses all other texts (for details, see "The Hidden Treasures and New Life, Archaeological Discoveries and the Gospel, Bruges, 1959, pp. 34 ff.). The text of the NT as a whole is fixed quite irrefutably.

The New Testament consists of 27 books. They are subdivided by the publishers into 260 chapters of unequal length for the purpose of providing references and citations. The original text does not contain this division. The modern division into chapters in the New Testament, as in the whole Bible, has often been ascribed to the Dominican Cardinal Hugh (1263), who elaborated it in his symphony to the Latin Vulgate, but it is now thought with great reason that this division goes back to Stephen the Archbishop of Canterbury. Langton, who died in 1228. As for the division into verses now accepted in all editions of the New Testament, it goes back to the publisher of the Greek New Testament text, Robert Stephen, and was introduced by him into his edition in 1551.

The sacred books of the New Testament are usually divided into statutory (Four Gospels), historical (Acts of the Apostles), teaching (seven conciliar epistles and fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul) and prophetic: the Apocalypse or Revelation of St. John the Theologian (see the Long Catechism of St. Philaret of Moscow).

However, modern experts consider this distribution outdated: in fact, all the books of the New Testament are law-positive, historical, and instructive, and there is prophecy not only in the Apocalypse. New Testament science pays great attention to the exact establishment of the chronology of the gospel and other New Testament events. Scientific chronology allows the reader to follow the life and ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ, the apostles and the original Church according to the New Testament with sufficient accuracy (see Appendixes).

The books of the New Testament can be distributed as follows:

1) Three so-called Synoptic Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and, separately, the fourth: the Gospel of John. New Testament scholarship devotes much attention to the study of the relationship of the first three Gospels and their relation to the Gospel of John (the synoptic problem).

2) The Book of the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles of the Apostle Paul ("Corpus Paulinum"), which are usually divided into:

a) Early Epistles: 1 and 2 Thessalonians.

b) Greater Epistles: Galatians, 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Romans.

c) Messages from bonds, i.e. written from Rome, where ap. Paul was in prison: Philippians, Colossians, Ephesians, Philemon.

d) Pastoral Epistles: 1st to Timothy, to Titus, 2nd to Timothy.

e) The Epistle to the Hebrews.

3) Cathedral Messages("Corpus Catholicum").

4) Revelation of John the Theologian. (Sometimes in the NT they single out "Corpus Joannicum", i.e. everything that ap Ying wrote for a comparative study of his Gospel in connection with his epistles and the book of Rev.).

FOUR GOSPEL

1. The word "gospel" (ευανγελιον) on Greek means "good news". This is how our Lord Jesus Christ Himself called His teaching (Mt 24:14; Mt 26:13; Mk 1:15; Mk 13:10; Mk 14:9; Mk 16:15). Therefore, for us, the "gospel" is inextricably linked with Him: it is the "good news" of salvation given to the world through the incarnate Son of God.

Christ and His apostles preached the gospel without writing it down. By the middle of the 1st century, this sermon had been fixed by the Church in a strong oral tradition. The Eastern custom of memorizing sayings, stories, and even large texts by heart helped the Christians of the apostolic age to accurately preserve the unwritten First Gospel. After the 1950s, when eyewitnesses to Christ's earthly ministry began to pass away one by one, the need arose to record the gospel (Luke 1:1). Thus, the “gospel” began to denote the narrative recorded by the apostles about the life and teachings of the Savior. It was read at prayer meetings and in preparing people for baptism.

2. The most important Christian centers of the 1st century (Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Ephesus, etc.) had their own gospels. Of these, only four (Mt, Mk, Lk, Jn) are recognized by the Church as inspired by God, i.e. written under the direct influence of the Holy Spirit. They are called "from Matthew", "from Mark", etc. (Greek “kata” corresponds to Russian “according to Matthew”, “according to Mark”, etc.), for the life and teachings of Christ are set forth in these books by these four priests. Their gospels were not brought together in one book, which made it possible to see the gospel story from different points of view. In the 2nd century, St. Irenaeus of Lyon calls the evangelists by name and points to their gospels as the only canonical ones (Against Heresies 2, 28, 2). A contemporary of St. Irenaeus, Tatian, made the first attempt to create a single gospel narrative, composed of various texts of the four gospels, the Diatessaron, i.e. gospel of four.

3. The apostles did not set themselves the goal of creating a historical work in the modern sense of the word. They sought to spread the teachings of Jesus Christ, helped people to believe in Him, correctly understand and fulfill His commandments. The testimonies of the evangelists do not coincide in all details, which proves their independence from each other: the testimonies of eyewitnesses are always individual in color. The Holy Spirit does not certify the accuracy of the details of the facts described in the gospel, but the spiritual meaning contained in them.

The minor contradictions encountered in the presentation of the evangelists are explained by the fact that God gave the priests complete freedom in conveying certain specific facts in relation to different categories of listeners, which further emphasizes the unity of meaning and direction of all four gospels (see also General Introduction, pp. 13 and 14) .

Hide

Commentary on the current passage

Commentary on the book

Section comment

1 During the sermon that Christ was holding, standing on the very shore of the Lake of Gennesaret (cf. Mt 4:18), the people began to harass Him so much that it was difficult for Him to stay on the shore any longer (cf. Mt 4:18 and Mark 1:16).

2 Washed out nets. Ev. Luke pays attention only to this work - other evangelists also talk about mending nets ( Mark 1:19) or only about casting nets ( Mt 4:18). It was necessary to wash the nets in order to free them from the shells that got into them and from the sand.

3 Simon was already a disciple of Christ (cf. John 1:37ff.) - only he was not yet called, like the other apostles, to the constant following of Christ and continued to fish.

For the position of Christ in the boat during the sermon, cf. Mark 4:1 .

4-7 The Lord invites Simon to swim away to a deep place and there cast out nets to catch fish. Simon, addressing the Lord as a "mentor" (ἐπιστάτα! - instead of the reference "rabbi" often used by other evangelists), notices that the catch can hardly be expected: he and his comrades tried to catch even at night - at the best hours for fishing — and yet nothing was caught. But nevertheless, by faith in the word of Christ, which, as Simon knows, has miraculous power, he fulfills the will of Christ and receives a huge booty as a reward. This prey is so great that the nets have already begun to break through in some places, and Simon and his companions began to signal with their hands to the fishermen who remained in another boat near the shore, so that they would quickly go to their aid: it was unnecessary to shout at the distance of the boat Simon from the shore. The “comrades”, obviously, were watching Simon’s boat all the time, as they heard what Christ said to Simon.

8-9 Both Simon and the others who were present were extremely frightened, and Simon even began to ask the Lord to get out of the boat, because he felt that his sinfulness might suffer from the holiness of Christ (cf. 1:12 ; 2:9 ; 1 Kings 17:18).

9 From this catch - more precisely: "the catch that they took" (in Russian, the translation is inaccurate: "they caught"). Simon was especially struck by this miracle, not because he had not seen the miracles of Christ before, but because it happened according to some special intentions of the Lord, without any request from Simon himself. He realized that the Lord wanted to give him some special assignment, and fear of an unknown future filled his soul.

10-11 The Lord comforts Simon and reveals to him the purpose he had when miraculously sent Simon a rich catch of fish. This was a symbolic act that pointed out to Simon the success he would have when he began to convert whole masses of people to Christ with his preaching. Evangelist, obviously, was presented here with that great event, which was accomplished mainly thanks to the preaching of St. Peter on the day of Pentecost - precisely the appeal to Christ of three thousand people ( Acts 2:41).

11 They left everything. Although the Lord spoke only to one Simon, but, apparently, other disciples of the Lord realized that the time had come for all of them to leave their usual activities and travel with their Teacher.

However, this was not yet the calling of the disciples to the apostolic ministry: this was done after ( 6:13ff.). Negative criticism points to the fact that the first two evangelists say nothing about the miraculous catch of fish, and concludes that ev. Luke here merged into one event two completely different in time: the calling of the disciples to be fishers of people ( Mt 4:18-22) and miraculous fishing after the resurrection of Christ ( Jn 21 ch.). But the wonderful fishing in Ev. John and the miraculous fishing in Ev. Bows have completely different meanings. The first one talks about the restoration of the app. Peter in his apostolic ministry, and the second - only about the preparation for this ministry: here Peter still has the thought of that great activity to which the Lord calls him. Therefore, there is no doubt that this is not at all the catch that Ev. John. But in that case, how can the first two evangelists and the third be reconciled? Why do the first two evangelists say nothing about the slave's catch? Some interpreters (eg Keil), conscious of their impotence to resolve this issue, argue that Ev. Luke does not have in mind the vocation that the first two evangelists talk about (Explanation on the Heb. Matt, ch. IV-i). But the whole situation of the event does not allow us to think that it could be repeated, so that ev. Luke was not talking about the moment in the gospel history that the evangelists Matthew and Mark have in mind. Therefore, it would be better to say that the first two evangelists did not attach as much importance to the symbolic fishing that it had in the eyes of Luke. Indeed, Ev. Luke, who describes in the book of Acts the preaching activity of St. Peter and, obviously, who had long been interested in everyone who was related to this apostle, it seemed very important to note in the Gospel that symbolic foreshadowing of the success of the future activity of St. Peter, which is contained in the story of the miraculous catch of fish.

12-14 See Matthew 8:2-4 and Mark 1:40-44. Ev. Luke more follows here ev. Mark.

15-16 About the disobedience of the leper Luke was silent (cf. Mark 1:45).

15 All the more, that is, to an even greater extent than before (μα̃λλον ). The prohibition to speak only further encouraged people to spread the rumor about the Miracle Worker.

17-26 (See Matthew 9:2-8 and Mark 2:3-12) Ev. Luke makes some additions to the narrative of the first two evangelists.

17 One day—that is, one of those days—just during the journey the Lord had taken (cf. 4:43ff.).

Lawyers - see Mt 22:35 .

Of all places, the expression is hyperbolic. The motives for the arrival of the scribes and Pharisees could be very diverse, but, of course, an unfriendly attitude towards Christ prevailed among them.

The power of the Lord, - that is, the power of God. Ev. Luke, where he calls Christ the Lord, writes the word κύριος; with a member (ὁ κύριος), but here it is put: κυρίου - without a member.

19 Through the roof, i.e. through the tiles ( διὰ τω̃ν κεράμων ), with which the roof of the house was laid out. They dismantled these tiles in one place (at Mark 2:4, the roof seems to be such that you need to "dig through").

20 He said to the man: they say goodbye- more correctly: “he said to him: man! are forgiven…” Christ calls the paralytic not a “child”, as in other cases (e.g. Matthew 9:2), but simply "man", probably referring to his former sinful life.

22 Understanding their thoughts. Some critics point to a contradiction here. Luke to himself: just now he said that the scribes reasoned aloud among themselves, so that Christ could hear their conversations, and now he says that Christ penetrated into their thoughts, which they kept to themselves, as he noted. Mark. But there is no contradiction here. Christ could hear the conversation of the scribes among themselves - Luke kept silent about this - but at the same time He penetrated with thought into the secret thoughts that they hid: they say, according to the Evangelist Luke, not everyone expressed what they thought ... - Impression , rendered by this miracle on the people (v. 26), was, according to ev. Luke, stronger than Matthew and Mark portrayed him.

27-39 The call of the publican Levi and the feast arranged by him. Luke describes according to Mark ( 2:13-22 ; cf. Matthew 9:9-17), only occasionally supplementing his story.

27 He went out - out of the city.

I saw - more correctly: “began to look, observe” (ἐθεάσατο ).

28 Leaving everything - that is, his office and everything that was in it!

Followed - more precisely: followed (past Nes. ἠκολούθει, - according to the best reading - means constant following of Christ).

29 And others who reclined with them. So ev. Luke replaces Mark's expression "sinners" ( Mark 2:15). About the fact that there were “sinners” at the table, he says in v. 30th.

33 Why the disciples of John. Ev. Luke does not mention that the disciples of John themselves turned to Christ with questions (cf. Mt and Mk). This is because he reduces this picture, which the first two evangelists divide into two scenes, into one scene. Why the disciples of John found themselves this time with the Pharisees, this is due to the similarity in their religious exercises. In fact, of course, the spirit of the Pharisees' fasts and prayers was completely different from that of the disciples of John, who at one time denounced the Pharisees quite a lot (Matthew ch. 3). The prayers that the disciples of John did - only Ev. Luke - were probably the so-called Jewish shema laid down for different hours of the day (cf. Mt 6:5).

36 At this he told them a parable. Having explained that the Pharisees and the disciples of John cannot make claims about the non-observance of the fasts by the disciples of Christ (there is no question of prayer - because, of course, the disciples of Christ also prayed), the Lord further explains that, on the other hand, His disciples should not harshly condemn the Pharisees and disciples of John because they strictly adhere to the Old Testament decrees or, better, the habits of antiquity. It is really impossible to take one piece from new clothes in order to mend old ones: a piece from new clothes will not fit the old clothes, and the new one will also be spoiled by such a clipping. This means that to the Old Testament worldview, on the basis of which even the disciples of John the Baptist, not to mention the Pharisees, continued to stand, one should not attach only one piece of the new, Christian worldview, in the form of a free attitude to the fasts established by Jewish tradition (not by the Law of Moses) . What will happen if the disciples of John borrow only this freedom from the disciples of Christ? For the rest, after all, their worldview will not change in anything, but meanwhile they will violate the integrity of their own view, and at the same time the new teaching, Christian, with which they will later have to get acquainted, will lose for them the impression of integrity.

37 And no one pours. Here is another parable, but of exactly the same content as the first. New wine has to be poured into new wineskins because it has to ferment and the wineskins will stretch very much. Old wineskins will not withstand this fermentation process: they will burst - and why sacrifice them in vain? They may come in handy for something... It is clear that Christ again here points to the futility of forcing the disciples of John who were not prepared to accept His teaching, in general, to learn one rule of Christian freedom. For the time being, let the bearers of this freedom be people who are able to perceive and assimilate it. He, so to speak, excuses the disciples of John for the fact that they still make up some kind of separate circle that stands outside of fellowship with Him ... The same apology to the disciples of John is contained in the last parable that old wine is tastier ( Art. 39). The Lord wants to say by this that for Him it is quite understandable that people who are accustomed to certain ways of life and have long since adopted certain views cling to them with all their might and that the ancient seems pleasant to them...

Personality of the gospel writer. The Evangelist Luke, according to legends preserved by some ancient church writers (Eusebius of Caesarea, Jerome, Theophylact, Euthymius Zigaben, and others), was born in Antioch. His name, in all likelihood, is an abbreviation of the Roman name Lucilius. Was he a Jew or a Gentile? This question is answered by that place from the epistle to the Colossians, where ap. Paul distinguishes Luke from the circumcised (Luke 4:11-14) and therefore testifies that Luke was a Gentile by birth. It is safe to assume that before entering the Church of Christ, Luke was a Jewish proselyte, since he is very familiar with Jewish customs. In his civil profession, Luke was a doctor (Col. 4:14), and church tradition, although rather later, says that he was also engaged in painting (Nikephorus Kallistos. Church. history. II, 43). When and how he converted to Christ is unknown. The tradition that he belonged to the number of the 70 apostles of Christ (Epiphanius. Panarius, haer. LI, 12, etc.) cannot be recognized as reliable in view of the clear statement of Luke himself, who does not include himself among the witnesses of the life of Christ (Luke 1:1ff.). He acts for the first time as a companion and assistant to the Apostle. Paul during Paul's second missionary journey. This took place in Troas, where Luke may have lived before (Acts 16:10ff.). Then he was with Paul in Macedonia (Acts 16:11ff.) and, on his third journey, Troas, Miletus, and other places (Acts 24:23; Col. 4:14; Phm. 1:24). He also accompanied Paul to Rome (Acts 27:1-28; cf. 2 Tim 4:11). Then information about him ceases in the writings of the New Testament, and only a relatively late tradition (Gregory the Theologian) reports his martyr's death; his relics, according to Jerome (de vir. ill. VII), at imp. Constantius was transferred from Achaia to Constantinople.

Origin of the Gospel of Luke. According to the evangelist himself (Luke 1:1-4), he composed his Gospel on the basis of the tradition of eyewitnesses and the study of written experiences of the presentation of this tradition, trying to give a relatively detailed and correct orderly presentation of the events of the Gospel history. And the works that Ev. Luke, were compiled on the basis of the apostolic tradition - but nevertheless, they seemed to be ev. Luke is insufficient for the purpose he had in compiling his gospel. One of these sources, perhaps even the main source, was for Ev. Luke Gospel of Mark. They even say that a huge part of the Gospel of Luke is in literary dependence on Ev. Mark (this is exactly what Weiss proved in his work on Ev. Mark by comparing the texts of these two Gospels).

Some critics still tried to make the Gospel of Luke dependent on the Gospel of Matthew, but these attempts were extremely unsuccessful and are now almost never repeated. If there is anything that can be said with certainty, it is that in some places Ev. Luke uses a source that agrees with the Gospel of Matthew. This must be said primarily about the history of the childhood of Jesus Christ. The nature of the presentation of this story, the very speech of the Gospel in this section, which is very reminiscent of the works of Jewish writing, make us assume that Luke here used a Jewish source, which was quite close to the story of the childhood of Jesus Christ, set forth in the Gospel of Matthew.

Finally, back in ancient time it has been suggested that the Luke, as a companion of ap. Paul, expounded the "Gospel" of this particular apostle (Irenaeus. Against heresies. III, 1; in Eusebius of Caesarea, V, 8). Although this assumption is very likely and agrees with the nature of the gospel of Luke, who, apparently, deliberately chose such narratives as could prove the general and main point of the gospel of Paul about the salvation of the Gentiles, nevertheless the evangelist's own statement (1:1 et seq.) does not refer to this source.

Reason and purpose, place and time of writing the Gospel. The Gospel of Luke (and the book of Acts) was written for a certain Theophilus to enable him to be convinced that the Christian doctrine taught to him rested on solid foundations. There are many assumptions about the origin, profession and place of residence of this Theophilus, but all these assumptions do not have sufficient grounds for themselves. One can only say that Theophilus was a noble man, since Luke calls him “venerable” (κράτ ιστε 1:3), and from the character of the Gospel, which is close to the character of the teachings of St. Paul naturally concludes that Theophilus was converted to Christianity by the apostle Paul and was probably previously a pagan. One can also accept the evidence of the Encounters (a work attributed to Clement of Rome, x, 71) that Theophilus was a resident of Antioch. Finally, from the fact that in the book of Acts, written for the same Theophilus, Luke does not make explanations of those mentioned in the history of the journey of St. Paul to Rome of the localities (Acts 28:12.13.15), it can be concluded that Theophilus was well acquainted with these localities and, probably, he himself traveled to Rome more than once. But there is no doubt that the gospel is its own. Luke wrote not for Theophilus alone, but for all Christians who were interested in getting acquainted with the history of the life of Christ in such a systematic and verified form as this history is found in the Gospel of Luke.

That the Gospel of Luke was in any case written for a Christian, or, more correctly, for Gentile Christians, is clearly seen from the fact that the evangelist nowhere presents Jesus Christ as the Messiah predominantly expected by the Jews and does not seek to indicate in his activity and teaching Christ the fulfillment of messianic prophecies. Instead, we find repeated indications in the third gospel that Christ is the Redeemer of the entire human race and that the gospel is for all nations. Such an idea was already expressed by the righteous elder Simeon (Luke 2:31 et seq.), and then passes through the genealogy of Christ, which is in Ev. Luke brought to Adam, the ancestor of all mankind, and which, therefore, shows that Christ does not belong to one Jewish people, but to all mankind. Then, beginning to depict the Galilean activity of Christ, Ev. Luke puts in the forefront the rejection of Christ by His fellow citizens - the inhabitants of Nazareth, in which the Lord indicated a feature that characterizes the attitude of the Jews towards the prophets in general - the attitude by virtue of which the prophets left the Jewish land for the Gentiles or showed their favor to the Gentiles (Elijah and Elisha Lk 4 :25-27). In the Conversation on the Mount, Ev. Luke does not cite Christ's sayings about His attitude to the law (Lk 1:20-49) and Pharisees' righteousness, and in his instruction to the apostles he omits the prohibition for the apostles to preach to the Gentiles and Samaritans (Lk 9:1-6). On the contrary, he only tells about the grateful Samaritan, about the merciful Samaritan, about Christ's disapproval of the immoderate irritation of the disciples against the Samaritans who did not accept Christ. Here it is also necessary to include various parables and sayings of Christ, in which there is a great similarity with the doctrine of righteousness from faith, which St. Paul proclaimed in his epistles, written to the churches, which were composed predominantly of Gentiles.

The influence of ap. Paul and the desire to clarify the universality of salvation brought by Christ undoubtedly had a great influence on the choice of material for compiling the Gospel of Luke. However, there is not the slightest reason to assume that the writer pursued purely subjective views in his work and deviated from historical truth. On the contrary, we see that he gives a place in his Gospel to such narratives, which undoubtedly developed in the Judeo-Christian circle (the story of the childhood of Christ). In vain, therefore, they attribute to him the desire to adapt the Jewish ideas about the Messiah to the views of St. Paul (Zeller) or else the desire to exalt Paul before the twelve apostles and Paul's teaching before Judeo-Christianity (Baur, Gilgenfeld). This assumption is contradicted by the content of the Gospel, in which there are many sections that go against such an alleged desire of Luke (this is, firstly, the story of the birth of Christ and His childhood, and then such parts: Luke 4:16-30; Luke 5:39; Luke 10:22 ; Luke 12:6 ff.; Luke 13:1-5 ; Luke 16:17 ; Luke 19:18-46 etc. (In order to reconcile his assumption with the existence of such sections in the Gospel of Luke, Baur had to resort to a new assumption that in its present form the Gospel of Luke is the work of some later living person (editor).Golsten, who sees in the Gospel of Luke a combination of the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, believes that Luke had the goal of uniting the Judeo-Christian and The same view of the Gospel of Luke, as a work pursuing purely reconciliatory aims of two trends that fought in the primordial Church, continues to exist in the latest criticism of the apostolic writings. Jog. Weiss in his preface to sense ovation on Ev. Luke (2nd ed. 1907) to come to the conclusion that this gospel can by no means be regarded as pursuing the task of exalting peacockism. Luke shows his complete “non-partisanship”, and if he has frequent coincidences in thoughts and expressions with the epistles of the Apostle Paul, then this is due only to the fact that by the time Luke wrote his Gospel, these epistles were already widely distributed in all churches . But the love of Christ for sinners, on the manifestations of which so often ev. Luke, is not anything particularly characterizing the Pauline idea of Christ: on the contrary, the whole Christian tradition presented Christ as loving sinners...

The time of writing the Gospel of Luke by some ancient writers belonged to a very early period in the history of Christianity - back to the time of the activity of St. Paul, and the newest interpreters in most cases assert that the Gospel of Luke was written shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem: at the time when the two-year stay of Apostle ended. Paul in Roman imprisonment. There is, however, an opinion, supported by rather authoritative scholars (for example, B. Weiss), that the Gospel of Luke was written after the year 70, that is, after the destruction of Jerusalem. This opinion wants to find a basis for itself, mainly in the 21st ch. The Gospel of Luke (v. 24 et seq.), where the destruction of Jerusalem is assumed as if it had already taken place. With this, as if, according to the idea that Luke has about the position of the Christian Church, as being in a very oppressed state (cf. Luke 6:20 et seq.). However, according to the same Weiss, the origin of the Gospel cannot be attributed further to the 70s (as do, for example, Baur and Zeller, who believe the origin of the Gospel of Luke in 110-130, or as Gilgenfeld, Keim, Volkmar - in 100- m g.). Regarding this opinion of Weiss, it can be said that it does not contain anything incredible and even, perhaps, can find its basis in the testimony of St. Irenaeus, who says that the Gospel of Luke was written after the death of the apostles Peter and Paul (Against Heresies III, 1).

Where the Gospel of Luke was written is nothing definite from tradition. According to some, the place of writing was Achaia, according to others, Alexandria or Caesarea. Some point to Corinth, others to Rome as the place where the Gospel was written; but all this is mere conjecture.

On the Authenticity and Integrity of the Gospel of Luke. The writer of the Gospel does not call himself by name, but the ancient tradition of the Church unanimously calls the writer of the third Gospel St. Luke (Irenaeus. Against heresies. III, 1, 1; Origen in Eusebius, Tserk. ist. VI, 25, etc. See also the canon of Muratorius). There is nothing in the Gospel itself that would prevent us from accepting this testimony of tradition. If opponents of authenticity point out that the apostolic men do not cite any passages from it, then this circumstance can be explained by the fact that under the apostolic men it was customary to be guided more by oral tradition about the life of Christ than by records about Him; in addition, the Gospel of Luke, as having, judging by its writing, a private purpose primarily, could just so be considered by the apostolic men as a private document. Only later did it acquire the significance of a universally binding guide for the study of gospel history.

The latest criticism still does not agree with the testimony of tradition and does not recognize Luke as the writer of the Gospel. The basis for doubting the authenticity of the Gospel of Luke is for critics (for example, for John Weiss) the fact that the author of the Gospel must be recognized as the one who compiled the book of the Acts of the Apostles: this is evidenced not only by the inscription of the book. Acts (Acts 1:1), but also the style of both books. Meanwhile, criticism claims that the book of Acts was not written by Luke himself or by any companion of St. Paul, and a person who lived much later, who only in the second part of the book uses the records that remained from the companion of ap. Paul (see, for example, Luke 16:10: we...). Obviously, this assumption, expressed by Weiss, stands and falls with the question of the authenticity of the book of the Acts of the Apostles and therefore cannot be discussed here.

With regard to the integrity of the Gospel of Luke, critics have long expressed the idea that not the entire Gospel of Luke came from this writer, but that there are sections inserted into it by a later hand. Therefore, they tried to single out the so-called "first Luke" (Scholten). But most of the new interpreters defend the position that the Gospel of Luke, in its entirety, is the work of Luke. The objections which, for example, he expresses in his commentary on Ev. Luke Yog. Weiss, they can hardly shake the confidence in a sane person that the Gospel of Luke in all its departments is a completely integral work of one author. (Some of these objections will be dealt with in the Commentary on Luke.)

content of the gospel. In relation to the choice and order of gospel events, ev. Luke, like Matthew and Mark, divides these events into two groups, one of which embraces the Galilean activity of Christ, and the other his activity in Jerusalem. At the same time, Luke greatly abridges some of the stories contained in the first two Gospels, citing many such stories that are not at all found in those Gospels. Finally, he groups and modifies those stories, which in his Gospel are a reproduction of what is in the first two Gospels, in his own way.

Like Ev. Matthew, Luke begins his Gospel from the very first moments of the New Testament revelation. In the first three chapters, he depicts: a) the foreshadowing of the birth of John the Baptist and the Lord Jesus Christ, as well as the birth and circumcision of John the Baptist and the circumstances that accompanied them (ch. 1), b) the story of the birth, circumcision and bringing of Christ to the temple , and then the speech of Christ in the temple, when He was a 12-year-old boy (ch. 11), c) the performance of John the Baptist as the Forerunner of the Messiah, the descent of the Spirit of God on Christ during His baptism, the age of Christ, in which He was at that time, and His genealogy (ch. 3rd).

The depiction of Christ's messianic activity in the Gospel of Luke is also quite clearly divided into three parts. The first part embraces the work of Christ in Galilee (Lk 4:1-9:50), the second contains the speeches and miracles of Christ during His long journey to Jerusalem (Lk 9:51-19:27) and the third contains the story of the completion of the messianic ministry Christ in Jerusalem (Luke 19:28-24:53).

In the first part, where the Evangelist Luke apparently follows Ev. Mark, both in choice and in the sequence of events, made several releases from Mark's narrative. Omitted precisely: Mk 3:20-30, - the malicious judgments of the Pharisees about the expulsion of demons by Christ, Mk 6:17-29 - the news of the taking into prison and the death of the Baptist, and then everything that is given in Mark (and also in Matthew) from history activities of Christ in northern Galilee and Perea (Mk 6:44-8:27ff.). The miracle of feeding the people (Luke 9:10-17) is directly connected with the story of Peter's confession and the first prediction of the Lord about His sufferings (Luke 9:18 et seq.). On the other hand, Ev. Luke, instead of the section on the recognition of Simon and Andrew and the sons of Zebedee to follow Christ (Mk 6:16-20; cf. Mt 4:18-22), tells the story of the miraculous fishing, as a result of which Peter and his companions left their occupation in order to constantly follow Christ (Lk 5:1-11), and instead of the story of the rejection of Christ in Nazareth (Mk 6:1-6; cf. Mt 13:54-58), he places a story of the same content when describing Christ's first visit as Messiah of his fatherly city (Luke 4:16-30). Further, after the calling of the 12 apostles, Luke places in his Gospel the following departments that are not found in the Gospel of Mark: the Sermon on the Mount (Luke 6:20-49, but in a shorter form than it is set out in Ev. Matthew), the question of the Baptist to the Lord about His Messiahship (Luke 7:18-35), and inserted between these two parts is the story of the resurrection of the youth of Nain (Luke 7:11-17), then the story of the anointing of Christ at a dinner in the house of the Pharisee Simon (Luke 7:36-50) and the names of the women of Galilee who served Christ with their property (Luke 8:1-3).

Such closeness of the Gospel of Luke to the Gospel of Mark is no doubt due to the fact that both evangelists wrote their Gospels for Gentile Christians. Both evangelists also show a desire to depict the gospel events not in their exact chronological sequence, but to give the fullest and clearest possible idea of Christ as the founder of the Messianic kingdom. Luke's deviations from Mark can be explained by his desire to give more space to those stories that Luke borrows from tradition, as well as the desire to group the facts reported to Luke by eyewitnesses so that his Gospel represents not only the image of Christ, His life and works, but also His teaching. about the Kingdom of God, expressed in His speeches and conversations both with His disciples and with His opponents.

In order to carry out systematically such an intention, ev. Luke places between the two, predominantly historical, parts of his Gospel - the first and third - the middle part (Luke 9:51-19:27), in which conversations and speeches predominate, and in this part he cites such speeches and events that, according to others The gospels took place at a different time. Some interpreters (for example, Meyer, Godet) see in this section an accurate chronological presentation of events, based on the words of Ev. Luke, who promised to state “everything in order” (καθ ’ ε ̔ ξη ̃ ς - 1:3). But such an assumption is hardly sound. Although Ev. Luke also says that he wants to write "in order", but this does not mean at all that he wants to give in his Gospel only a chronicle of the life of Christ. On the contrary, he made it his goal to give Theophilus, through an accurate presentation of the gospel history, complete confidence in the truth of those teachings in which he was instructed. General sequential order of events ev. Luke kept it: his gospel story begins with the birth of Christ and even with the birth of His Forerunner, then there is an image of Christ's public ministry, and the moments of the disclosure of Christ's teaching about Himself as the Messiah are indicated, and finally, the whole story ends with a presentation of events last days the sojourn of Christ on earth. There was no need to enumerate in sequential order everything that was accomplished by Christ from baptism to ascension, and there was no need - it was enough for the purpose that Luke had, to convey the events of the gospel history in a certain grouping. About this intention ev. Luke also speaks of the fact that most of the sections of the second part are interconnected not by exact chronological indications, but by simple transitional formulas: and it was (Luke 11:1; Luke 14:1), but it was (Luke 10:38; Luke 11:27 ), and behold (Lk 10:25), he said (Lk 12:54), etc. or in simple connectives: a, but (δε ̀ - Lk 11:29; Lk 12:10). These transitions were obviously made not in order to determine the time of events, but only their setting. It is also impossible not to point out that the evangelist here describes events that took place now in Samaria (Lk 9:52), then in Bethany, not far from Jerusalem (Lk 10:38), then again somewhere far from Jerusalem (Lk 13 :31), in Galilee - in a word, these are events of different times, and not only those that happened during the last journey of Christ to Jerusalem on the Passover of suffering Some interpreters, in order to keep the chronological order in this section, tried to find in it indications of two journeys of Christ to Jerusalem - the feast of renewal and the feast of the last Easter (Schleiermacher, Ohlshausen, Neander) or even three that John mentions in his Gospel ( Wieseler). But, apart from the fact that there is no definite allusion to various journeys, this passage in the Gospel of Luke clearly speaks against such an assumption, where it is definitely said that the evangelist wants to describe in this section only the last journey of the Lord to Jerusalem - on the Pascha of suffering. In the 9th ch. 51st Art. It says, “When the days of His taking away from the world drew near, He desired to go up to Jerusalem.” Explanation see in a sense. 9th ch. .

Finally, in the third section (Lk 19:28-24:53) Heb. Luke sometimes deviates from the chronological order of events in the interests of his grouping of facts (for example, he places Peter's denial before the trial of Christ by the high priest). Here again ev. Luke keeps the Gospel of Mark as the source of his narratives, supplementing his story with information drawn from another source unknown to us. So, Luke alone has stories about the publican Zacchaeus (Lk 19:1-10), about the dispute of the disciples during the celebration of the Eucharist (Lk 22:24-30), about the trial of Christ by Herod (Lk 23:4-12), about women mourning Christ during His procession to Golgotha (Lk 23:27-31), a conversation with a thief on the cross (Lk 23:39-43), an appearance to Emmaus travelers (Lk 24:13-35) and some other messages representing a replenishment to the stories of ev. Mark. .

Gospel plan. In accordance with his intended goal - to provide a basis for faith in the teaching that has already been taught to Theophilus, ev. Luke planned the entire content of his Gospel in such a way that it really leads the reader to the conviction that the Lord Jesus Christ accomplished the salvation of all mankind, that He fulfilled all the promises of the Old Testament about the Messiah as the Savior not of one Jewish people, but of all peoples. Naturally, in order to achieve his goal, the Evangelist Luke did not need to give his Gospel the appearance of a chronicle of gospel events, but rather, it was necessary to group all the events so that his narrative would make the desired impression on the reader.

The evangelist's plan is already evident in the introduction to the history of Christ's messianic ministry (chapters 1-3). In the story of the conception and birth of Christ, it is mentioned that an angel announced to the Blessed Virgin the birth of a Son, whom she would conceive by the power of the Holy Spirit and who therefore would be the Son of God, and in the flesh, the son of David, who would forever occupy the throne of his father, David. The birth of Christ, as the birth of the promised Redeemer, is announced through an angel to the shepherds. When Christ the Infant is brought to the temple, the inspired elder Simeon and the prophetess Anna testify to His high dignity. Jesus Himself, still a 12-year-old boy, already announces that He should be in the temple as in the house of His Father. When Christ is baptized in the Jordan, He receives a heavenly witness that He is the beloved Son of God, who received the fullness of the gifts of the Holy Spirit for His messianic ministry. Finally, His genealogy, given in Chapter 3, going back to Adam and God, testifies that He is the founder of a new humanity, born from God through the Holy Spirit.

Then, in the first part of the Gospel, an image is given of the messianic ministry of Christ, which is accomplished in the power of the Holy Spirit indwelling in Christ (4:1). By the power of the Holy Spirit, Christ triumphs over the devil in the wilderness (Luke 4:1-13), and this "power of the Spirit" in Galilee, and in Nazareth, His native city, declares Himself the Anointed One and Redeemer, about whom the prophets of the Old Testament foretold. Having not met faith in Himself here, He reminds His unbelieving fellow citizens that God is still in Old Testament prepared the reception of the prophets among the Gentiles (Luke 4:14-30).

After this, which had a predictive value for the future attitude towards Christ on the part of the Jews, the event follows a series of deeds performed by Christ in Capernaum and its environs: the healing of the demon-possessed by the power of the word of Christ in the synagogue, the healing of Simon's mother-in-law and other sick and demon-possessed who were brought and brought to Christ (Luke 4:31-44), miraculous fishing, healing of a leper. All this is depicted as events that led to the spread of the rumor about Christ and the arrival to Christ of whole masses of people who came to listen to the teaching of Christ and brought their sick with them in the hope that Christ would heal them (Luke 5:1-16).

This is followed by a group of incidents that caused opposition to Christ from the Pharisees and scribes: the forgiveness of the sins of the healed paralytic (Lk 5:17-26), the announcement at the publican's dinner that Christ did not come to save the righteous, but sinners (Lk 5:27-32 ), the justification of the disciples of Christ in non-observance of the fasts, based on the fact that the Bridegroom-Messiah is with them (Luke 5:33-39), and in violating the Sabbath, based on the fact that Christ is the lord of the Sabbath, and, moreover, confirmed by a miracle, which On the Sabbath Christ did it over the withered hand (Luke 6:1-11). But while these deeds and statements of Christ irritated his opponents to the point that they began to think about how to take Him, He chose from among His disciples 12 to be apostles (Luke 6:12-16), announced from the mountain in the ears of all the people who followed Him, the main provisions on which the Kingdom of God founded by Him should be built (Luke 6:17-49), and, after descending from the mountain, not only fulfilled the request of the Gentile centurion for the healing of his servant, because the centurion showed such faith in Christ, which Christ did not find in Israel (Lk 7:1-10), but also resurrected the son of the widow of Nain, after which he was glorified by all the people accompanying the funeral procession as a prophet sent by God to the chosen people (Lk 7:11-17 ).

The embassy from John the Baptist to Christ with the question of whether He is the Messiah prompted Christ to point to His deeds as evidence of His Messianic dignity and together reproach the people for not trusting John the Baptist and Him, Christ. At the same time, Christ makes a distinction between those listeners who yearn to hear from Him an indication of the way to salvation, and between those who are a huge mass and who do not believe in Him (Luke 7:18-35). The subsequent sections, in accordance with this intention of the evangelist to show the difference between the Jews who listened to Christ, report a number of such facts that illustrate such a division in the people and together Christ's attitude to the people, to its different parts, in accordance with their attitude to Christ, namely: the anointing of Christ a repentant sinner and the behavior of a Pharisee (Lk 7:36-50), a mention of the women of Galilee who served Christ with their property (Lk 8:1-3), a parable about the various qualities of the field on which sowing is carried out, indicating the bitterness of the people (Lk 8: 4-18), the attitude of Christ towards His relatives (Luke 8:19-21), the crossing into the country of Gadara, at which the disciples showed little faith, and the healing of the demoniac, and the contrast between the stupid indifference shown by the Gadarins to the miracle performed by Christ, and the gratitude of the healed (Lk 8:22-39), the healing of the bleeding woman and the resurrection of the daughter of Jairus, because both the woman and Jairus showed their faith in Christ (Lk 8:40-56). This is followed by the events told in chapter 9, which were intended to strengthen the disciples of Christ in the faith: supplying the disciples with the power to cast out and heal the sick, along with instructions on how they should act during their preaching journey (Luke 9: 1- 6), and it is indicated, as Tetrarch Herod understood the activity of Jesus (Lk 9: 7-9), the feeding of five thousand, by which Christ showed the apostles who returned from the journey His power to help in every need (Lk 9: 10-17), the question of Christ , for whom His people consider and for whom the disciples, and the confession of Peter on behalf of all the apostles is given: “You are the Christ of God”, and then the prediction by Christ of His rejection by the representatives of the people and His death and resurrection, as well as an exhortation addressed to the disciples, so that they imitated Him in self-sacrifice, for which He will reward them at His second glorious coming (Luke 9:18-27), the transfiguration of Christ, which allowed His disciples to penetrate with their eyes into His future glorification (L to 9:28-36), the healing of the demon-possessed lunatic lad, whom the disciples of Christ could not heal, due to the weakness of their faith, which had as its result an enthusiastic glorification by the people of God. At the same time, however, Christ once again pointed out to His disciples the fate awaiting Him, and they turned out to be incomprehensible in relation to such a clear statement made by Christ (Luke 9:37-45).

This inability of the disciples, despite their confession of the Messiahship of Christ, to understand His prophecy about His death and resurrection, had its basis in the fact that they were still in those ideas about the Kingdom of the Messiah, which were formed among the Jewish scribes, who understood the Messianic Kingdom as an earthly kingdom, political, and at the same time testified to how weak their knowledge of the nature of the Kingdom of God and its spiritual blessings was. Therefore, according to Ev. Luke, Christ devoted the rest of the time until His solemn entrance into Jerusalem to teaching His disciples precisely these most important truths about the nature of the Kingdom of God, about its form and distribution (second part), about what is needed to achieve eternal life and warnings not to be carried away by the teachings of the Pharisees and the views of His enemies, whom He will in time come to judge as the King of this Kingdom of God (Luke 9:51-19:27).

Finally, in the third part, the evangelist shows how Christ, by His sufferings, death and resurrection, proved that He is indeed the promised Savior and King of the Kingdom of God anointed by the Holy Spirit. Depicting the solemn entry of the Lord into Jerusalem, the evangelist Luke speaks not only of the rapture of the people - which other evangelists also report, but also that Christ announced His judgment on the city that was rebellious to Him (Luke 19:28-44) and then, according to with Mark and Matthew, about how He shamed His enemies in the temple (Luke 20:1-47), and then, pointing out the superiority of alms to the temple of a poor widow over the contributions of the rich, He foreshadowed before his disciples the fate of Jerusalem and His followers ( Luke 21:1-36).

In the description of the suffering and death of Christ (chap. 22 and 23), it is exposed that Satan induced Judas to betray Christ (Luke 22:3), and then Christ's confidence is put forward that He will eat the supper with His disciples in the Kingdom of God and that the Passover of the Old Testament must henceforth be replaced by the Eucharist established by Him (Luke 22:15-23). The evangelist also mentions that Christ, at the Last Supper, calling the disciples to service, and not to domination, nevertheless promised them dominion in His Kingdom (Luke 22:24-30). This is followed by a story about three moments of the last hours of Christ: the promise of Christ to pray for Peter, given in view of his imminent fall (Lk 22:31-34), the call of the disciples in the struggle against temptations (Lk 22:35-38), and the prayer of Christ in Gethsemane, in which He was strengthened by an angel from heaven (Luke 22:39-46). Then the evangelist speaks about the taking of Christ and the healing by Christ of the wounded servant of Peter (51) and about the denunciation by Him of the high priests who came with the soldiers (53). All these particulars clearly show that Christ went to suffering and death voluntarily, in the consciousness of their necessity in order for the salvation of mankind to be accomplished.

In depicting the very sufferings of Christ, the evangelist Luke puts forward Peter's denial as evidence that even during His own sufferings, Christ pitied His weak disciple (Luke 22:54-62). Then follows a description of the great sufferings of Christ in the following three lines: 1) the denial of the high dignity of Christ, partly by the soldiers who mocked Christ in the court of the high priest (Lk 22:63-65), but mainly by the members of the Sanhedrin (Lk 22:66-71), 2 ) the recognition of Christ as a dreamer at the trial of Pilate and Herod (Lk 23:1-12) and 3) the preference of the people for Christ Barabbas the robber and the condemnation of Christ to death by crucifixion (Lk 23:13-25).

After depicting the depth of Christ's suffering, the evangelist notes such features from the circumstances of this suffering, which clearly testified that Christ, even in His sufferings, nevertheless remained the King of the Kingdom of God. The Evangelist reports that the Condemned One 1) as a judge addressed the women weeping over Him (Lk 23:26-31) and asked the Father for his enemies who committed a crime against Him without consciousness (Lk 23:32-34), 2) gave a place in paradise to the repentant thief, as having the right to do so (Lk 23:35-43), 3) realized that, dying, He betrays His own spirit to the Father (Lk 23:44-46), 4) was recognized as a righteous man by the centurion and aroused repentance among the people by his death (Lk 23:47-48) and 5) was honored with a particularly solemn burial (Lk 23:49-56). Finally, in the history of the resurrection of Christ, the evangelist exposes such events that clearly proved the greatness of Christ and served to explain the work of salvation accomplished by Him. This is precisely: the testimony of the angels that Christ overcame death, according to His predictions about this (Luke 24:1-12), then the appearance of Christ himself to the Emmaus travelers, to whom Christ showed from Scripture the necessity of His suffering in order for Him to enter into glory. His (Lk 24:13-35), the appearance of Christ to all the apostles, to whom He also explained the prophecies that spoke about Him, and instructed in His name to preach the message of the forgiveness of sins to all the peoples of the earth, while promising the apostles to send down the power of the Holy Spirit (Lk 24:36-49). Finally, having depicted briefly the ascension of Christ into heaven (Luke 24:50-53), ev. Luke ended his Gospel with this, which really was the affirmation of everything taught to Theophilus and other Christians from the Gentiles, the Christian teaching: Christ is really depicted here as the promised Messiah, as the Son of God and the King of the Kingdom of God.

Sources and aids in the study of the Gospel of Luke. Of the patristic interpretations of the Gospel of Luke, the most detailed are the writings of Blessed. Theophylact and Euphemia Zigaben. Of our Russian commentators, Bishop Michael (The Explanatory Gospel) should be placed in the first place, then D.P. Kaz. spirit. Academy of M. Bogoslovsky, who compiled the books: 1) The childhood of our Lord Jesus Christ and His forerunner, according to the Gospels of St. Apostles Matthew and Luke. Kazan, 1893; and 2) The public ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ according to the sayings of the holy evangelists. Issue. the first. Kazan, 1908.

Of the writings on the Gospel of Luke, we have only the thesis of Fr. Polotebnova: The Holy Gospel of Luke. Orthodox critical-exegetical study against F. H. Baur. Moscow, 1873.

Of the foreign commentaries, we mention interpretations: Keil K. Fr. 1879 (in German), Meyer, revised by B. Weiss 1885 (in German), Jog. Weiss "The Writings of N. Head." 2nd ed. 1907 (in German); Trench. Interpretation of the parables of our Lord Jesus Christ. 1888 (in Russian) and Miracles of our Lord Jesus Christ (1883 in Russian, lang.); and Mercks. The four canonical gospels according to their oldest known text. Part 2, 2nd half of 1905 (in German).

The following works are also cited: Geiki. The Life and Teachings of Christ. Per. St. M. Fiveysky, 1894; Edersheim. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Per. St. M. Fiveysky. T. 1. 1900. Reville A. Jesus the Nazarene. Per. Zelinsky, vol. 1-2, 1909; and some spiritual journal articles.

Gospel

The word "Gospel" (τὸ εὐαγγέλιον) in classical Greek was used to designate: a) the reward given to the messenger of joy (τῷ εὐαγγέλῳ), b) the sacrifice sacrificed on the occasion of receiving some kind of good news or a holiday made on the same occasion and c) the good news itself. In the New Testament, this expression means:

a) the good news that Christ accomplished the reconciliation of people with God and brought us the greatest blessings - mainly establishing the Kingdom of God on earth ( Matt. 4:23),

b) the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ, preached by Himself and His apostles about Him as the King of this Kingdom, the Messiah and the Son of God ( Rome. 1:1, 15:16 ; 2 Cor. 11:7; 1 Thess. 2:8) or the identity of the preacher ( Rome. 2:16).

For quite a long time, stories about the life of the Lord Jesus Christ were transmitted only orally. The Lord Himself left no record of His words and deeds. In the same way, the 12 apostles were not born writers: they were “unlearned and simple people” ( Acts. 4:13), although they are literate. Among the Christians of the apostolic time there were also very few "wise according to the flesh, strong" and "noble" ( 1 Cor. 1:26), and for most believers much greater value had oral stories about Christ than written ones. Thus the apostles and preachers or evangelists "transmitted" (παραδιδόναι) tales of the deeds and speeches of Christ, while the faithful "received" (παραλαμβάνειν), but, of course, not mechanically, only by memory, as can be said of the students of rabbinical schools, but whole soul, as if something living and giving life. But soon this period of oral tradition was to end. On the one hand, Christians must have felt the need for a written presentation of the Gospel in their disputes with the Jews, who, as you know, denied the reality of the miracles of Christ and even claimed that Christ did not declare Himself the Messiah. It was necessary to show the Jews that Christians have authentic stories about Christ of those persons who were either among His apostles, or who were in close communion with eyewitnesses of Christ's deeds. On the other hand, the need for a written presentation of the history of Christ began to be felt because the generation of the first disciples was gradually dying out and the ranks of direct witnesses of the miracles of Christ were thinning out. Therefore, it was necessary to fix in writing individual sayings of the Lord and His whole speeches, as well as the stories about Him of the apostles. It was then that separate records of what was reported in the oral tradition about Christ began to appear here and there. Most carefully they wrote down the words of Christ, which contained the rules of the Christian life, and were much freer in the transfer of various events from the life of Christ, retaining only their general impression. Thus, one thing in these records, due to its originality, was transmitted everywhere in the same way, while the other was modified. These initial notes did not think about the completeness of the narrative. Even our Gospels, as can be seen from the conclusion of the Gospel of John ( In. 21:25), did not intend to report all the words and deeds of Christ. This is evident, among other things, from what is not included in them, for example, such a saying of Christ: “it is more blessed to give than to receive” ( Acts. 20:35). The Evangelist Luke reports such records, saying that many before him had already begun to compose narratives about the life of Christ, but that they did not have the proper fullness and that therefore they did not give sufficient “confirmation” in the faith ( OK. 1:1-4).

Evidently, our canonical gospels arose from the same motives. The period of their appearance can be determined at about thirty years - from 60 to 90 (the last was the Gospel of John). The first three gospels are usually called synoptic in biblical science, because they depict the life of Christ in such a way that their three narratives can be easily viewed in one and combined into one whole narrative (forecasters - from Greek - looking together). They began to be called gospels each separately, perhaps as early as the end of the 1st century, but from church writing we have information that such a name was given to the entire composition of the gospels only in the second half of the 2nd century. As for the names: “The Gospel of Matthew”, “The Gospel of Mark”, etc., then these very ancient names from Greek should be translated as follows: “The Gospel according to Matthew”, “The Gospel according to Mark” (κατὰ Ματθαῖον, κατὰ Μᾶρκον). By this, the Church wanted to say that in all the Gospels there is a single Christian gospel about Christ the Savior, but according to the images of different writers: one image belongs to Matthew, the other to Mark, etc.

four gospel

Thus the ancient Church looked upon the depiction of the life of Christ in our four gospels, not as different gospels or narratives, but as one gospel, one book in four forms. That is why in the Church the name of the Four Gospels was established behind our Gospels. Saint Irenaeus called them "the four-fold Gospel" (τετράμορφον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον - see Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses liber 3, ed. A. Rousseau and L. Doutreleaü Irenée Lyon. Contre les hérésies, livre 3 ., vol. 29 11, 11).

The Fathers of the Church dwell on the question: why did the Church accept not one gospel, but four? So St. John Chrysostom says: “Is it really impossible for one evangelist to write everything that is needed. Of course, he could, but when four people wrote, they did not write at the same time, not in the same place, without communicating or conspiring among themselves, and for all that they wrote in such a way that everything seemed to be pronounced by one mouth, then this is the strongest proof of the truth. You will say: "However, the opposite happened, for the four Gospels are often convicted in disagreement." This is what it is sure sign truth. For if the Gospels were exactly in agreement with each other in everything, even regarding the very words, then none of the enemies would believe that the Gospels were not written by ordinary mutual agreement. Now, a slight disagreement between them frees them from all suspicion. For what they say differently about time or place does not in the least impair the truth of their narration. In the main thing, which is the foundation of our life and the essence of preaching, not one of them disagrees with the other in anything and nowhere - that God became a man, worked miracles, was crucified, resurrected, ascended into heaven. ("Conversations on the Gospel of Matthew", 1).

Saint Irenaeus also finds a special symbolic meaning in the quaternary number of our Gospels. “Since there are four parts of the world in which we live, and since the Church is scattered throughout the earth and has its affirmation in the Gospel, it was necessary for her to have four pillars, from everywhere emanating incorruption and reviving the human race. The all-arranging Word, seated on the Cherubim, gave us the Gospel in four forms, but imbued with one spirit. For David also, praying for His appearance, says: "Seated on the Cherubim, reveal Yourself" ( Ps. 79:2). But the Cherubim (in the vision of the prophet Ezekiel and the Apocalypse) have four faces, and their faces are images of the activity of the Son of God. Saint Irenaeus finds it possible to attach the symbol of a lion to the Gospel of John, since this Gospel depicts Christ as the eternal King, and the lion is the king in the animal world; to the Gospel of Luke - the symbol of the calf, since Luke begins his Gospel with the image of the priestly service of Zechariah, who slaughtered the calves; to the Gospel of Matthew - a symbol of a person, since this Gospel mainly depicts the human birth of Christ, and, finally, to the Gospel of Mark - a symbol of an eagle, because Mark begins his Gospel with a mention of the prophets, to whom the Holy Spirit flew, like an eagle on wings "(Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses, liber 3, 11, 11-22). In other Church Fathers, the symbols of the lion and calf are moved and the first is given to Mark, and the second to John. Starting from the 5th c. in this form, the symbols of the evangelists began to join the images of the four evangelists in church painting.

Reciprocity of the Gospels

Each of the four Gospels has its own characteristics, and most of all - the Gospel of John. But the first three, as already mentioned above, have extremely much in common with each other, and this similarity involuntarily catches the eye even with a cursory reading of them. Let us first of all speak of the similarity of the Synoptic Gospels and the causes of this phenomenon.

Even Eusebius of Caesarea in his "canons" divided the Gospel of Matthew into 355 parts and noted that all three forecasters have 111 of them. AT modern times exegetes worked out an even more precise numerical formula for determining the similarity of the Gospels and calculated that the total number of verses common to all weather forecasters goes up to 350. Matthew then has 350 verses peculiar only to him, Mark has 68 such verses, and Luke has 541. Similarities are mainly seen in the transmission of the sayings of Christ, and differences - in the narrative part. When Matthew and Luke literally converge in their Gospels, Mark always agrees with them. The similarity between Luke and Mark is much closer than between Luke and Matthew (Lopukhin - in the Orthodox Theological Encyclopedia. T. V. C. 173). It is also remarkable that some passages of all three evangelists go in the same sequence, for example, the temptation and speech in Galilee, the calling of Matthew and the conversation about fasting, the plucking of ears and the healing of the withered hand, the calming of the storm and the healing of the demoniac of Gadarene, etc. The similarity sometimes extends even to the construction of sentences and expressions (for example, in the citation of the prophecy Mal. 3:1).

As for the differences observed among weather forecasters, there are quite a few of them. Others are reported only by two evangelists, others even by one. So, only Matthew and Luke cite the conversation on the mount of the Lord Jesus Christ, tell the story of the birth and the first years of Christ's life. One Luke speaks of the birth of John the Baptist. Other things one evangelist conveys in a more abbreviated form than another, or in a different connection than another. The details of the events in each Gospel are different, as well as the expressions.

This phenomenon of similarity and difference in the Synoptic Gospels has long attracted the attention of interpreters of Scripture, and various assumptions have long been put forward to explain this fact. More correct is the opinion that our three evangelists used a common oral source for their narrative of the life of Christ. At that time, evangelists or preachers about Christ went everywhere preaching and repeated in different places in more or less extensive form what it was considered necessary to offer to those who entered the Church. In this way a well-known definite type was formed oral gospel, and this is the type we have in writing in our synoptic gospels. Of course, at the same time, depending on the goal that this or that evangelist had, his gospel took on some special features, only characteristic of his work. At the same time, one cannot rule out the possibility that an older gospel might have been known to the evangelist who wrote later. At the same time, the difference between synoptics should be explained by the different goals that each of them had in mind when writing his Gospel.

As we have already said, the synoptic gospels are very different from the gospel of John the Theologian. Thus they depict almost exclusively the activity of Christ in Galilee, while the apostle John depicts mainly the sojourn of Christ in Judea. In regard to content, the synoptic gospels also differ considerably from the gospel of John. They give, so to speak, a more external image of the life, deeds and teachings of Christ, and from the speeches of Christ they cite only those that were accessible to the understanding of the whole people. John, on the other hand, omits a lot of Christ's activity, for example, he cites only six miracles of Christ, but those speeches and miracles that he cites have a special deep meaning and the extreme importance of the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. Finally, while the synoptics portray Christ primarily as the founder of the kingdom of God and therefore direct their readers' attention to the kingdom he founded, John draws our attention to the central point of this kingdom, from which life flows along the peripheries of the kingdom, i.e. on the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, whom John depicts as the Only Begotten Son of God and as the Light for all mankind. That is why even the ancient interpreters called the Gospel of John predominantly spiritual (πνευματικόν), in contrast to synoptic ones, as depicting a predominantly human side in the face of Christ (εὐαγγέλιον σωματικόν), i.e. bodily gospel.

However, it must be said that weather forecasters also have passages that indicate that, as weather forecasters, the activity of Christ in Judea was known ( Matt. 23:37, 27:57 ; OK. 10:38-42), so John has indications of the continuous activity of Christ in Galilee. In the same way, weather forecasters convey such sayings of Christ, which testify to His divine dignity ( Matt. 11:27), and John, for his part, also in places depicts Christ as a true man ( In. 2 etc.; John 8 and etc.). Therefore, one cannot speak of any contradiction between the synoptics and John in the depiction of the face and deed of Christ.

Reliability of the Gospels

Although criticism has long been expressed against the authenticity of the Gospels, and recently these attacks of criticism have become especially intensified (the theory of myths, especially the theory of Drews, who does not at all recognize the existence of Christ), however, all objections of criticism are so insignificant that they are shattered at the slightest collision with Christian apologetics. . Here, however, we will not cite the objections of negative criticism and analyze these objections: this will be done when interpreting the text of the Gospels itself. We will only speak about the main general grounds on which we recognize the Gospels as completely reliable documents. This is, firstly, the existence of the tradition of eyewitnesses, of whom many survived until the era when our Gospels appeared. Why should we refuse to trust these sources of our gospels? Could they have made up everything that is in our gospels? No, all the Gospels are purely historical. Secondly, it is incomprehensible why the Christian consciousness would want - so the mythical theory asserts - to crown the head of a simple rabbi Jesus with the crown of the Messiah and the Son of God? Why, for example, is it not said about the Baptist that he performed miracles? Obviously because he did not create them. And from this it follows that if Christ is said to be the Great Wonderworker, then it means that He really was like that. And why could one deny the authenticity of the miracles of Christ, since the highest miracle - His Resurrection - is witnessed like no other event ancient history(cm. 1 Cor. fifteen)?

Bibliography foreign works according to the four gospels

Bengel J. Al. Gnomon Novi Testamentï in quo ex nativa verborum VI simplicitas, profunditas, concinnitas, salubritas sensuum coelestium indicatur. Berolini, 1860.

Blass, Gram. - Blass F. Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch. Göttingen, 1911.

Westcott - The New Testament in Original Greek the text rev. by Brooke Foss Westcott. New York, 1882.

B. Weiss - Wikiwand Weiss B. Die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Göttingen, 1901.

Yog. Weiss (1907) - Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments, von Otto Baumgarten; Wilhelm Bousset. Hrsg. von Johannes Weis_s, Bd. 1: Die drei alteren Evangelien. Die Apostelgeschichte, Matthaeus Apostolus; Marcus Evangelista; Lucas Evangelista. . 2. Aufl. Göttingen, 1907.

Godet - Godet F. Commentar zu dem Evangelium des Johannes. Hanover, 1903.

Name De Wette W.M.L. Kurze Erklärung des Evangeliums Matthäi / Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum Neuen Testament, Band 1, Teil 1. Leipzig, 1857.

Keil (1879) - Keil C.F. Commentar über die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Leipzig, 1879.

Keil (1881) - Keil C.F. Commentar über das Evangelium des Johannes. Leipzig, 1881.

Klostermann A. Das Markusevangelium nach seinem Quellenwerthe für die evangelische Geschichte. Göttingen, 1867.

Cornelius a Lapide - Cornelius a Lapide. In SS Matthaeum et Marcum / Commentaria in scripturam sacram, t. 15. Parisiis, 1857.

Lagrange M.-J. Études bibliques: Evangile selon St. Marc. Paris, 1911.

Lange J.P. Das Evangelium nach Matthäus. Bielefeld, 1861.

Loisy (1903) - Loisy A.F. Le quatrième evangile. Paris, 1903.

Loisy (1907-1908) - Loisy A.F. Les evangeles synoptiques, 1-2. : Ceffonds, pres Montier-en-Der, 1907-1908.

Luthardt Ch.E. Das johanneische Evangelium nach seiner Eigenthümlichkeit geschildert und erklärt. Nürnberg, 1876.

Meyer (1864) - Meyer H.A.W. Kritisch exegetisches Commentar über das Neue Testament, Abteilung 1, Hälfte 1: Handbuch über das Evangelium des Matthäus. Göttingen, 1864.

Meyer (1885) - Kritisch-exegetischer Commentar über das Neue Testament hrsg. von Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Abteilung 1, Hälfte 2: Bernhard Weiss B. Kritisch exegetisches Handbuch über die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Göttingen, 1885. Meyer (1902) - Meyer H.A.W. Das Johannes-Evangelium 9. Auflage, bearbeitet von B. Weiss. Göttingen, 1902.

Merckx (1902) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Matthaeus / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte, Teil 2, Hälfte 1. Berlin, 1902.

Merckx (1905) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Markus und Lukas / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte. Teil 2, Hälfte 2. Berlin, 1905.

Morison J. A practical commentary on the Gospel according to St. Morison Matthew. London, 1902.

Stanton - Wikiwand Stanton V.H. The Synoptic Gospels / The Gospels as historical documents, Part 2. Cambridge, 1903. Toluc (1856) - Tholuck A. Die Bergpredigt. Gotha, 1856.

Tolyuk (1857) - Tholuck A. Commentar zum Evangelium Johannis. Gotha, 1857.

Heitmüller - see Jog. Weiss (1907).

Holtzmann (1901) - Holtzmann H.J. Die Synoptiker. Tubingen, 1901.

Holtzmann (1908) - Holtzmann H.J. Evangelium, Briefe und Offenbarung des Johannes / Hand-Commentar zum Neuen Testament bearbeitet von H. J. Holtzmann, R. A. Lipsius etc. bd. 4. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1908.

Zahn (1905) - Zahn Th. Das Evangelium des Matthäus / Commentar zum Neuen Testament, Teil 1. Leipzig, 1905.

Zahn (1908) - Zahn Th. Das Evangelium des Johannes ausgelegt / Commentar zum Neuen Testament, Teil 4. Leipzig, 1908.

Schanz (1881) - Schanz P. Commentar über das Evangelium des heiligen Marcus. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1881.

Schanz (1885) - Schanz P. Commentar über das Evangelium des heiligen Johannes. Tubingen, 1885.

Schlatter - Schlatter A. Das Evangelium des Johannes: ausgelegt fur Bibelleser. Stuttgart, 1903.

Schürer, Geschichte - Schürer E., Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi. bd. 1-4. Leipzig, 1901-1911.

Edersheim (1901) - Edersheim A. The life and times of Jesus the Messiah. 2 Vols. London, 1901.

Ellen - Allen W.C. A critical and exegetical commentary of the Gospel according to st. Matthew. Edinburgh, 1907.

Alford - Alford N. The Greek Testament in four volumes, vol. 1. London, 1863.

26.10.2020

P - to dream

The most interesting:

Vanga's predictions over the years about Russia and the world, determining fate by the date of birth of Edgar Cayce about the financial well-being and integrity of Russia

Online fortune-telling "Yes - No", free virtual fortune-telling

Divination oracle sphere. Divination online. The meaning of tarot cards in the layout for love