Thoughts From Luke - Day 1

                                                     Luke 1:1-4, 3:1,2

Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, ² just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. ³ With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, ⁴ so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught... In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar—when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene— ² during the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness.


         Sometimes when I do devotions with the grandkids I make the mistake of starting out the Bible story with "Once upon a time..." Karen usually stops me in my tracks and says "Jim, this isn't a once upon a time story!" And she is right. What she means when she says that is that fairy tales, legends, epics start out that way. This isn't one of those stories.  This is an account.This is true. This is truth. This is history.This is certainty. Luke, a doctor and educated man and historian and writer has gone and interviewed those who were with Jesus  - eyewitnesses, and servants of Him. It is written during their lifetime so there was no time for legends or exaggerations, or untruths to rise up. If anything he wrote was untrue, he couldn't have gotten away with it. I've often used the illustration of Elvis. If someone wrote a book on Elvis saying that his death was faked and that he is living on an island in the Caribbean, the coroner is still alive that pronounced him. The pall bearers could testify that it was him. His wife could attest to the fact he died. All those at the funeral could swear that what was written by this person is untrue. However, 150 years from now, a person might get away with it because all the eyewitnesses are dead. Luke is writing this in the lifetime of the eyewitnesses... this is not a once upon a time story. Therefore all the difficult, hard to believe accounts, are factual. Jesus was born of a virgin, rose from the dead, walked on water, fed 5000 - twice, raised dead people, healed lepers, brought sight to blind and hearing to deaf, calmed storms, and so the reader needs to not just say "that didn't really happen" but come to grips with "how did this happen?" They could say, Jesus didn't die but swooned and the disciples stole the body from the tomb. Or, Jesus, while praying on the mount, saw a sandbar and walked on it and thus the disciples thought He was walking on water. Or, the 5000, moved by the generosity of the lad all started sharing their food and the 5000 were fed. Eventually, however, your explaining away the accounts documented in the Bible begin to take more faith to believe than the accounts. It's like evolution. To believe that we came from an amoeba takes more faith to believe than God created us. I mean, if there is a God, wouldn't He by definition do things that are impossible for us to do or explain? That would be a pretty puny God if He couldn't.

        The other interesting thing to me in this passage is that Luke refers to people as servants of the word. John also calls Jesus the word. Why not just say Jesus? I like this wording because once again it shows the importance of God's word. The Psalmist says "You have magnified Your word above Your name." How can we know Jesus without the Bible? How can we know anyone without hearing their words? John the Baptist started his ministry on hearing the word of the Lord. Not only is God capable of doing physical miracles from creation to raising the dead, but don't you think He would be capable of having His words compiled in a book that leaves out errant passages and says everything He wants us to know? If not, He would be a puny God. And then, He takes that Word and supernaturally speaks to us through it. John the Baptist didn't happen to get a copy of the Septuagint and then began his ministry, but rather God spoke to him supernaturally through His word and said, it's time to introduce Jesus. The word of God is alive. We could look at God's word, the Bible, and say, "You can't take that literally" or "That's just poetry or hyperbole", or "That's just what they believed back then but we know better now", or "That's just their culture", but at some point isn't it just easier to say, "I trust God is big enough to move men to write and compile a book of truth containing everything that God thinks is essential for us to know"? And then, isn't God transcendant  enough to supernaturally empower that word?

     The underlying assumption here is that there is a personal, all powerful, transcendent God. If there isn't then no, miracles aren't possible, life after death isn't possible, virgin births aren't possible. If there isn't a God, creation isn't possible because it implies a creator. If there isn't a God then the Bible is a flawed religious book written by and compiled by men who had ulterior motives. This is where the attacks on the Bible come from. They come from people who don't want there to be an authority above them who holds them accountable. This is why any attack on the inerrancy of scripture, on Creationism, on the resurrection and virgin birth, on miracles come from this mindset. We must not give an inch because as we will see in chapter 1, "with God, all things are possible."