Bible Commentaries
Luke 3

Verses 1-6

THESE verses describe the beginning of the Gospel of Christ. It began with the preaching of John the Baptist. The Jews could never say, that when Messiah came, He came without notice or preparation. He graciously sent a mighty forerunner before His face, by whose ministry the attention of the whole nation was awakened.

Let us notice first, in this passage, the wickedness of the times when Christ’s Gospel was brought into the world. The opening verses of the chapter tell us the names of some who were rulers and governors in the earth, when the ministry of John the Baptist began. It is a melancholy list, and full of instruction. There is hardly a name in it which is not infamous for wickedness. Tiberius, and Pontius Pilate, and Herod, and his brother, and Annas, and Caiaphas, were men of whom we know little or nothing but evil. The earth seemed given into the hands of the wicked. (Job 9:24.) When such were the rulers, what must the people have been?—Such was the state of things when Christ’s forerunner was commissioned to begin preaching. Such were the times when the first foundation of Christ’s church was brought out and laid. We may truly say, that God’s ways are not our ways.

Let us learn never to despair about the cause of God’s truth, however black and unfavorable its prospects may appear. At the very time when things seem hopeless, God may be preparing a mighty deliverance. At the very season when Satan’s kingdom seems to be triumphing, the "little stone, cut without hands," may be on the point of crushing it to pieces. The darkest hour of the night is often that which just precedes the day.

Let us beware of slacking our hands from any work of God, because of the wickedness of the times, or the number and power of our adversaries. "He that observeth the wind shall not sow, and he that regardeth the clouds shall not reap." (Ecclesiastes 11:4.) Let us work on, and believe that help will come from heaven, when it is most wanted. In the very hour when a Roman emperor, and ignorant priests, seemed to have everything at their feet, the Lamb of God was about to come forth from Nazareth, and set up the beginnings of His kingdom. What He has done once, He can do again. In a moment He can turn His church’s midnight into the blaze of noon day.

Let us notice, secondly, in this passage, the account which Luke gives of the calling of John the Baptist into the ministry. We are told that "the word of God came to John, the son of Zacharias." He received a special call from God to begin preaching and baptizing. A message from heaven was sent to his heart, and under the impulse of that message, he undertook his marvelous work.

There is something in this account which throws great light on the office of all ministers of the Gospel. It is an office which no man has a right to take up, unless he has an inward call from God, as well as an outward call from man. Visions and revelations from heaven, of course we have no right to expect. Fanatical claims to special gifts of the Spirit must always be checked and discouraged. But an inward call a man must have, before he puts his hand to the work of the ministry. The word of God must "come to him," as really and truly as it came to John the Baptist, before he undertakes to "come to the word." In short, he must be able to profess with a good conscience, that he is "inwardly moved by the Holy Ghost" to take upon him the office of a minister. The man who cannot say this, when he comes forward to be ordained, is committing a great sin, and running without being sent.

Let it be a part of our daily prayers, that our churches may have no ministers excepting those who are really called of God. An unconverted minister is an injury and burden to a church. How can a man speak of truths which he has never tasted? How can he testify of a Savior whom he has never seen by faith, and never laid hold on for his own soul? The pastor after God’s own heart, is a man to whom the Word of God has come. He runs confidently, because he has tidings. He speaks boldly, because he has been sent.

Let us notice, lastly, in this passage, the close connection between true repentance and forgiveness. We are told that John the Baptist came "preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins." The plain meaning of this expression is, that John preached the necessity of being baptized, in token of repentance, and that he told his hearers that except they repented of sin, their sins would not be forgiven.

We must carefully bear in mind that no repentance can make atonement for sin. The blood of Christ, and nothing else, can wash away sin from man’s soul. No quantity of repentance can ever justify us in the sight of God. "We are accounted righteous before God, only for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ, by faith, and not for our own works or deservings." It is of the utmost importance to understand this clearly. The trouble that men bring upon their souls, by misunderstanding this subject, is more than can be expressed.

But while we say all this, we must carefully remember that without repentance no soul was ever yet saved. We must know our sins, mourn over them, forsake them, abhor them, or else we shall never enter the kingdom of heaven. There is nothing meritorious in this. It forms no part whatever of the price of our redemption. Our salvation is all of grace, from first to last. But the great fact still remains, that saved souls are always penitent souls, and that saving faith in Christ, and true repentance toward God, are never found asunder. This is a mighty truth, and one that ought never to be forgotten.

Do we ourselves repent? This, after all, is the question which most nearly concerns us. Have we been convinced of sin by the Holy Ghost? Have we fled to Jesus for deliverance from the wrath to come? Do we know anything of a broken and contrite heart, and a thorough hatred of sin? Can we say, "I repent," as well as "I believe"? If not, let us not delude our minds with the idea that our sins are yet forgiven. It is written, "Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish." (Luke 13:3.)

==================

Notes—

v1.—[Ituraea, Trachonitis, Abilene.] These were districts lying to the north and north-east of Palestine.

v2.—[Annas and Caiaphas being high priests.] We know, from the Bible, that there could not, properly speaking, be two high priests at the same time. The office, in the best days of Israel, was held by one man, and held for life. But in the time of our Lord’s earthly ministry there seems to have been much irregularity connected with the high priest’s office, and the Romans probably deposed some from it for political reasons. The result was that there were frequently others beside the actual high priest still living, who had filled the office before. Annas was father-in-law to Caiaphas. (John 18:13.)

v5.—[Every valley shall be filled, &c.] These and similar expressions in this verse must certainly receive a figurative interpretation. It is no literal pulling down of mountains, or filling up of valleys, that is here meant. The sense of the prophecy evidently is, that difficulties and obstacles as great as mountains and valleys in the way of a king’s march, shall go down before the progress of the Gospel of Christ.

v6.—[All flesh shall see, &c.] This is a prophecy which is not yet fully accomplished. It is to receive its completion when the kingdom of Christ is fully set up at His second advent, and all know Him from the least to the greatest. It is one among many examples, that the prophets of the Old Testament often spoke of both advents at once. and foretold the complete victories of the second appearing of Jesus, in the same breath with the partial victories of His first appearing. Some began to "see the great salvation" as soon as the Gospel was first preached. A little flock was taken out at once. All shall finally see the salvation of God from the least to the greatest.

Verses 7-14

WE have, in these verses, a specimen of John the Baptist’s ministry. It is a portion of Scripture which should always be specially interesting to a Christian mind. The immense effect which John produced on the Jews, however temporary, is evident, from many expressions in the Gospels. The remarkable testimony which our Lord bore to John, as "a prophet greater than any born of woman," is well-known to all Bible readers. What then was the character of John’s ministry? This is the question to which the chapter before us supplies a practical answer.

We should first mark the holy boldness with which John addresses the multitudes who came to his baptism. He speaks to them as "a generation of vipers." He saw the rottenness and hypocrisy of the profession that the crowd around him were making, and uses language descriptive of their case. His head was not turned by popularity. He cared not who was offended by his words. The spiritual disease of those before him was desperate, and of long standing, and he knew that desperate diseases need strong remedies.

Well would it be for the Church of Christ, if it possessed more plain-speaking ministers, like John the Baptist, in these latter days. A morbid dislike to strong language,—an excessive fear of giving offence,—a constant flinching from directness and plain speaking, are, unhappily, too much the characteristics of the modern Christian pulpit. Personality and uncharitable language is no doubt always to be deprecated. But there is no charity in flattering unconverted people, by abstaining from any mention of their vices, or in applying smooth epithets to damnable sins. There are two texts which are too much forgotten by Christian preachers. In one it is written, "Woe unto you when all men shall speak well of you." In the other it is written, "If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." (Luke 6:26; Galatians 1:10.)

We should mark, secondly, how plainly John speaks to his hearers about hell and danger. He tells them that there is a "wrath to come." He speaks of "the ax" of God’s judgments, and of unfruitful trees being cast into "the fire."

The subject of hell is always offensive to human nature. The minister who dwells much upon it, must expect to find himself regarded as coarse, violent, unfeeling, and narrow-minded. Men love to hear "smooth things," and to be told of peace, and not of danger. (Isaiah 30:10.) But the subject is one that ought not to be kept back, if we desire to do good to souls. It is one that our Lord Jesus Christ brought forward frequently in His public teachings. That loving Savior, who spoke so graciously of the way to heaven, has also used the plainest language about the way to hell.

Let us beware of being wise above that which is written, and more charitable than Scripture itself. Let the language of John the Baptist be deeply graven in our hearts. Let us never be ashamed to avow our firm belief, that there is a "wrath to come" for the impenitent, and that it is possible for a man to be lost as well as to be saved. To be silent on the subject is positive treachery to men’s souls. It only encourages them to persevere in wickedness, and fosters in their minds the devil’s old delusion, "Ye shall not surely die." That minister is surely our best friend who tells us honestly of danger, and warns us, like John the Baptist, to "flee from the wrath to come." Never will a man flee till he sees there is real cause to be afraid. Never will he seek heaven till be is convinced that there is risk of his falling into hell. The religion in which there is no mention of hell, is not the religion of John the Baptist, and of our Lord Jesus, and His apostles.

We should mark, thirdly, how John exposes the uselessness of a repentance which is not accompanied by fruits in the life. He said to the multitude, who came to be baptized, "Bring forth fruit worthy of repentance." He tells them that "Every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down."

This is a truth which should always occupy a prominent place in our Christianity. It can never be impressed on our minds too strongly, that religious talking and profession are utterly worthless, without religious doing and practice. It is vain to say with our lips that we repent, if we do not at the same time repent in our lives. It is more than vain. It will gradually sear our consciences, and harden our hearts. To say that we are sorry for our sins is mere hypocrisy, unless we show that we are really sorry for them, by giving them up. Doing is the very life of repentance. Tell us not merely what a man says in religion. Tell us rather what he does. "The talk of the lips," says Solomon, "tendeth only to penury." (Proverbs 14:23.)

We should mark, fourthly, what a blow John strikes at the common notion, that connection with godly people can save our souls. "Begin not to say," he tells the Jews, "we have Abraham to our Father; for I say unto you that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham."

The strong hold that this notion has obtained on the heart of man, in every part of the world, is an affecting proof of our fallen and corrupt condition. Thousands have always been found, in every age of the church, who have believed that connection with godly men made them acceptable in the sight of God. Thousands have lived and died in the blind delusion, that because they were allied to holy people by ties of blood or church-membership, they might themselves hope to be saved.

Let it be a settled principle with us, that saving religion is a personal thing. It is a business between each man’s own soul and Christ. It will profit us nothing at the last day, to have belonged to the Church of Luther, or Calvin, or Cranmer, or Knox, or Owen, or Wesley, or Whitfield.—Had we the faith of these holy men? Did we believe as they believed, and strive to live as they lived, and to follow Christ as they followed Him? These will be the only points on which our salvation will turn. It will save no man to have had Abraham’s blood in his veins, if he did not possess Abraham’s faith and do Abraham’s works.

We should remark, lastly, in this passage, the searching test of sincerity which John applied to the consciences of the various classes who came to his baptism. He bade each man who made a profession of repentance, to begin by breaking off from those sins which specially beset him. The selfish multitude must show common charity to each other. The publicans must "exact no more than their due." The soldiers must "do violence to no man, and be content with their wages." He did not mean that, by so doing, they would atone for their sins, and make their peace with God. But he did mean that, by so doing, they would prove their repentance to be sincere.

Let us leave the passage with a deep conviction of the wisdom of this mode of dealing with souls, and specially with the souls of those who are beginning to make a profession of religion. Above all, let us see here the right way to prove our own hearts. It must not content us to cry out against sins to which, by natural temperament, we are not inclined, while we deal gently with other sins of a different character. Let us find out our own peculiar corruptions. Let us know our own besetting sins. Against them let us direct our principal efforts. With these let us wage unceasing war. Let the rich break off from the rich man’s sins, and the poor from the sins of the poor. Let the young man give up the sins of youth, and the old man the sins of age. This is the first step towards proving that we are in earnest, when we first begin to feel about our souls. Are we real? Are we sincere? Then let us begin by looking at home, and looking within.

==================

Notes—

v8.—[Bring forth fruit.] It is worthy of remark, that the word translated "bring forth," is the same that is used by John, when he speaks of "committing sin." and "doing righteousness." (1 John 3:4, 1 John 3:7.) Both there and here is implied a continued habit, and not a single act.

[We have Abraham to our father.] A passage in Stella, the Spanish commentator on the Gospel of Luke, on this expression, is worth quoting:—"There are many monks who imitate these Jews, saying, we have Benedict, Augustine, Jerome, Francis, or Dominic for out" father, just as they said, We have Abraham to our father. They relate to others the marvellous doings of the founders of their order, and cry up their praises with wonderful commendation. They say, our order has so many holy men enrolled in the catalogue of saints, so many Popes, so many Cardinals, so many bishops, so many teachers. In them they rejoice and vain-gloriously boast, while they themselves have degenerated from the true excellencies of their founders, by iniquity and laxity of morals. To all these we may deservedly say what Christ said to the Jews, ’If ye are Abraham’s children, do the works of Abraham.’ "

[God is able of these stones, &c.] The meaning of this expression is simply this: "Think not that God will not have a people to show forth His praise, if He cuts you off and does "not save you. Even if you were all cast off, He could raise up a family for Himself of true believers from these stones." The calling of the Gentiles was evidently implied.

v14.—[What shall we do.] Our English version hardly gives the full sense of the original Greek here. It should rather be, "and we, what shall we do?"

[Do violence.] The word so translated is found nowhere else in the New Testament. It signifies "to put in fear, or to shake, by violent conduct."

[Accuse falsely.] This word is only found in one other place, and there it is rendered, "take by false accusation." It occurs in the remarkable profession of Zacchæus after his conversion. (Luke 19:8.)

Let it be carefully noted that John the Baptist says not a word to show that the work of the tax-gatherer or the soldier is unlawful in the sight of God.

Verses 15-20

WE learn, firstly, from these verses, that one effect of a faithful ministry is to set men thinking. We read concerning John the Baptist’s hearers, that "the people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not."

The cause of true religion has gained a great step in a parish, or congregation, or family, when people begin to think. Thoughtlessness about spiritual things is one great feature of unconverted men. It cannot be said, in many cases, that they either like the Gospel, or dislike it. But they do not give it a place in their thoughts. They never "consider." (Isaiah 1:3.)

Let us always thank God when we see a spirit of reflection on religious subjects coming over the mind of an unconverted man. Consideration is the high road to conversion. The truth of Christ has nothing to fear from sober examination. We court inquiry. We desire to have its claims fully investigated. We know that its fitness to supply every want of man’s heart and conscience is not appreciated in many cases, simply because it is not known. Thinking, no doubt, is not faith and repentance. But it is always a hopeful symptom. When hearers of the Gospel begin to "muse in their hearts," we ought to bless God and take courage.

We learn, secondly, from these verses, that a faithful minister will always exalt Christ. We read that when John saw the state of mind in which his hearers were, he told them of a coming One far mightier than himself. He refused the honor which he saw the people ready to give him, and referred them to Him who had the "fan in his hand," the Lamb of God, the Messiah.

Conduct like this will always be the characteristic of a true "man of God." He will never allow anything to be credited to him, or his office, which belongs to his divine Master. He will say like Paul, "we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus, the Lord, and ourselves your servants for Jesus’ sake." (2 Corinthians 4:5.) To commend Christ dying, and rising again for the ungodly,—to make known Christ’s love and power to save sinners,—this will be the main object of his ministry. "He must increase but I must decrease," will be a ruling principle in all his preaching. He will be content that his own name be forgotten, so long as Christ crucified is exalted.

Would we know whether a minister is sound in the faith, and deserving of our confidence as a teacher? We have only to ask a simple question, Where is Christ in his teaching?—Would we know whether we ourselves are receiving benefit from the preaching we attend? Let us ask whether its effect is to magnify Christ in our esteem. A minister who is really doing us good will make us think more of Jesus every year we live.

We learn, thirdly, from these verses, the essential difference between the Lord Jesus and even the best and holiest of His ministers. We have it in the solemn words of John the Baptist:—"I indeed baptize you with water:—He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost."

Man, when ordained, can administer the outward ordinances of Christianity, with a prayerful hope, that God will graciously bless the means which he has Himself appointed. But man cannot read the hearts of those to whom he ministers. He can preach the Gospel faithfully to their ears, but he cannot make them receive it into their consciences. He can apply baptismal water to their foreheads, but he cannot cleanse their inward nature. He can give the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper into their hands, but he cannot enable them to eat Christ’s body and blood by faith. Up to a certain point he can go, but he can go no further. No ordination, however solemnly conferred, can give man power to change the heart. Christ, the great Head of the Church, can alone do this by the power of the Holy Ghost. It is His peculiar office to do it, and it is an office which He has deputed to no child of man.

May we never rest till we have tasted by experience the power of Christ’s grace upon our souls! We have been baptized with water. But have we also been baptized with the Holy Ghost?—Our names are in the baptismal register. But are they also in the Lamb’s book of life?—We are members of the visible Church. But are we also members of that mystical body of which Christ alone is the Head?—All these are privileges which Christ alone bestows, and for which all who would be saved must make personal application to Him. Man cannot give them. They are treasures laid up in Christ’s hand. From Him we must seek them by faith and prayer, and believing we shall not seek in vain.

We learn, fourthly, in these verses, the change that Christ will work in his visible church at his second appearing. We read in the figurative words of His forerunner, "that he will thoroughly purge his floor, and gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable."

The visible Church is now a mixed body. Believers and unbelievers, holy and unholy, converted and unconverted, are now mingled in every congregation, and often sit side by side. It passes the power of man to separate them. False profession is often so like true; and grace is often so weak and feeble, that, in many cases, the right discernment of character is an impossibility. The wheat and the chaff will continue together until the Lord returns.

But there will be an awful separation at the last day. The unerring judgment of the King of kings shall at length divide the wheat from the chaff, and divide them for evermore. The righteous shall be gathered into a place of happiness and safety. The wicked shall be cast down to shame and everlasting contempt. In the great sifting day, every one shall go to his own place.

May we often look forward to that day, and judge ourselves, that we be not judged of the Lord. May we give all diligence to make our calling and election sure, and to know that we are God’s "wheat." A mistake in the day that the floor is "purged," will be a mistake that is irretrievable.

We learn, lastly, from these verses, that the reward of God’s servants is often not in this world. Luke closes his account of John the Baptist’s ministry, by telling us of his imprisonment by Herod. The end of that imprisonment we know from other parts of the New Testament. It led at last to John being beheaded.

All true servants of Christ must be content to wait for their wages. Their best things are yet to come. They must count it no strange thing, if they meet with hard treatment from man. The world that persecuted Christ will never hesitate, to persecute Christians. "Marvel not if the world hate you." (1 John 3:13.)

But let us take comfort in the thought that the great Master has laid up in heaven for His people such things as pass man’s understanding. The blood that His saints have shed in His name will all be reckoned for one day. The tears that often flow so freely in consequence of the unkindness of the wicked, will one day be wiped from all faces. And when John the Baptist, and all who have suffered for the truth are at last gathered together, they will find it true that heaven makes amends for all.

==================

Notes—

v15.—[Mused.] The word so translated is generally rendered "reasoned."

v16.—[I indeed baptize with water.] We must not fail to observe that the contrast John the Baptist draws here, is not, as the Roman Catholic writers say, between his baptism and Christian baptism, but between his power as a mere man to administer an outward ordinance, and the power of Christ the Son of God to affect the heart.

We must be careful that we do not underrate the value of John’s baptism. We have no proof that any of the apostles ever received any other baptism than that of John. To say that the baptism of Christian ministers always confers grace, "ex opere operato," and that the baptism of John never conferred grace, is to say what cannot be proved either by Scripture or experience. The value of John’s baptism is well defended by Brentius, in his Homilies on this chapter. Spanheim ably discusses the whole question, and concludes that the distinction between the baptism of John and the baptism of Christ was "not essential but accidental," that is, not in its essence but in its accidents or circumstances.

[Baptize with fire.] The meaning of this expression is doubtful, and has never been fully cleared up. Some confine it entirely to the descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost, when "cloven tongues like as of fire" sat upon each person present on the occasion. (Acts 2:3.) Others confine it entirely to the converting operation of the Holy Ghost, purifying and refining the heart as fire purifieth gold. Both views are probably included.

v19.—[But Herod &c.] The mention of John’s imprisonment, in this part of Luke’s Gospel, before the event actually took place, is a striking example of Luke’s mode of "writing in order." (Luke 1:3.) He is on the subject of John the Baptist and his ministry, and he therefore takes occasion to explain how that ministry was brought to an end, before turning to another subject.

Verses 21-28

WE see in the passage before us, the high honor the Lord Jesus has put on baptism. We find that among others who came to John the Baptist, the Savior of the world came, and was "baptized."

An ordinance which the Son of God was pleased to use, and afterwards to appoint for the use of His whole Church, ought always to be held in peculiar reverence by His people. Baptism cannot be a thing of slight importance, if Christ Himself was baptized. The use of baptism would never have been enjoined on the Church of Christ, if it had been a mere outward form, incapable of conveying any blessing.

It is hardly necessary to say that errors of every sort and description abound on the subject of baptism. Some make an idol of it, and exalt it far above the place assigned to it in the Bible. Some degrade it and dishonor it, and seem almost to forget that it was ordained by Christ Himself. Some limit the use of it so narrowly that they will baptize none unless they are grown up, and can give full proof of their conversion. Some invest the baptismal water with such magic power, that they would like missionaries to go into heathen lands and baptize all persons, old and young indiscriminately, and believe that however ignorant the heathen may be, baptism must do them good. On no subject, perhaps, in religion, have Christians more need to pray for a right judgment and a sound mind.

Let it suffice us to hold firmly the general principle, that baptism was graciously intended by our Lord to be a help to His Church, and "a means of grace," and that, when rightly and worthily used, we may confidently look upon it for a blessing. But let us never forget that the grace of God is not tied to any sacrament, and that we may be baptized with water, without being baptized with the Holy Ghost.

We see, secondly, in this passage, the close connection that ought to exist between the administration of baptism and prayer. We are specially told by Luke, that when our Lord was baptized He was also "praying."

We need not doubt that there is a great lesson in this fact, and one that the Church of Christ has too much overlooked. We are meant to learn that the baptism which God blesses must be a baptism accompanied by prayer. The sprinkling of water is not sufficient. The use of the name of the blessed Trinity is not enough. The form of the sacrament alone conveys no grace. There must be something else beside all this. There must be "the prayer of faith." A baptism without prayer, it may be confidently asserted, is a baptism on which we have no right to expect God’s blessing.

Why is it that the sacrament of baptism appears to bear so little fruit? How is it that thousands are every year baptized, and never give the slightest proof of having received benefit from it? The answer to these questions is short and simple. In the vast majority of baptisms there is no prayer except the prayer of the officiating minister. Parents bring their children to the font, without the slightest sense of what they are doing. Sponsors stand up and answer for the child, in evident ignorance of the nature of the ordinance they are attending, and as a mere matter of form. What possible reason have we for expecting such baptisms to be blessed by God? None! none at all! Such baptisms may well be barren of results. They are not baptisms according to the mind of Christ. Let us pray that the eyes of Christians on this important subject may be opened. It is one on which there is great need of change.

We see, thirdly, in these verses, a remarkable proof of the doctrine of the Trinity. We have all the Three Persons of the Godhead spoken of, as co-operating and acting at one time. God the Son begins the mighty work of His earthly ministry, by being baptized. God the Father solemnly accredits Him as the appointed Mediator, by a voice from heaven. God the Holy Ghost descends "in a bodily shape like a dove" upon our Lord, and by so doing declares that this is He to whom "the Father gives the Spirit without measure." (John 3:34.)

There is something deeply instructive, and deeply comforting in this revelation of the blessed Trinity, at this particular season of our Lord’s earthly ministry. It shows us how mighty and powerful is the agency that is employed in the great business of our redemption. It is the common work of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. All Three Persons in the Godhead are equally concerned in the deliverance of our souls from hell. The thought should cheer us, when disquieted and cast down. The thought should hearten and encourage us, when weary of the conflict with the world, the flesh, and the devil. The enemies of our souls are mighty, but the Friends of our souls are mightier still. The whole power of the triune Jehovah is engaged upon our side. "A three-fold cord is not easily broken." (Ecclesiastes 4:12.)

We see, fourthly, in these verses, a marvelous proclamation of our Lord’s office as Mediator between God and man. A voice was heard from heaven at His baptism, "which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased." There is but One who could say this. It was the voice of God the Father.

These solemn words no doubt contain much that is deeply mysterious. One thing however about them is abundantly clear. They are a divine declaration, that our Lord Jesus Christ is the promised Redeemer, whom God from the beginning undertook to send into the world, and that with His incarnation, sacrifice, and substitution for man, God the Father is satisfied and well pleased. In Him, He regards the claim of His holy law as fully discharged. Through Him, He is willing to receive poor sinful man to mercy, and to remember his sins no more.

Let all true Christians rest their souls on these words, and draw from them daily consolation. Our sins and shortcomings are many and great. In ourselves we can see no good thing. But if we believe in Jesus, the Father sees nothing in us that He cannot abundantly pardon. He regards us as the members of His own dear Son, and, for His Son’s sake, He is well pleased.

We see, lastly, in these verses, what a frail and dying creature is man. We read at the end of the chapter a long list of names, containing the genealogy of the family in which our Lord was born, traced up through David and Abraham to Adam. How little we know of many of the seventy-five persons, whose names are here recorded! They all had their joys and sorrows, their hopes and fears, their cares and troubles, their schemes and plans, like any of ourselves. But they have all passed away from the earth, and gone to their own place. And so will it be with us. We too are passing away, and shall soon be gone.

Forever let us bless God, that in a dying world we are able to turn to a living Savior, "I am he," says Jesus, "that liveth and was dead, and behold I am alive for evermore." "I am the resurrection and the life," (Revelation 1:18; John 11:25.) Let our main care be, to be one with Christ and Christ with us. Joined to the Lord Jesus by faith we shall rise again to live for evermore. The second death shall have no power over us. "Because I live," says Christ, "ye shall live also." (John 14:19.)

==================

Notes—

v23.—[Thirty years of age.] This was the age, be it remembered, at which Levites were first permitted to do work in the tabernacle. (Numbers 4:3.)

[Joseph, which was the son of Heli, &c.] Every careful reader of the Bible knows well that there is a great difficulty connected with the genealogy of our Lord. The difficulty lies in the entire variance between that part of the genealogy which lies between David and Joseph, as recorded by Luke, and the same part of it as recorded by Matthew. Between Abraham and David the two genealogies agree. Between David and Joseph they almost entirely differ. How can this difference be reconciled? This is a question on which learned men have written volumes, and failed to convince one another. A few simple remarks must suffice. Those who wish to study the subject will find it thoroughly discussed by Gomarus, Spanheim, South, Calovius, and A. Clarke.

The first, but least probable explanation, is this. The persons mentioned in the genealogy from David to Joseph had all two names. Matthew gives one of their names, Luke gives the other. But both enumerate the same persons, and both give the genealogy of Joseph. This explanation will satisfy very few people. The difference between the number of names given by Luke, compared to the number given by Matthew, is of itself an insuperable objection. It seems waste of time to dwell on this solution of the question.

The second, and more probable explanation of the difficulty, is this. The mother of Joseph the husband of Mary, married two husbands. Of one husband Joseph was the son by birth. Of the other he was the son by adoption. The two genealogies in the two Gospels, are the genealogies of these two husbands. Each evangelist ends his genealogy in Joseph, but Luke traces it through Heli, and Matthew through Jacob. Joseph was the natural son of one, and the adopted son of the other. This explanation is that which satisfied the early fathers, and is commonly known as that of Julius Africanus. It is, however, in spite of its antiquity, open to several serious objections. It is difficult to see why Joseph’s genealogy should he repeated by Luke, in a Gospel written specially for Gentile converts, and why the genealogy of our Lord’s own mother should be entirely passed over by both evangelists.

The third, and most probable explanation of the difficulty, is to regard Luke’s genealogy as the genealogy of Mary, and not of Joseph. Heli was the father of Mary, and the father-in-law, by his marriage, of Joseph. It is not said that Heli "begat" Joseph; and that the Greek does not necessarily mean that Joseph was "his son," is clear from the expressions used about Mary and Jude. in two other places of the New Testament. (Mark 16:1. and Acts 1:15.) It is Mary’s family, therefore, and not Joseph’s, that Luke describes, and Joseph’s family, and not Mary’s, that is described by Matthew. There are doubtless some difficulties in the way of this explanation. But there seem to be far greater difficulties in the way of any other. In leaving the question, I may be allowed to remark, that the view I venture to maintain is that of Brentius, Gomarus, Chemnitius, Spanheim, Surenhusius, Poole, Bengel, Paræus, Lightfoot, Calovius, Gill, Burkitt, Henry, Scott, and Clarke, among Protestants,—and of Jansenius, Barrradius, Stella, and others, among Roman Catholics. It is also a remarkable fact, that Rabbinical writers, quoted by Lightfoot, speaking of Mary in very reproachful terms, distinctly call her, "the daughter of Heli."

v36.—[The son of Cainan.] There is a serious difficulty connected with this name. It is not to be found in the genealogy from Noah to Abraham, as recorded in the Hebrew version of Genesis 11:12, although it is found in the Septuagint Greek version. The question at once arises,—Why did Luke put the name here? How are we to reconcile Moses and Luke?

The solutions of this difficulty are various, and a complete settlement of the question will probably never be attained. One thing only is certain, and that is, that neither Moses nor Luke could have made a real mistake, because both were inspired. Some think that Luke does not pretend to do more than copy out the genealogy which was commonly received, and guards himself against the charge of endorsing its errors and mistakes, by the use of the expression at the outset, "as was supposed." They consider this expression to apply to the whole genealogy. Some think that the name has been omitted in the Hebrew text of Genesis, by mistake of a transcriber. Some think that Luke purposely put the name in the genealogy, in order to consult the feelings of those who only knew the Septuagint version of the Old Testament.—Some think that the name has crept into Luke’s Gospel by the error of some transcriber, who knew nothing of Hebrew, and only knew the old Testament from the Septuagint version, and that Luke originally did not insert Cainan’s name. This last solution is maintained by Spanheim, Capellus, Grotius, Calovius, Rivetus, Leigh, and Surenhusius, and is perhaps the most probable one. One argument in support of it is the fact that the name is omitted in Beza’s manuscript, though it must be admitted that on this point his manuscript stands almost alone.

In leaving the difficult subject of these questions connected with our Lord’s genealogy, we shall do well to ponder the sensible remarks of Mr. Burgon: "It is humbly suggested that a few difficulties of this class may have been suffered to find place in Holy Writ, in order to exercise the faith of persons who, while they feel such intellectual trials keenly, are but little affected by those which imperil the salvation of the ordinary class of mankind."