Luke 1:1-8; Luke 24; 2 Peter 1:19; Amos 9:11; Gen 18; 1 Sam 1; Exodus 37; 2 Chr. 26:18.
It is a delight for me to spend concentrated time reading and thinking about the nativity stories found at the beginning of the gospels of Matthew and Luke. Especially in this series, we will concentrate on their continuity with the Old Testament, and look for the light that the Old Testament can shed upon these early pages of the good news. In expecting that the Old Testament will help us to understand these stories, we are following the instruction that Jesus gave to his apostles, and that they have handed down to us. At the resurrection, He made it clear that the Old Testament spoke before-time of what would happen, and that they should understand all that they had seen and heard concerning Jesus in the light of the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms (Luke 24). So, then, in reading the traditional narratives about Jesus that have come down to us, we are sure to be further illumined by searching for the evangelists’ references to the Old Testament, whether these come to us in the form of actual quotations, or whether we see similarities and echoes in the gospel stories and images to earlier passages of the Old Testament. We begin with Luke’s story.
Though Orthodox worshippers have been in the cycle of St. Luke’s gospel since just after Holy Cross in September, and will continue to concentrate on Luke until the Saturday before the Nativity, many of us may have missed the first four verses in which Luke introduces his gospel, and his purpose in writing it:
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished among us, just as they were delivered to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus that you may know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed.
There is a good deal to think about in this brief introduction, before we even move on to Luke’s narrative of the nativity. First, it is helpful to read that Luke was aware of “many” writings concerning Jesus in his own day, most of which were never accepted as canonical by the fathers. This means that we need not be disturbed when we hear in the news, for example, about the discovery of a so-called gospel of Judas, discovered in the 1970s, or the significance of the so-called gospel of Thomas, which has been known to scholars quite a bit longer. A reading of these two books (and for Judas we only have a very damaged manuscript) will make it clear that they are nothing like our Christian gospels, but come from ancient Gnostic circles which distorted the truth about the God-Man whom we worship. Quite recently a fascinating exposé, which reads as a thriller, was written regarding the bogus discovery and publication of fragments of “The Gospel of Mary”—purportedly, Mary Magdalene, the “wife” of Jesus. If you are interested in scholarly shinanigans and intrigue, I highly recommend the book Veritas: A Harvard Professor, A Con Man and the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife. If you didn’t know better, you’d think that this is a novel! So then, we know that so-called gospels were very popular in ancient times, and have continued to be fabricated even in our own day. The third century scholar Origen, well aware of these many writings in his day, commented wisely that Luke speaks about those who “tried” to write a gospel narrative, but who did this on their own steam, and were not influenced to do so by the Holy Spirit, as is the case with our four canonical gospels.
After all, the evangelist Lukes explain why it is that he is writing. We need to give priority, as he says that he did, to those who were eye-witnesses and original servants of the word. No doubt Luke has in mind the Twelve, who were with Jesus, and whom He sent out to proclaim his “word,” the good news. But of course, Jesus is Himself that Word incarnate, and they were eye-witnesses of the God-Man and His servants. Further, Luke explained that things needed to be put in order: no doubt he was thinking of those ancient writings that did not get it right. But he may also be referring to our gospel of Mark. One ancient father, Papias, reported by the historian Eusebius, tells us that Mark’s gospel is valuable, but that the evangelist wrote down all he remembered of Jesus’ words and deeds accurately as he had heard them from Peter, though not in a chronologically ordered account. Luke, then, tells us that he has looked into all the stories, and intends to put them in order for Theophilus, a friend (probably someone in the government) whose name means “Lover of God.” And finally, Luke tells us that all these events have been passed down by those who understood the events surrounding Jesus as a ‘fulfillment” of what God had promised. Luke, then, is insistent that he is not writing a novel account, but that he has received and is passing on trustworthy narratives, events that are an actual fulfillment of the OT, and in continuity with that ancient collection.
Consider how Luke does not say only that he wants to record “those things that have happened” among Christians, but “those things that have been accomplished among us.” The verb plērophoreō in verse one can mean both “fulfilled” or “been surely believed”—and of course, what Christians surely believe is what God has shown to be fulfilled. We can think of Jesus’ words to the two on Emmaus and to all the disciples in the upper room (Luke 24), that the whole OT Scriptures had to be fulfilled in Him. We can also think of the explanation of the apostle in 2 Peter 1:19, that the Scriptures of the OT have, through the Transfiguration and other events of Jesus’ ministry, now been shown to be even more reliable, more solid. The prophets only had God’s promises, but the apostles have seen Jesus: “And we [apostles] have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention.” Luke, in beginning his gospel by speaking of such full confirmation, makes us put up our antennae for anything in his narrative that will show a fulfillment of the law, the prophets, and the writings. We, like Theophilus, have been informed about what God is done; may it also be that we are like Theophilus in his name, which means “lover of God.” As one Church father puts it, the gospel is not written only for one man, but for all of us who, like him, love God!
The very next paragraph of Luke’s gospel confirms what we expect that we will find—a story that recalls other events of the Old Testament, and makes an explicit link between the story of Israel and the story of Jesus.
In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, of the division of Abijah; and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. But they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren, and both were advanced in years. (Luke 1:5-7)
Even the first three words echo numerous phrases in the Old Testament, which speaks of what happened “in the days” of Abraham, “in the days of David the king,” “in the days of Menasseh the king,” and so on. What is about to happen reminds us of numerous stories from Israel’s past—the past of the Hebrews, the past of united Israel, and the less remote past of southern Judah, and of the northern kingdom of Israel. Frequently in the books of Kingdoms and Chronicles, a story is introduced by reference to “the days of King’ so-and-so, of Judah or of Israel. Of course, the keen reader of Luke’s day will notice a difference. This is not a king “of Judah,” that is, a legitimate heir to the tribe of Judah but of “Judea”—an area called this by the Roman Empire, now in control. Herod may have had the title “King of Judea,” but he was only a client-king, since the title had been conferred on him by Gentiles, and also since his ancestry went back to the pagan Edomites. If he was a Jew at all, he was a very compromised one, and this showed in much that he did. Yes, he built up the Temple to show off his glory, but he put a Roman Eagle at its doorway! One can almost hear a kind of “sneer’ coming from Luke’s mouth as he mentions Herod. Yet, “in the days of” recalls good times from the past, and also a promise made by the prophet Amos:
In that day I will raise up
the booth of David that is fallen
and repair its breaches,
and raise up its ruins,
and rebuild it as in the days of old (Amos 9:11)
That day is about to come, and Zechariah and Elizabeth are the faithful couple that will see its dawn. For they are “righteous,” and living according to the commandments and statutes” (1.6), showing the best that can be found in enslaved Judea.
As they are described, we think of famous OT couples who were obedient to God—Abraham and Sarah, who also were “advanced in age” with the woman tragically barren (Gen 18:1), or Hannah and Elkanah (1 Sam/1 Kingdoms 1), the eventual parents of Samuel. In noticing these parallels, St. Ambrose highlights the noteworthy ancestors of John the Baptist, who will soon be born: Abijah, (descendent of Zechariah), Aaron (ancestor of both parents), and Hannah, too. Then he comments: “So St. John’s nobility was handed down not only from his parents but also from his ancestors—not exalted through worldly power but venerable through the religious succession. For the forerunner of Christ ought to have such ancestors, that he be seen to preach a faith in his Lord’s advent that is not suddenly conceived but received from his ancestors and imparted by the very law of nature.” (Exposition of the Gospel of Luke 15–16.)
In Luke’s mind and that of the of early writers, these references to famous faithful people are important not just to show John’s pedigree, but to demonstrate that John the Baptist would not preach novel things (“not suddenly conceived”) but things legitimately passed on to him from the faithful people of the past. Unlike our day, when new things are prized as “creative” and “fresh,” the Scriptures remind us that what has continuity with the past is venerable, established, and trustworthy. Luke has already spoken of what has been “passed down,” and here, in the very beginning of the Forerunner’s story, he demonstrates it.
Then the story goes on to show its deep connection with the past. Zechariah, of the house of Aaron, goes during the time of the incense offering to pray for the people and to offer incense. This prayer time, done both morning and night, has been established since Exodus 37, and the offering of incense could only be done by a priest of Aaron’s line. In verse 11, an angel appears to the bewildered Zechariah, who responds, as most visionaries like Daniel and others do, with fear (Luke 1:12). But perhaps he was thinking of a particular time when someone offered incense before the LORD, and had great reason to fear, for he then was struck with leprosy. King Uzziah took it upon himself to offer what only the priest could (2 Chr. 26:18), and was visited by God’s judgment. True, Zechariah really was a priest, but he was ministering in a Kingdom and a Temple that was deeply compromised, and not faithful to God. An adulterous puppet-king ruled, and the High Priests that he appointed were not really legitimate.
Perhaps, then, Zechariah feared not only that an angelic figure was before him, but that judgment was to be announced. As representative of God’s sinful people, living in a sinful time, under a sinful king, would he become a sign of judgment to them? But the angel’s word is gracious, “Do not be afraid, your prayers have been heard.” Again, we think of God’s word to Moses that he has heard the prayers of the people when Moses hears the LORD speak in the burning bush, or Hannah’s consolation in the temple, that she will indeed have a son. This comfort is clinched by the name that the angel announces: “You will call him John.” John (Hebrew Yohannan) — a word made from the holy name of the LORD (YHWH) and the verb chanan (“to be gracious”) — this name it all. Just as God has been with His people through all the years of all the kings, through the years of exile, and now during the time when the Romans conquered, so He is still with them, and will be with them in a way that they can scarcely imagine. The promised baby is to be the herald of all this. Next week we will hear more about this remarkable forerunner, St. John the Baptist, and how his ministry was intertwined from the beginning with the coming of the God-Man Jesus.
Edith M. Humphrey 