‚P As a witness of the Lord

Habakkuk 2:1-3
‡T Among us

@"The Gospel according to Luke", it is felt that it is more modern than the other Gospel. Because, it is the article an intellectual of Herenist recorded for the foreigners of the Greek zone. It may be said that the then Greek zone was considerably near to our modern people in an international sense. Because it has 24 chapters, it may take the time for a long time considerably. But I want to hear these messages, as much as possible carefully.

@First of all, it is the foreword from Verse 1:1-4. "Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word have handed them down to us, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; so that you might know the exact truth about the things you have been taught." Luke, he was a Herenist born in Syria/Anteoke (though the name of "Luke" does not come out in this Gospel). Perhaps, it seems he wrote this Gospel in around AD58. He accompanied to the third trip of missionary work of Paul and passed through each city of Macedonia Greece from Asia Minor and built many churches, and he came back to the Jerusalem church for the report. Paulo was accused there by the Jew, and was confined at Caizariya. He appealed to the emperor of that time, and went to Rome, and Luke also shared an action with Paul all the time. Perhaps, Luke obtained many documents during a Caizariya stay, and it seems that he might have written down this Gospel, I think. Writing of the gospel for the people of Greek zone was demanded already, and Luke would seem to be a well-qualified person for that work. Because Luke was one of the team member who worked to build up the church of each place, he checked the state of those churches with his eyes and ears. "Among us", it seems including the believers of those various churches.

@The emperor at that time in Rome was Nero. He was the first emperor who assumed Christians as arsonists of the Rome conflagration which happened in AD64, and he started persecuting. However, Nero succeeded to the throne in AD54, and it seems he was an emperor full of will during five years, seriously; that is why Paul decided appeal to this emperor. At that time, the church encountered Jewish persecution, but it seems to have spread smoothly in the Rome world. The reason why this dignitary of Rome/Theophius interested in Christianity eagerly, it would be in such a time. At that time, he seems to have been a Christian, and Acts was consecrated to him.

‡U "The Word" and "the church"

@This Gospel was written for such Theophilus assumed to be a reader, but, strangely, a document, except this Luke, can not find who is "Theophilus", at all. There is the person saying that it may be a person in imagination; and there are many movements imagining Luke's real intention. Even though he is fictitious or existence; anyway, "Theophilus" must be a person on behalf of us. Luke finished writing this Gospel and wanted "so that you might know the exact truth about the things you have been taught". The matter of "exact truth"; Luke seem to aim this. "An account of things accomplished amount us", "those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses", "servants of the Word", "handed them down to us"; Luke told like thus in several ways. And these really point at the Gospel of Jesus. The Gospel of Jesus that many people witnessed it, was deepened, raised and preached, than it's witness. Here there is it, "servants of the Word"; and it seems that there are two meanings in "this Word". One of it points Jesus himself and another one indicates "Bible that is God's word". It was the Old Testament mainly in those days, but it was included "the Gospel according to Matthew", "Paulo's letter" which has already appeared to the church, and fragmentary sighting informations, etc. The witnesses compared the matter which they witnessed and "the Word of God"; and they admitted that event/the Gospel of Jesus was really plan of God; then they began to tell this to other people.

@Luke heard that testimony. It was not just only the impression of the individual who witnessed it, but it was the testimony which had been told through the church put up by the testimony. The church of the testimony medium widened a limit remarkably, and Luke is going to finish writing this Gospel now. He added "the Word" and "the church" as a witness information, then we can hear from it that he is going to testify "exact truth".

‡V As a witness of the Lord

@I want to pick up some points, but I will do it carefully, so that please hear it carefully. First of all, it is "the exact truth". It's meaning "it is worth reliance". In the original, it is compound word, "negation word + lets you stagger (or I deceive you)". Luke investigated the Gospel of Jesus minutely and is going to finish writing it methodically. He expected that "so that you might know the exact truth about the things you have taught". Surely, in the people who heard the Gospel of Jesus, they believed it obediently at first; but there may have been many cases leaving from the Gospel that they heard, because they are swung around in sense of values of Rome or confused by Jewish legalism. Is not it piled up with modern us? It seems the result that they did not hear it as the exact truth. Because this is the testimony investigated minutely, we must hear it like that.

@The second is a thing called "an event convinced". There are other reasons expressing a lot for a long time, "an account of the things accomplished" etc. And, it shows it has two meanings, the Gospel of Jesus, "it has accomplished", and also "it has convinced", among us. About the word of Japanese "belief", you may feel it that is "conviction" of believers, but by using two words having two meanings for here, we can hear Luke's decisive insistence having been concluded in Jesus, who died on the cross and revived the day before 2000 years ago, but not only our conviction that the Gospel is salvation. And it would be his greatest message that was not a mistake by any means that we believe this Gospel, in this foreword.

@The third point is that Luke was not the eyewitness of that event. This point must pay attention to it in particular. The witness does not necessarily have the qualification for testifying for "the exact fact." Rather, only the surface of things will reflect, if we catch only the things that "we heard" or that "we saw". It is only such a human senses thing which changes itself into groundless memory immediately, and it does not need to remember "a transmission game". A really important thing is often concealed in the place in which it doesn't see it. The witnesses pile the witnessed event, and it has compared with "the Word", and has confirmed it many times in walking of the church. Therefore, they might assume that this is the trustworthy event, and have piled "Testimony to the Gospel". Luke is going to stand as a witness in that meaning, too. He spoke to modern us, as a person who heard such a testimony, and as an eyewitness and as a believer. This is a matter given from God. When it which he "convinced" of the Gospel of Jesus made "the accomplishment", and it is the work of God in him, and he will stand as its witness above all. Will not we wish to stand the same place?