Featured A subtle attack

Christian scholars are divided on how to interpret Colossians 4:11. Some, and I side with them, say this verse excludes Luke and Demas as being Jews (circumcised). Others say this verse only refers to those working with Paul "at the time the letter was written" and there does not exclude Luke from being "of the circumcision."

Either way, the idea that the personal bias of an inspired writer might introduce error into the text is without merit. As beautifully stated earlier, God used the experience, education and vocabulary of the inspired writer to express His (God's) own message!!!!

 

I am familiar with many very prominent and competent scholars who have written that Luke was a Gentile. But, of course, I do not read only those scholars who agree with me!

 

Where in the proverb that Jesus is quoting from does it specify the ethnicity of the physician?

 

Thank you for this quote. However, I wrote that “first-century physicians in the Hellenistic world were Gentiles rather than Jews.” Moreover, the “medicine” practiced by ancient Jewish “physicians” was more akin to sorcery and magic than the medical arts of ancient Greek medical practice.

 

Romans 3:1. Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision?
2. Much, in every way. For in the first place the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God.

Romans 3:29. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also,
30. since God is one; and he will justify the circumcised on the ground of faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith.

Romans 4:7. “Blessed are those whose iniquities are forgiven,
and whose sins are covered;
8. blessed is the one against whom the Lord will not reckon sin.”
9. Is this blessedness, then, pronounced only on the circumcised, or also on the uncircumcised? We say, “Faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness.”
10. How then was it reckoned to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised.
11. He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the ancestor of all who believe without being circumcised and who thus have righteousness reckoned to them,
12. and likewise the ancestor of the circumcised who are not only circumcised but who also follow the example of the faith that our ancestor Abraham had before he was circumcised. (NRSV)

 

Alfred Plummer, in his commentary on the Greek text of the gospel according to Luke in the I.C.C. series, writes in his introduction, “Almost all critics are agreed that in Col. iv. 14 Luke is separated from “those of he circumcision,” and therefore was a Gentile Christian.

 

Really? Would you not count William Hendriksen as a competent biblical scholar?
But actually, what difference does it make? 'All Scripture is God-breathed.....' whether the authors are Jewish or not.

 

Please see this work on the subject,

Carmoly, Eliakim. Histoire des Médecins Juifs, Anciens et Modernes. Brussels, Société Encyclographique des Sciences Médicales, 1843.

Carmoly writes that in the early days of the Jewish state the priests were the physicians, and that the direct agency by which the people were healed was יהוה (YHWH). Regarding the later days of the Jewish state, he writes,

“On the other hand there is no doubt that this science was cultivated by the doctors of the law, of whom Ezra, the scribe, may be considered the chief. The doctors of the law have always been the depositaries of it and esteemed it as appertaining exclusively to their province. Seeing the influence and consideration that their knowledge gave them with the public they shrouded it in mystery, and took all possible precaution to prevent the admission of other classes of the community.

“But did they cultivate this science in a methodical manner, and is it evident that what they have done gave it a perceptible progress? We think not; at least they have handed down to us nothing by which we could judge. Nevertheless, according to tradition, Ezra and Nehemiah were very well versed in the virtues of herbs and the qualities of roots.” (As translated into English by John R. W. Dunbar, M. D.).

When Paul, in Col. 4:14, referred to Luke as “the beloved physician,” he most certainly was not referring to a Jewish “physician,” but to a Greek physician.

 

I'm sure you wouldn't be surprised when I say that I disagree with you, Stillearning.

I think that God uses us as we are. He uses our intellect, or lack of it; he uses our strengths and weaknesses for his glory.

He used Luke to communicate his word in a way only Luke could have done.

Rob

 

This is not true in any shape or form. God can be and is sovereign even while men make choices, do investigations, and write divine books included in the canon.

Further, man's intellect and investigation used in the writing of scripture has nothing to do with 2 Peter 1:20. That would be a complete misapplication of that passage. Not even close.

Luke, while writing his gospel did so under the following conditions:

1. Not knowing that his writings would be part of the complete canon.
2. Did so as an eye witness and minister of the word to a specific audience.
3. He compiled an orderly account for the certainty of others as to what happened in Jesus ministry.

These are the conditions under which Luke wrote his gospel and yet during the entire time God is able to remain sovereign over all of His writing. We need to be careful of man made standards as to how God accomplishes things. Especially when we set them up where scripture itself has not.

 

I suspect Luke did not even have in his mind the concept of a canon of scripture, much less that his writings (at least the ones that we have) would survive two millennia and be used as an authoritative source for faith and practice.

Nevertheless, Luke did his work under the guidance and assistance of the Spirit, and it survives and continues to bless others.

 

I wonder if this is the case. Paul certainly knew that he was writing the words of God. 1 Cor. 14:37. If anyone thinks himself a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write to you are the commandments of the Lord.'

That is absolutely true.

 

Actually I talk like I have read the Bible


------------------------

Where in scripture does it say that what it meant?

That is not what that says. It is a reference to the progressive revelation of God.

 

Having thought about this a little more, I would want to say that Luke did his work under the direction of the Holy Spirit.