Luke 24:44-49

5. The last Instructions: Luke 24:44-49.

Vers. 44-49. Meyer, Bleek, and others think that all the sayings which follow were uttered this same evening, and that the ascension itself must, according to Luke, have followed immediately, during the night or toward morning. Luke corrected himself later in the Acts, where, according to a more exact tradition, he puts an interval of forty days between the resurrection and the ascension. A circumstance which might be urged in favour of this hypothesis is, that what Luke omits in the angel's message (Luke 24:6) is precisely the command to the disciples to return to Galilee. But, on the other hand: 1. May it not be supposed that Luke, having reached the end of the first part of his history, and having the intention of repeating those facts as the point of departure for his second, thought it enough to state them in the most summary way? 2. Is it probable that an author, when beginning the second part of a history, should modify most materially, without in the least apprising his reader, the recital of facts with which he has closed his first? Would it not have been simpler and more honest on the part of Luke to correct the last page of his first volume, instead of confirming it implicitly as he does, Acts 1:1; ? Acts 1:23. The τότε, then (Luke 24:45), may embrace an indefinite space of time. 4. This more general sense harmonizes with the fragmentary character of the report given of those last utterances: Now He said unto them, Luke 24:44: and He said unto them, Luke 24:46. This inexact form shows clearly that Luke abandons narrative strictly so called, to give as he closes the contents of the last sayings of Jesus, reserving to himself to develope later the historical account of those last days. 5. The author of our Gospel followed the same tradition as Paul (see the appearance to Peter, mentioned only by Paul and Luke). It is, moreover, impossible, considering his relations to that apostle and to the churches of Greece, that he was not acquainted with the first Epistle to the Corinthians. Now, in this epistle a considerable interval is necessarily supposed between the resurrection and the ascension, first because it mentions an appearance of Jesus to more than 500 brethren, which cannot have taken place on the very day of the resurrection; and next, because it expressly distinguishes two appearances to the assembled apostles: the one undoubtedly that the account of which we have just been reading (1 Corinthians 15:6); the other, which must have taken place later (Luke 24:7). These facts, irreconcilable with the idea attributed by Meyer and others to Luke, belonged, as Paul himself tells us, 1 Corinthians 15:1-3, to the teaching generally received in the Church, to the παράδοσις. How could they have been unknown to such an investigator as Luke? How could they have escaped him in his first book, and that to recur to him without his saying a word in the second? Luke therefore here indicates summarily the substance of the different instructions given by Jesus between His resurrection and ascension all comprised in the words of the Acts: “ After that He had given commandments unto the apostles ” (Acts 1:2).

Ver. 44 relates how Jesus recalled to them His previous predictions regarding His death and resurrection, which fulfilled the prophecies of the O. T. Οὗτοι οἱ λόγοι, an abridged phrase for ταῦτα ἐστιν οἱ λόγοι : “These events which have just come to pass are those of which I told you in the discourses which you did not understand.” The expression: while I was yet with you, is remarkable; for it proves that, in the mind of Jesus, His separation from them was now consummated. He was with them only exceptionally; His abode was elsewhere.

The three terms: Moses, Prophets, Psalms, may denote the three parts of the O. T. among the Jews: the Pentateuch; the Prophets, comprising, with the historical books (up to the exile), the prophetical books; the Psalms, as representing the entire group of the hagiographa. Bleek rather thinks that Jesus mentions here only the books most essential from a prophetic point of view (περὶ ἐμοῦ). If it is once admitted that the division of the canon which we have indicated existed so early as the time of Jesus, the first meaning is the more natural.

Jesus closes these explanations by an act of power for which they were meant to prepare. He opens the inner sense of His apostles, so that the Scriptures shall henceforth cease to be to them a sealed book. This act is certainly the same as that described by John in the words (Luke 20:22): “ And He breathed on them, saying, Receive ye the Holy Ghost. ” The only difference is, that John names the efficient cause, Luke the effect produced. The miracle is the same as that which Jesus shall one day work upon Israel collectively, when the veil shall be taken away (2 Corinthians 3:15-16).

At Luke 24:46 there begins a new resumé that of the discourses of the risen Jesus referring to the future, as the preceding bore on the past of the kingdom of God. Καὶ εἶπεν, and He said to them again. So true is it that Luke here gives the summary of the instructions of Jesus during the forty days (Acts 1:3), that we find the parallels of these verses scattered up and down in the discourses which the other Gospels give between the resurrection and ascension. The words: should be preached among all nations, recall Matthew 28:19: “ Go and teach all nations,” and Mark 16:15: “ Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. ” The words: preaching repentance and remission of sins, recall John 20:23: “ Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them. ” Luke 24:46 forms the transition from the past to the future (Luke 24:47). ῞Οτι depends on: it was so, understood.

The omission of καὶ οὕτως ἔδει, thus it behoved, by the Alex. cannot be justified; it has arisen from negligence. Jesus declares two necessities: the one founded on prophecy (thus it is written), the other on the very nature of things (it behoved). The Alex. reading: repentance unto pardon, instead of: repentance and pardon, has no internal probability. It would be a phrase without analogy in the whole of the N. T.

The partic. ἀρξάμενον is a neut. impersonal accusative, used as a gerund. The Alex. reading ἀρξάμενοι is a correction.

The thought that the kingdom of God must spread from Jerusalem belonged also to prophecy (Psalms 110:2, et al.); comp. Acts 1:8, where this idea is developed.

To carry out this work of preaching, there must be men specially charged with it. These are the apostles (Luke 24:48). Hence the ὑμεῖς, ye, heading the proposition. The thought of Luke 24:48 is found John 15:27: that of Luke 24:49; John 15:26.

A testimony so important can only be given worthily and effectively with divine aid (Luke 24:49). ᾿Ιδού, behold, expresses the unforeseen character of this intervention of divine strength; and ἐγώ, I, is put foremost as the correlative of ὑμεῖς, ye (Luke 24:48): “Ye, on the earth, give testimony; and I, from heaven, give you power to do so.” When the disciples shall feel the spirit of Pentecost, they shall know that it is the breath of Jesus glorified, and for what end it is imparted to them. In the phrase: the promise of the Father, the word promise denotes the thing promised. The Holy Spirit is the divine promise par excellence. It is in this supreme gift that all others are to terminate. And this aid is so indispensable to them, that they must beware of beginning the work before having received it. The command to tarry in the city is no wise incompatible with a return of the disciples to Galilee between the resurrection and ascension. Everything depends on the time when Jesus spoke this word; it is not specified in the context. According to Acts 1:4, it was on the day of His ascension that Jesus gave them this command. The Alex. reject the word Jerusalem, which indeed is not necessary after Luke 24:47.