LUKE CHAPTER 3

OBSERVATION STAGE

The purpose of the observation stage is to maintain focus on the text at hand within the normative rules of language, context and logic which limits the observer to the content offered by the book of Luke. This will serve to avoid going on unnecessary tangents elsewhere; and more importantly, it will provide the framework for a proper and objective comparison with passages located elsewhere in Scripture.

Remember that something elsewhere may be true, but in the text at hand it may not be in view.

I) [Lk 3:1-14]:

(Lk 3:1 NAS) '''Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene,

(Lk 3:2 HOLMAN) during [lit., in] the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, God's word came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness.

(Lk 3:3 ASV) And he came into all the region round about the Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins;

(Lk 3:4 NKJV) as it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying: "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ' Prepare the way of the LORD; Make His paths straight.

(Lk 3:5 NAS) Every ravine will be filled, and every mountain and hill will be brought low, the crooked [places] will [be] straight, and the rough roads [into] smooth

(Lk 3:6 NAS) And all flesh will see the salvation of God.

(Lk 3:7 NAS) So he [lit., was saying, imperfect tense] to the crowds who were going out to be baptized by him, "You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?

(Lk 3:8 HOLMAN) Therefore produce fruit [lit., "worthy of," in the sense of being] consistent with repentance. And don't start saying to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father,' for I tell you that God is able to raise up children for Abraham from these stones!

(Lk 3:9 NKJV) And even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees. Therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire

(Lk 3:10 YLT) And the multitudes were questioning him, saying, 'What, then, shall we do?'

(Lk 3:11 YLT) and he [answered, (aorist) saying, (participle)] to them, 'He [who has; lit., the one] having two coats - let him impart to him having none, and he [who has] having victuals [food] - in like manner let him do.'

(Lk 3:12 NKJV) Then tax collectors also came to be baptized, and said to him, 'Teacher, what shall we do?'

(Lk 3:13 NKJV) And he said to them, "Collect no more than what is appointed for you.

(Lk 3:14 NKJV) Likewise the soldiers asked him, saying, 'And what shall we do?' So he said to them, 'Do not intimidate anyone or accuse falsely, and be content with your wages.' "

A) (3:1-2) IN THE FIFTEENTH YEAR OF TIBERIUS CAESAR, WHEN PONTIUS PILATE WAS GOVERNOR OF JUDEA, AND HEROD ANTIPAS WAS TETRARCH OF GALILEE, AND HIS BROTHER PHILIP WAS TETRARCH OF ITURAEA AND TRACHONITIS, AND LYSANIAS WAS TETRARCH OF ABILENE, DURING THE PRIESTHOOD OF ANNAS AND CAIAPHAS, AND AFTER CENTURIES OF SILENCE, GOD'S WORD CAME TO JOHN THE SON OF ZECHARIAH IN THE WILDERNESS

(Lk 3:1 NAS) "Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene, (Lk 3:2 HOLMAN) during [lit., in] the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, God's word came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness." =

Author Luke continued to be thorough in conveying the historical setting of his writing, (cf. Lk 1:1-5; 2:1-3). In accordance with the Roman method of reckoning time, author Luke stipulated the timeframe of chapter 3 to be the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, which implies that it was calculated from the death of the previous Caesar Augustus, Tiberius' stepfather, which occurred on 19 August, A.D. 14. So the timeframe of chapter 3 is between August, A.D. 28 to August, A.D. 29. Tiberius is recorded as having ruled over the Roman Empire from A.D. 14 to A.D. 37, during which time, Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, appointed in A.D. 26, and ruling until A.D. 36. Pilate's rule was characterized as being largely opposed to the Jewish people over whom he ruled. Author Luke further stipulated that Herod, more specifically, Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great who ruled Galilee and Perea from 4 B.C. - A.D. 39, was tetrarch of Galilee, rulting from the city of Tiberius, from 4 B.C. to A.D. 39. Herod's brother Philip was tetrarch of the region northwest of Palestine called Ituraea and Trachonitis from 4 B.C. to A.D. 34; and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene, northwest of Damascus. John the Baptist's ministry began within this timeframe, which is in the time when Annas was high priest, (A.D. 6 to A.D. 15). Annas was deposed in A.D. 15 by the Romans in favor of his son-in-law, Caiaphas, (A.D. 18-36). But the Jews, nevertheless, still recognized Annas as the rightful high priest while his son-in-law functioned in that office. And at that time, God's word came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness for the first time in centuries, (Lk 3:1-2).

B) (3:2b-6) DURING THE FIFTEENTH YEAR OF THE REIGN OF TIBERIUS CAESAR, THE WORD OF GOD CAME TO JOHN THE SON OF ZECHARIAH, IN THE WILDERNESS, WHEREUPON JOHN PREACHED THE BAPTISM OF REPENTANCE UNTO REMISSION OF SINS THROUGHOUT THE JORDAN RIVER REGION. HIS MINISTRY WAS DECLARED TO BE A FULFILLMENT OF THE PROPHECY IN ISAIAH OF THE VOICE WHO WOULD CRY OUT IN THE WILDERNESS TO PREPARE THE WAY OF THE LORD, MAKING HIS PATHS STRAIGHT, EVERY RAVINE FILLED, MOUNTAINS AND HILLS BROUGHT LOW, CROOKED PLACES STRAIGHT, ROUGH ROADS SMOOTH, SO THAT ALL FLESH WILL SEE THE SALVATION OF OUR GOD - THE REMISSION OF THE SINS OF ALL MANKIND TO BE RECEIVED AS EACH INDIVIDUAL TRUSTS IN THE LORD FOR IT. IN THE CASE OF THE MESSAGE OF JOHN OF REPENTANCE UNTO REMISSION OF SINS, THE WORD REPENTANCE CANNOT MEAN DOING GODLY WORKS IN ORDER TO RECEIVE REMISSION (FORGIVENESS) OF SINS, AS SOME CONTEND; BECAUSE DOING GODLY WORKS CANNOT ERASE SINFUL DEEDS. NOR CAN REPENTANCE MEAN TURNING FROM SIN IN THE SENSE OF NOT COMMITTING SINS ANY MORE; FOR THAT IS A TASK WHICH IS NOT POSSIBLE GIVEN THE SINFUL NATURE OF EVERY INDIVIDUAL

(Lk 3:1 NAS) '''Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene, (Lk 3:2 HOLMAN) during [lit., in] the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, God's word came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness. (Lk 3:3 ASV) And he came into all the region round about the Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins; (Lk 3:4 NKJV) as it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying: "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ' Prepare the way of the LORD; Make His paths straight. (Lk 3:5 NAS) Every ravine will be filled, and every mountain and hill will be brought low, the crooked [places] will [be] straight, and the rough roads [into] smooth.' " (Lk 3:6 NAS).And all flesh will see the salvation of God. ''' =

Verse 2b declared that the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness. Note that God's communication to mankind had been silent for centuries. Verse 3 then says that John, having received communication directly from God in the wilderness, went about all the region around the Jordan River - a wilderness area - preaching the baptism of repentance unto [Greek "eis"] remission of sins. Hence an itinerant mission of preaching and water baptism by John is in view. The Greek word "eis" rendered "unto" means because of, i.e., as a result of having already repented. So John's water baptism was an immersion by John in the waters of the Jordan River of Israelite believers as a symbolic act of their having repented. The Greek word "metanoias" rendered "of repentance" in the ASV, means a change of mind. It qualifies the phrase rendered "baptism of repentance unto remission of sins." So John's water baptism evidently symbolized an individual Israelite's having changed his mind about his sins in the sense that he chose to acknowledge that he committed sins and would be held accountable for them before God; and that those sins would be remitted, i.e., be forgiven by God through that change of mind, i.e., through trusting in God to make provision for that individual's forgiveness through His coming Messiah / Savior. In the case of the message of John of repentance unto remission of sins, the word repentance cannot mean doing godly works in order to receive remission (forgiveness) of sins, as some contend; because doing godly works cannot erase sinful deeds. Nor can repentance mean turn from sin in the sense of not committing sins any more, for that is a task which is not possible given the sinful nature of every individual. Later, John told the crowds to produce fruit in keeping with repentance which corroborates that repentance and producing fruit, i.e., doing godly works are not the same thing , (Lk 3:8). Luke goes on to explain through the Prophet Isaiah how forgiveness of sins would come about. A forerunner of the Messiah / Savior would announce His imminent coming. Author Luke implied that that forerunner was John the son of Zacharias, known elsewhere in Scripture as John the Baptist. The words of the prophet Isaiah implied that should all of a generation of Israel repent in the sense of believing in their salvation - the remission of their sins - through the Messiah / Savior, His appearing to bring that salvation and His Kingdom rule would be imminent. Luke quoted from Isaiah as follows: '''As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying: "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way of the LORD; Make His paths straight. (Lk 3:5 NAS) Every ravine will be filled, and every mountain and hill will be brought low, the crooked [places] will [be] straight, and the rough roads [into] smooth.' " Then author Luke reflected the meaning of the words He quoted from the Book of Isaiah: "And all flesh will see the salvation of God,"(Lk 3:6). In consideration of the fact that author Luke reported that John, son of Zechariah, preached the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins, and Luke's words in verse 3:6 which reflect upon the context conveyed by Isaiah chapter 40; it must be concluded that the salvation stipulated in verse 3:6 refers to the universal salvation - the remission of sins - of all mankind made available through the coming of the LORD ushered in by the preparedness of that generation of Israelites - that preparation being a moment of faith in His offer of remission of sins. Luke's statement in Lk 3:6, therefore implies that it is God Who is bringing to all mankind salvation as something He will provide for us and not something we must do for Him.

1) [Compare Luke's words in Lk 3:4-6 with Isa 40:1-5]:

(Isa 40:1 Holman) " 'Comfort, comfort My people,' says your God."

(Isa 40:2 NKJV) 'Speak [to the heart of] Jerusalem, and cry out to her, That her warfare [has been] ended, that her iniquity [is to have been pardoned], For she has received from the LORD's hand Double for all her sins.'

(Isa 40:3 HOLMAN) A voice of one crying out: ["In the wilderness, prepare the way of the LORD]; make a straight highway for our God in the desert.

(Lk 3:4 NKJV) as it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying: "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ' Prepare the way of the LORD; Make His paths straight.

(Isa 40:4 HOLMAN) Every valley will be lifted up, and every mountain and hill will be leveled; the uneven ground will become smooth, and the rough places a plain.

(Lk 3:5 NAS) Every ravine will be filled, and every mountain and hill will be brought low, the crooked [places] will [be] straight, and the rough roads [into] smooth.' "

(Isa 40:5 NKJV) [And] the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together, for the mouth of the LORD has spoken [it].' "

(Lk 3:6 NAS) "And all flesh will see the salvation of God."

The words of Isaiah 40 to which author Luke refer in 3:4-6 incorporate the content of the previous text of Isaiah, especially Isa 7:14-16 and 9:6-7. This being considered, the words figuratively convey the message that when every individual of a generation of Israelites trusts alone in the LORD alone to deliver him from his sins and be provided with the gift of God's perfect Righteousness within himself unto eternal life in the Kingdom of Heaven, then that would prepare the way of the LORD and He would come at that time and begin His Eternal Kingdom rule over the world on the throne of David from Jerusalem through His people, Israel. This mission of the LORD was to begin as a Child born of an Israelite maiden / virgin - a Son and Child of Israel, (Isa 7:14-16); Who was further described as "Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace, (Isaiah 9:6-7) .. The mission of the LORD to make provision of His Righteousness for all mankind through faith in Him implies His atonement for the sins of the whole world - an unlimited and universal atonement for sins made available to all mankind through a moment of faith alone in the LORD alone, (Lk 3:4-6; Isa 6:3; 7:14-16; 9:6-7; 40:1-5). So those individuals from the population of the world, i.e., Jews and Gentiles, who trusted alone in the Messiah / Christ alone would then be permitted entrance into the eternal Kingdom of Heaven.

****** EXCERPTS FROM THE BOOK OF ISAIAH ******

OR MOVE TO THE NEXT SECTION OF LUKE CHAPTER 3

(Isa 7:14-16; 9:6-7; 39:1-8; 40:1-5) IN VIEW OF THE IMMINENT RETURN IN ANCIENT TIMES OF ISRAEL FROM BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY TO A JERUSALEM WHICH WOULD BE REBUILT, A VOICE OF A PROPHET CRIED OUT TO THE PEOPLE OF JERUSALEM TELLING THEM IN A FIGURATIVE / SPIRITUAL SENSE, NOT A LITERAL SENSE, THAT IN THE WILDERNESS THEY WERE ALL TO PREPARE THE WAY OF THE LORD IN THE SENSE OF MAKING THE WAY OF THE LORD RIGHTEOUS; AND IN THE SAME SENSE, MAKE A STRAIGHT HIGHWAY FOR OUR GOD IN THE DESERT, AND LIKEWISE HAVE EVERY VALLEY LIFTED UP, EVERY MOUNTAIN AND HILL LEVELED, AND UNEVEN GROUND BECOME SMOOTH AND ROUGH PLACES A PLAIN, I.E., SO THAT THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL WOULD BE CHARACTERIZED AS HAVING THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD THUS HAVING REMOVED THE SPIRITUAL HINDRANCES WITHIN THEMSELVES TO THE COMING OF THE LORD AND HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS SO THAT ALL MANKIND WOULD SEE THE GLORY OF THE LORD WHEN HE COMES TO RULE OVER HIS EVERLASTING KINGDOM OF HEAVEN ON THE EARTH, AS DECLARED BY THE PROPHET TO BE TRUE, FOR ISAIAH DECLARED THAT THE MOUTH OF THE LORD HAD SPOKEN IT TO HIM. SO THE TIME OF THE LORD'S RULE WOULD BEGIN WHEN EACH ONE OF NATIONAL ISRAEL, TO WHOM THE MESSAGE OF THE PROPHET CRYING OUT WAS EXCLUSIVELY DIRECTED, RESPONDED TO IT EVIDENTLY VIA A MOMENT OF FAITH ALONE IN THE COMING LORD ALONE TO DELIVER ONE FROM ONE'S SINS SUCH THAT EACH ONE WOULD BE PROVIDED WITH THE GIFT OF GOD'S PERFECT RIGHTEOUSNESS WITHIN ONESELF UNTO ETERNAL LIFE AND BY THAT PREPARE THE WAY OF THE LORD TO COME TO RULE OVER HIS EVERLASTING KINGDOM OF HEAVEN ON THE EARTH THROUGH HIS PEOPLE ISRAEL. NOTICE THAT THIS REPENTANCE CANNOT MEAN DOING GODLY WORKS IN ORDER TO RECEIVE REMISSION (FORGIVENESS) OF SINS IN ORDER TO ENTER THE KINGDOM OF GOD, AS SOME CONTEND; BECAUSE DOING GODLY WORKS CANNOT ERASE SINFUL DEEDS. NOR CAN REPENTANCE MEAN TO TURN FROM SIN IN THE SENSE OF NOT COMMITTING SINS ANY MORE; FOR THAT IS A TASK WHICH IS NOT POSSIBLE GIVEN THE SINFUL NATURE OF EVERY INDIVIDUAL. ISAIAH INDICATED PREVIOUSLY THAT THIS OUTCOME WAS TO BEGIN WITH A CHILD BORN SUPERNATURALLY OF AN ISRAELITE MAIDEN / VIRGIN - A SON AND CHILD OF ISRAEL, WHO WOULD BE DECLARED WONDERFUL, COUNSELOR, MIGHTY GOD, EVERLASTING FATHER, PRINCE OF PEACE WHO WOULD COME TO ESTABLISH HIS EVERLASTING KINGDOM OF HEAVEN RULE OVER THE WORLD UPON THE THRONE OF DAVID FROM JERUSALEM THROUGH HIS PEOPLE, ISRAEL AS BOTH GOD AND MAN

(Isa 7:14 YLT) '''Therefore the Lord Himself [is giving] to you [plural, i.e., Judah] a sign, [behold], the Virgin [the pregnant one] [the one giving birth to] a son, And she [has called] his name Immanuel. (Isa 7:15 NKJV) Curds and honey He shall eat, that He may know to refuse the evil and choose the good. (Isa 7:16 NKJV) For before the Child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land that you dread will be forsaken by both her kings... (Isa 9:6 NKJV) For unto us [Israel, Isa 1:1, 8:18] a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. (Isa 9:7 NKJV) Of the increase of His government and peace There will be no end, Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, To order it and establish it with judgment and justice From that time forward, even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this... (Isa 39:1 NKJV) At that time Merodach-Baladan the son of Baladan, king of Babylon, sent letters and a present to Hezekiah, for he heard [lit., was hearing] that he had been sick and had recovered [lit., was recovering]. (Isa 39:2 NKJV) And Hezekiah was pleased [lit., was being pleased] with them, and showed them [lit., was showing them] the house of his treasures - the silver and gold, the spices and precious ointment, and all his armory - all that was found [lit., had been found] among his treasures. There was nothing in his house or in all his dominion that Hezekiah did not show them. (Isa 39:3 NKJV) Then Isaiah the prophet went [lit., was coming] to King Hezekiah, and said [lit., was saying] to him, "What did these men say [lit., have these men said], and from where did they come [lit., were coming] to you?" So Hezekiah said, "They came [lit., had come] to me from a far country, from Babylon." (Isa 39:4 NKJV) And he said, [lit., was saying], "What have they seen in your house?" So Hezekiah answered, [lit., was answering], "They have seen all that is in my house; there is nothing among my treasures that I have not shown them." (Isa 39:5 NKJV) Then Isaiah said to Hezekiah, "Hear the word of the LORD of hosts: (Isa 39:6 NKJV) 'Behold, the days are coming when all that is in your house, and what your fathers have accumulated until this day, shall be carried [lit., have been carried] to Babylon; nothing shall be left,' says the LORD. (Isa 39:7 NKJV) And they shall take away [lit., be taking away] some of your sons who will descend [lit., shall be descendants] from you, whom you will beget [lit., be begetting]; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.' (Isa 39:8 NKJV) So Hezekiah said [lit., was saying] to Isaiah, "The word of the LORD which you have spoken is good!" For he said, "At least there will be peace and truth in my days." (Isa 40:1 Holman) "Comfort, comfort My people," says your God. (Isa 40:2 NKJV) "Speak [to the heart of] Jerusalem, and cry out to her, That her warfare [has been] ended, that her iniquity [is to have been pardoned], For she has received from the LORD's hand Double for all her sins." (Isa 40:3 HOLMAN) A voice of one crying out: ["In the wilderness, prepare the way of the LORD]; make a straight highway for our God in the desert. (Isa 40:4 HOLMAN) Every valley will be lifted up, and every mountain and hill will be leveled; the uneven ground will become smooth, and the rough places a plain. (Isa 40:5 NKJV) [And] the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together, for the mouth of the LORD has spoken [it].' " ''' =

In view in this passage in Isaiah chapter 40 is the imminent return in ancient times of the Israelites from Babylonian captivity to a Jerusalem which was to be rebuilt by them. Israel's past iniquity had been pardoned through having received double punishment for all her sins, (Isa 40:1-2). Whereupon the next verse portrays the voice of a prophet announcing the imminent coming of the LORD in His glory to establish on earth the Eternal Kingdom of God conditional upon all Israelites making the necessary preparation: "A voice of one crying out, 'In the wilderness prepare the way of the LORD; Make a straight highway for our God in the desert, Every valley will be lifted up, and every mountain and hill will be leveled; the uneven ground will become smooth, and the rough places a plain," [And] the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together, for the mouth of the LORD has spoken [it],' " ''' (Isa 40:3-5).

Note that author Luke provides his observation of this to be referring to a universal salvation brought to the world by God for all mankind to receive by faith: (Lk 3:6 NAS) "And all flesh will see the salvation of God."

The phrases such as "In the wilderness, prepare the way of the LORD; make a straight highway for our God in the desert. Every valley will be lifted up, and every mountain and hill will be leveled; the uneven ground will become smooth, and the rough places a plain," (Isa 40:3-5), cannot be literal because such a fulfillment of these phrases which portray the world completely without hill or valley, or uneven or rough ground is not literally possible with finite, flawed man; nor useful in enabling the coming of the LORD, Who is Creator and Master of the physical world, and would not be hindered by any physical obstruction. And from whence does it begin and to where does the highway go which is to be built for our God in the desert? One can only conclude that the prophet crying out is speaking figuratively of the way of God's Perfect Righteousness which can only be via every one of a generation of Israelites removing the spiritual hindrances from within oneself to receive the coming of the LORD through trusting alone in the LORD alone to deliver one from one's sins to provide the gift of God's perfect Righteousness within oneself unto eternal life; whereupon the LORD would come to establish His everlasting Kingdom of Heaven on the earth through His people Israel - having prepared His way of Perfect Righteousness within man by providing it for and within each individual by faith as a free gift. In the past, Israel's lack of faith had blocked her fellowship with the LORD and caused punishment and captivity to befall her, (cf. Isa 39:1-8). Nevertheless the ancient Israelites returning from Babylon had their opportunity to see the salvation of their God come into the world but failed to prepare for the LORD to bring in His Kingdom via repentance unto faith. Notice that this repentance cannot mean doing godly works in order to receive remission (forgiveness) of sins in order to enter the Kingdom of God, as some contend; because doing godly works cannot erase sinful deeds. Nor can repentance mean turning from sin in the sense of not committing sins any more; for that is a task which is not possible given the sinful nature of every individual. Hence the LORD postponed the completion of His mission for when a future generation of Israelites will prepare itself properly for His coming.

According to the context of the Book of Isaiah chapters 1 through 40, the coming of the LORD and His Righteousness into the world would begin as a Child: born of a maiden / virgin Whom she called His name Immanuel, (Isa 7:14-16).

[Compare Isa 7:14-16]:

(Isa 7:14 YLT) '''Therefore the Lord Himself [is giving] to you [plural, i.e., Judah] a sign, [behold], the Virgin [the pregnant one] [the one giving birth to] a son, And she [has called] his name Immanuel.

(Isa 7:15 NKJV) Curds and honey He shall eat, that He may know to refuse the evil and choose the good.

(Isa 7:16 NKJV) For before the Child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land that you dread will be forsaken by both her kings'''

So a Child shall be born of a maiden / virgin. His name shall be called "Immanuel" meaning "God is with us," (Isa 7:14-16 ).

[Compare Isa 9:6-7]:

(Isa 9:6 NKJV) "For unto us [Israel, Isa 1:1, 7:14-16; 8:18] a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

(Isa 9:7 NKJV) Of the increase of His government and peace There will be no end, Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, To order it and establish it with judgment and justice From that time forward, even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this."

So He will be born of Israel, hence a Son of Israel; and be declared, "Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." He will come to establish His Everlasting Kingdom rule over the world on the throne of David from Jerusalem through His people, Israel, (Isa 9:6-7). The time of His everlasting rule would begin when national Israel responded to Him by faith in order to be delivered each one of his sins, (Isa 40:3). When that becomes the case in history, every obstacle to God's rule of Righteousness will be removed; which Isaiah 40:4 expresses figuratively in order to convey a spiritual meaning of God's provision of the gift of His Righteousness to man: "Every valley will be lifted up, and every mountain and hill will be leveled; the uneven ground will become smooth, and the rough places a plain." Hence all mankind will see the glory of the LORD - His Perfect Righteousness - when He comes to rule over His everlasting kingdom on the earth through His people Israel, (Isa 40:5).

[Compare Isa 6:3 NKJV]:

"Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; The whole earth is full of His glory!"

All of this was declared by the prophet to be true, for the mouth of the LORD had spoken it to him, (Isa 5:16; 6:3; 7:14-16; 9:6-7; 39:5; 40:1-5).

****** END OF EXCERPTS FROM THE BOOK OF ISAIAH ******

C) (3:7-9) SO JOHN WAS SAYING TO THE CROWDS WHO WERE GOING OUT TO BE BAPIZED BY HIM, 'YOU BROOD OF VIPERS, WHO WARNED YOU TO FLEE FROM THE WRATH TO COME? THEREFORE PRODUCE FRUIT CONSISTENT WITH REPENTANCE UNTO FAITH IN A COMING MESSIAH / SAVIOR FOR REMISSION OF SINS. NOTE THAT THIS IMPLIES THAT REPENTANCE IS DIFFERENT FROM PRODUCING FRUIT. FURTHERMORE, JOHN TOLD THE CROWDS, "DON'T START SAYING TO YOURSELVES, 'WE HAVE ABRAHAM AS OUR FATHER.' FOR I TELL YOU THAT GOD IS ABLE TO RAISE UP CHILDREN FOR ABRAHAM FROM THESE STONES! AND EVEN NOW THE AX IS LAID TO THE ROOT OF THE TREES. THEREFORE EVERY TREE WHICH DOES NOT BEAR GOOD FRUIT IS CUT DOWN AND THROWN INTO THE FIRE"

(Lk 3:1 NAS) '''Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene, (Lk 3:2 HOLMAN) during [lit., in] the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, God's word came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness. (Lk 3:3 ASV) And he came into all the region round about the Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins; (Lk 3:4 NKJV) as it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying: "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ' Prepare the way of the LORD; Make His paths straight. (Lk 3:5 NAS) Every ravine will be filled, and every mountain and hill will be brought low, the crooked [places] will [be] straight, and the rough roads [into] smooth (Lk 3:6 NAS) And all flesh will see the salvation of God. (Lk 3:7 NAS) So he [lit., was saying, imperfect tense] to the crowds who were going out to be baptized by him, "You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? (Lk 3:8 HOLMAN) Therefore produce fruit [lit., "worthy of," in the sense of being] consistent with repentance. And don't start saying to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father,' for I tell you that God is able to raise up children for Abraham from these stones! (Lk 3:9 NKJV) And even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees. Therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.' " =

Note that the Greek word "ochlois" in Lk 3:7 rendered "crowds" in the NAS refers to throngs of people. So John, son of Zechariah, [known as John the Baptist] addressed crowds of individuals whom author Luke described as "going out to be baptized by him." This implied that throngs of individuals were going to where John was as he moved and preached throughout the wilderness region surrounding the Jordan River in order to receive the water baptism by John symbolic of repentance to faith in the coming Messiah / Savior for remission of sins unto eternal life in the Kingdom of God, (Lk 3:2-6). John said to a number of these throngs, "You brood of vipers," - implying that they were like a brood of deadly poisonous snakes in the sense that their attitude was like a deadly venom which threatened to poison the efforts of His ministry - "Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Therefore produce fruit consistent with repentance" - implying that they were hypocritical, i.e., that they had not actually repented and believed. Yet they came to receive John's water baptism that symbollized that repentance. Notice that John distinguished between repentance unto faith in a coming Messiah and bearing fruit that demonstrated that repentance. These are two different activities which do not necessarily follow one another, hence may or may not accompany one another in an individual's life. John was saying to them that if they had believed in the coming Messiah to deliver them from their sins unto entrance into the Eternal Kingdom of God, then they should have demonstrated that change of mind with godly works to corroborate that they did believe in order to flee from the LORD's temporal wrath when He did come. Evidently, God would exercise His temporal wrath upon believers and unbelievers who were not faithful to Him when He came to rule which was evidently imminent, certain conditions being met as described in Isa 40:3-5 . John said to them, "And don't start saying to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father,' " This implied that they falsely believed that since they were physical descendants of Abraham, then they were automatically qualified for entrance into the eternal Kingdom of God without having to repent unto exercising a moment of faith in the Messiah / Savior. This further corroborated that they did not choose to believe in John's message, nor did they think they had to produce fruits worthy of repentance to avoid the temporal wrath to come. John implied that their concept of a guarantee into heaven through their descendancy from Abraham was false: "For I tell you that God is able to raise up children for Abraham from these stones!" John indicated by this that the prophecy of the Kingdom of God being fulfilled through the descendants of Abraham would be fulfilled not with such as those John was addressing who neither believed nor produced fruits but with those children of Abraham by faith, even if the LORD had to raise stones up to be Abraham's children so that they might choose to repent and believe.

John further explained relative to the wrath to come, "And even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees. Therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire." In the same way that orchard keepers cut down trees that don't bear good fruit and immediately put them into the fire to be physically destroyed; so individuals who are in their mortal bodies who are alive at the inception of the Kingdom of God who did not produce good fruit will immediately be "cut down and thrown into the fire," i.e., face early physical death at the time of the LORD's coming. No mortal living at the time of the commencement of the Kingdom of God who has refused to exercise a moment of faith alone in the LORD alone and/or who has been characteristically unfaithful will have a part in the Kingdom of God, and will immediately be put to death - physical death.

Since this verse has as its emphatic initial phrase, "And even now," with the present tense which points to the time frame of John the Baptist; and since this verse follows the context of the previous statement of John: "Brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?" which also implies a present tense judgment, (Lk 3:7b); and since the word rendered "fire" in Scripture is often used to mean God's temporal judgment; then one can conclude that the Kingdom would bring with it the fire of temporal judgment for those mortals who did not choose to believe in the coming Messiah and / or refused to produce godly fruit, which amounts to rebelling against Him when He comes to establish His Kingdom. Just as the generations of Israel of the past had been subject to God's temporal wrath for not producing fruit with their repentance, so those of John the Baptist's time who came to be baptized, but whose inward attitude belied their baptism which was supposed to symbolize true repentance unto faith in the remission of sins which the coming Messiah / Savior's salvation will provide, would likewise suffer God's temporal wrath, should the Kingdom of God be ushered in, (Lk 3:9).

Eternal wrath is not in view in this passage because that won't be exercised until the end of time and only upon unbelievers as a result of their unbelief, not their lack of fruit.

D) (3:8-14) IN RESPONSE TO JOHN'S CONFRONTATION OF THE CROWDS TO PRODUCE FRUIT IN KEEPING WITH REPENTANCE - THAT THEIR DESCENDANCY FROM ABRAHAM WOULD NOT SAVE THEM FROM GOD'S TEMPORAL OR ETERNAL JUDGMENT - PEOPLE WERE ASKING HIM, "WHAT, THEN, SHALL WE DO? JOHN TOLD THEM TO SHARE WITH THOSE IN NEED, TO BE HONEST, TO NOT ABUSE ONES AUTHORITY OVER OTHERS, ESPECIALLY FOR PERSONAL GAIN, AND TO BE CONTENT WITH WHAT ONE HAS RECEIVED - I.E., ONE WAS TO DEMONSTRATE AGAPE / GODLY LOVE TOWARD THE LORD AND ONE ANOTHER

(Lk 3:1 NAS) '''Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene, (Lk 3:2 HOLMAN) during [lit., in] the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, God's word came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness. (Lk 3:3 ASV) And he came into all the region round about the Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins; (Lk 3:4 NKJV) as it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying: "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ' Prepare the way of the LORD; Make His paths straight. (Lk 3:5 NAS) Every ravine will be filled, and every mountain and hill will be brought low, the crooked [places] will [be] straight, and the rough roads [into] smooth (Lk 3:6 NAS) And all flesh will see the salvation of God. (Lk 3:7 NAS) So he [lit., was saying, imperfect tense] to the crowds who were going out to be baptized by him, "You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? (Lk 3:8 HOLMAN) Therefore produce fruit [lit., "worthy of," in the sense of being] consistent with repentance. And don't start saying to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father,' for I tell you that God is able to raise up children for Abraham from these stones! (Lk 3:9 NKJV) And even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees. Therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire (Lk 3:10 YLT) And the multitudes were questioning him, saying, 'What, then, shall we do?' (Lk 3:11 YLT) and he [answered, (aorist) saying, (participle)] to them, 'He [who has; lit., the one] having two coats - let him impart to him having none, and he [who has] having victuals [food] - in like manner let him do.' (Lk 3:12 NKJV) Then tax collectors also came to be baptized, and said to him, 'Teacher, what shall we do?' (Lk 3:13 NKJV) And he said to them, "Collect no more than what is appointed for you. (Lk 3:14 NKJV) Likewise the soldiers asked him, saying, 'And what shall we do?' So he said to them, 'Do not intimidate anyone or accuse falsely, and be content with your wages.' " =

In response to John's confrontation of the crowds to produce fruit in keeping with repentance - that their descendancy from Abraham would not save them from God's temporal or eternal judgment - people were asking him, "What, then, shall we do? And John answered them, "He who has two coats [lit., tunics] - let him impart one to him having none, and he who has food - in like manner, let him do." In other words, believers were to perform acts of kindness with agape godly love .toward the LORD and one another, (Lk 3:10-11). Tax collectors also came to be baptized by John. They too asked, 'What shall we do? And John said to them, "Collect no more than what is appointed for you." And the soldiers who came to be baptized also asked, "What shall we do?" And John said to them, "Do not intimidate anyone falsely, and be content with your wages." Notice that John told the people to share with those in need, (Lk 3:11); to be honest, (Lk 3:13), to not abuse ones authority over others, especially for personal gain, and to be content with what one receives, (Lk 3:14). Particular kinds of individuals were singled out: tax collectors who were notorious for their dishonesty in collecting more than required and pocketing it for themselves; hence John's emphasis on the need for honesty; soldiers, who were known and hated for always trying to get more money by extorting it and blaming others for it; hence the emphasis on the need to act righteously and be content with what one receives, (Lk 3:12-14).

II) [Lk 3:15-20]:

(Lk 3:15 NKJV) "Now as the people were in expectation, and all reasoned in their hearts about John, whether he was the Christ or not,

(Lk 3:16 NKJV) John answered, saying to all, 'I indeed baptize you with water; but One mightier than I is coming, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to loose. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

(Lk 3:17 NKJV) His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather the wheat into His barn; but the chaff He will burn with unquenchable fire.'

(Lk 3:18 NKJV) And with many other exhortations he preached to the people

(Lk 3:19 NKJV) But Herod the tetrarch, being rebuked by him concerning Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, and for all the evils which Herod had done,

(Lk 3:20 NKJV) also added this, above all, that he shut John up in prison."

A) (3:15-17) THERE WERE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THE CROWDS WHO CAME TO JOHN TO BE BAPTIZED SYMBOLIZING REPENTANCE FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS WHOSE EXPECTATION OF THE IMMEDIATE ARRIVAL OF THEIR MESSIAH / SAVIOR WAS AWAKENED AS A RESULT OF JOHN'S PREACHING. THEY REASONED IN THEIR HEARTS (MINDS) AS TO WHETHER JOHN WAS THE CHRIST. JOHN ANSWERED THAT THE ONE TO COME WAS MIGHTIER, WHOSE SANDAL STRAP HE WAS NOT WORTHY TO LOOSE, WHO WOULD BAPTIZE BELIEVERS WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT AND UNBELIEVERS WITH UNQUENCHABLE FIRE WHEN HE CAME TO COMMENCE HIS ETERNAL KINGDOM OF GOD

(Lk 3:1 NAS) '''Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene, (Lk 3:2 HOLMAN) during [lit., in] the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, God's word came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness. (Lk 3:3 ASV) And he came into all the region round about the Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins; (Lk 3:4 NKJV) as it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying: "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ' Prepare the way of the LORD; Make His paths straight. (Lk 3:5 NAS) Every ravine will be filled, and every mountain and hill will be brought low, the crooked [places] will [be] straight, and the rough roads [into] smooth (Lk 3:6 NAS) And all flesh will see the salvation of God. (Lk 3:7 NAS) So he [lit., was saying, imperfect tense] to the crowds who were going out to be baptized by him, "You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? (Lk 3:8 HOLMAN) Therefore produce fruit [lit., "worthy of," in the sense of being] consistent with repentance. And don't start saying to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father,' for I tell you that God is able to raise up children for Abraham from these stones! (Lk 3:9 NKJV) And even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees. Therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire (Lk 3:10 YLT) And the multitudes were questioning him, saying, 'What, then, shall we do?' (Lk 3:11 YLT) and he [answered, (aorist) saying, (participle)] to them, 'He [who has; lit., the one] having two coats - let him impart to him having none, and he [who has] having victuals [food] - in like manner let him do.' (Lk 3:12 NKJV) Then tax collectors also came to be baptized, and said to him, 'Teacher, what shall we do?' (Lk 3:13 NKJV) And he said to them, "Collect no more than what is appointed for you. (Lk 3:14 NKJV) Likewise the soldiers asked him, saying, 'And what shall we do?' So he said to them, 'Do not intimidate anyone or accuse falsely, and be content with your wages.' (Lk 3:15 NKJV) "Now as the people were in expectation, and all reasoned in their hearts about John, whether he was the Christ or not, (Lk 3:16 NKJV) John answered, saying to all, 'I indeed baptize you with water; but One mightier than I is coming, Whose sandal strap I am not worthy to loose. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. (Lk 3:17 NKJV) His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather the wheat into His barn; but the chaff He will burn with unquenchable fire.' " =

Author Luke, through reference to the prophet Isaiah and John's preaching, characterized the One to come as the LORD for Whom all Israel must prepare via repentance to faith in the coming Messiah for remission of sins at which time Luke declared that "all flesh will see the salvation of God," referring to all those in mortal bodies who are alive when He comes to establish His Kingdom of God on the earth, (Lk 3:3-6). This repentance to faith in the Messiah unto remission of sins was symbolized by the water baptism performed on individual Israelites by John.

There were a number of people in the crowds who came to John to be baptized symbolizing repentance to faith in the Messiah for the remission of sins whose expectation of the immediate arrival of their Messiah / Savior was awakened as a result of John's preaching. They reasoned in their hearts (minds) . as to whether John was the Christ. John was evidently aware of their questioning about who he was, either intuitively or by hearing it directly; for author Luke stipulated, "John answered saying to all, 'I indeed baptize you with water, but One mightier than I is coming, Whose sandal strap I am not worthy to loose." Note that the task of carrying another's sandals was given to the lowliest Gentile slave. John went on to say, "He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire." So John characterized "the Christ" as One mightier than Himself, Who will baptized with the Holy Spirit and with fire, i.e., judgment - functions reserved for God alone - ruling himself out

The Greek phrase in Lk 3:16c rendered "He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire," in the NKJV appears as follows in the interlinear mode:

1) [Lk 3:16c Interlinear]:

[Greek] .."Autou autos ....humas baptisei ......en ..............pneumati .hagiO .kai puri"

[English] "He .....Himself you .....will baptize .with [the] Spirit ........Holy ...and fire"

Notice that the preposition "en" rendered "with" which modifies the verb "baptisei" only occurs in Lk 3:16 in the Greek phrase "baptisei en pneumati hagiO" rendered "will baptize [you] with [the] Holy Spirit." It does not accompany the Greek word "puri" rendered "fire." Hence "puri" ("fire") is linked with "pneumati hagiO" ([the] Holy Spirit) as descriptive of the LORD's baptism of all mortal individuals who are alive at His coming to bring salvation to Israel and the world at the commencement of His Eternal Kingdom of God on earth. Those mortals who have accepted Him by a moment of faith in the Messiah, at that time will receive the Messiah's baptism of the Holy Spirit and fire by receiving the indwelling of the Holy Spirit to cause them to walk in God's statutes and keep His judgments and be delivered from all uncleannesses, i.e., sins, (cp Ez 36:26-29). This is what John the Baptist would have known from Old Testament Scripture: the reception of the Holy Spirit upon all those of Israel who have trusted in the LORD's coming at the commencement of His Eternal Kingdom on earth.

2) [Compare Ezekiel 36:26-29]:

(Ez 36:26 NKJV) "I will give you [Israel, (v. 22a; 32)] a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.

(Ez 36:27 NKJV) I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and to them.

(Ez 36:28 NKJV) Then you shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; you shall be My people, and I will be your God.

(Ez 36:29 NKJV) I will deliver you from all your uncleannesses."

When John declared that he baptized with water, but the One to come would baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire in Lk 3:16, he provided the meaning in verse 17 of the word rendered "fire" in verse 16:

"His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather the wheat into His barn; but the chaff He will burn with unquenchable fire.' "

The threshing of wheat often took place in the open air, usually on a hilltop. The grain was placed in a circle on the ground and trodden down by oxen or asses or beaten off the ear by hand. Then, to separate the chaff and other useless weeds from the grain, everything was thrown into the air with a winnowing fan - a wooden forklike shovel, similar to a pitchfork. The wind would carry off the lighter chaff, while the heavier grain fell to the ground. In the same way that the good grain was gathered and placed in a barn and the useless chaff was gathered and burned; so the Messiah would gather those who had repented unto faith in Him to deliver them from their sins, baptize them with the Holy Spirit, and give them entrance into His Everlasting Kingdom.

And those who did not repent to believe in Him in their lifetimes will be baptized, i.e., immersed in the fire of eternal condemnation, commencing with the LORD's judgment upon them of immediate physical death for not producing fruit, (Lk 3:7-9). Had all Israel at the time of John repented, the Kingdom of Heaven would have begun in John the Baptist's time. Since this did not occur, that beginning is evidently yet to come when a generation of all Israel will repent unto faith in the coming Messiah / Savior for remission of sins unto eternal life in the Eternal Kingdom of God, (Lk 3:16-17).

Since the context of Luke chapter 3 is before the church age; and since John the Baptist addresses Israel exclusively; and since the baptism of the Holy Spirit and fire is portrayed as administered by the Messiah / Savior in His Humanity at the commencement of the Eternal Kingdom of God which includes both the Holy Spirit and eternal unquenchable fire; and since individuals who become believers during the age of the church are not in view; then what Luke is reporting of what John the Baptist said and did is not applicable to church age believers, as some contend. Other passages which have the context of church age believers must be sought to determine the applicability of the Holy Spirit baptism upon them.

B) (3:18-20) JOHN PREACHED MANY OTHER EXHORTATIONS. THEREAFTER, HEROD IMPRISONED JOHN THE BAPTIST FOR REBUKING HIM CONCERNING HERODIAS, HIS BROTHER PHILIP'S WIFE AND ALL HIS EVILS

(Lk 3:18 NKJV) "And with many other exhortations he preached to the people. (Lk 3:19 NKJV) But Herod the tetrarch, being rebuked by him concerning Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, and for all the evils which Herod had done, (Lk 3:20 NKJV) also added this, above all, that he shut John up in prison." =

Since the gospel of Luke and every gospel account only covered a small portion of all that Jesus and those around Him said and did; hence statements were frequently made by the authors as to the extent of what was not included. For example, author Luke indicated that John preached many other exhortations to the people. So John the Baptist was not a prophet who conveyed only one message - he had much to say.

After John baptized Jesus, which is covered in the following two verses, [hence not in chronological order, (Lk 3:21-22)]; Herod, the tetrarch of Galilee, seized John and put him in prison for publically rebuking him concerning Herodias. John had rebuked Herod for many of his evils, not the least of which was divorcing his wife to marry his niece Herodias, who had been the wife of his brother Philip.

III) [Lk 3:21-22]:

(Lk 3:21 NKJV) "When all the people were baptized, it came to pass that Jesus also was baptized; and while He prayed, the heaven was opened.

(Lk 3:22 NKJV) And the Holy Spirit descended in bodily form like a dove upon Him, and a voice came from heaven which said, "You are My beloved Son; in You I am well pleased."

A) (3:21-22) ON A PARTICULAR DAY, WHEN ALL THE PEOPLE WERE BAPTIZED, JESUS WAS THEN BAPTIZED BY JOHN, SYMBOLIZING HIS IDENTIFICATION WITH HIS MISSION TO PROVIDE HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS - THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD FOR MANKIND'S REDEMPTION THROUGH FAITH IN HIM TO PROVIDE IT THROUGH HIS SACRIFICE FOR THE REMISSION OF THE SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD. AND WHILE JESUS PRAYED, HEAVEN WAS OPENED AND THE HOLY SPIRIT DESCENDED UPON HIM IN BODILY FORM LIKE A DOVE. A VOICE CAME FROM HEAVEN WHICH SAID, "YOU ARE MY BELOVED SON; IN YOU I AM WELL PLEASED"

(Lk 3:21 NKJV) "When all the people were baptized, it came to pass that Jesus also was baptized; and while He prayed, the heaven was opened. (Lk 3:22 NKJV) And the Holy Spirit descended in bodily form like a dove upon Him, and a voice came from heaven which said, "You are My beloved Son; in You I am well pleased." =

Author Luke writes, "When all the people were baptized" in the sense that on a particular day and time when John had baptized all people that came to be baptized, then Jesus was also baptized by John. Since author Luke made it evident that Jesus was the Messiah / Savior to come as was spoken of by the Prophet Isaiah, was Mighty God and Everlasting Father, (Isa 9:7); then Jesus did not need remission of sins, nor would He have been baptized to symbolize such a remission. For He was coming to provide His Righteousness - the Righteousness of God for mankind's redemption through faith in Him to provide it through His sacrifice for the remission of the sins of the whole world. Hence John's water baptism of Jesus symbolized Jesus' identification with His mission to bring the availability of redemption to mankind, not to receive redemption Himself. Note that Jesus' baptism by John was an authentication that He was the Son of God, the Messiah / Savior.

Luke reports that while Jesus was being baptized, He prayed, heaven opened up and the Holy Spirit appeared as a dove, literally "in bodily form." The dove was observed flying down from above and landing upon Jesus. This implies that the Holy Spirit came to dwell within Jesus' Humanity - a baptism of the Holy Spirit - in order to enable Him to complete His mission to provide for remission of sins to Israel and all mankind and to commence His Eternal Kingdom on earth. Author Luke reports that a voice was heard from heaven saying, "You are My beloved Son; in You I am well pleased." Author Luke wrote this account in such a manner that it would be interpreted that the dove was observable by a number of individuals around Jesus, and that the voice of God from heaven was likewise audible by a number of those around Jesus when He was baptized. That the dove was the Holy Spirit was a revelation from God. It was evidently reported to author Luke via a third party or directly by someone who was there at Jesus' baptism who received that revelation. The words of the voice of God from heaven were an intimate personal message to Jesus in the second person as His Son, His one and only Son.

IV) [Lk 3:23-38]:

(Lk 3:23 NKJV) Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, the son of Heli,

(Lk 3:24 NKJV) the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Janna, the son of Joseph,

(Lk 3:25 NKJV) the son of Mattathiah, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai,

(Lk 3:26 NKJV) the son of Maath, the son of Mattathiah, the son of Semei, the son of Joseph, the son of Judah,

(Lk 3:27 NKJV) the son of Joannas, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, the son of Neri,

(Lk 3:28 NKJV) the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmodam, the son of Er,

(Lk 3:29 NKJV) the son of Jose, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi,

(Lk 3:30 NKJV) the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonan, the son of Eliakim,

(Lk 3:31 NKJV) the son of Melea, the son of Menan, the son of Mattathah, the son of Nathan, the son of David,

(Lk 3:32 NKJV) the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Salmon, the son of Nahshon,

(Lk 3:33 NKJV) the son of Amminadab, the son of Ram, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah,

(Lk 3:34 NKJV) the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor,

(Lk 3:35 NKJV) the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah,

(Lk 3:36 NKJV) the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech,

(Lk 3:37 NKJV) the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel, the son of Cainan,

(Lk 3:38 NKJV) the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God."

A) (3:23) NOW JESUS HIMSELF BEGAN HIS MINISTRY AT ABOUT THIRTY YEARS OF AGE, BEING AS WAS SUPPOSED THE SON OF JOSEPH, THE SON OF HELI

(Lk 3:23 NKJV) "Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, the son of Heli," =

Verse 23 stipulates that Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age - His age not being precisely known for that beginning. And regarding Jesus' father, Luke also indicates that Jesus was as was supposed, the son of Joseph. He did not stipulate that Joseph was his actual human birth father, but by inheritance according to Jewish genealogical rules.

B) (3:23-38) LUKE'S GENEALOGY OF JESUS FROM ADAM TO ABRAHAM THROUGH DAVID VERIFIES THAT JESUS WAS IN THE DAVIDIC LINE, THE PROMISED MESSIAH

(Lk 3:23 NKJV) "Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, the son of Heli, (Lk 3:24 NKJV) the son of Matthat,the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Janna, the son of Joseph, (Lk 3:25 NKJV) the son of Mattathiah, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai, (Lk 3:26 NKJV) the son of Maath, the son of Mattathiah, the son of Semei, the son of Joseph, the son of Judah, (Lk 3:27 NKJV) the son of Joannas, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, the son of Neri, (Lk 3:28 NKJV) the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmodam, the son of Er, (Lk 3:29 NKJV) the son of Jose, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, (Lk 3:30 NKJV) the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonan, the son of Eliakim, (Lk 3:31 NKJV) the son of Melea, the son of Menan, the son of Mattathah, the son of Nathan, the son of David, (Lk 3:32 NKJV) the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Salmon, the son of Nahshon, (Lk 3:33 NKJV) the son of Amminadab, the son of Ram, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, (Lk 3:34 NKJV) the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, (Lk 3:35 NKJV) the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, (Lk 3:36 NKJV) the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, (Lk 3:37 NKJV) the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel, the son of Cainan, (Lk 3:38 NKJV) the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God." =

Note that the Jewish authorities had carefully maintained genealogical records which were preserved in the temple until it was destroyed in A.D. 70. The authorities, as well as writers of the gospels, would have had access to these records and could accurately trace the genealogy of Jesus from them in order to see if His claims to being in the Davidic line and Messiahship were true. It is interesting to note that there was nothing mentioned in any of the gospels about Jesus' human ancestry that refuted His claim to be the Messiah in the line of David; something which would have been on the forefront of the Jewish rulers objections to Jesus' ministry, and their pursuit of Him in order to kill Him. An honest and objective reading of the biblical genealogies establishes that they establish the LORD's actual and real biological descendancy as prophesied in Scripture which verifies His descendancy from the Davidic line and qualifies Him as the true Messiah.

1) [Compare Jer 23:5-6]:

(Jer 23:5 NKJV) " 'Behold,the days are coming,' says the LORD,

'That I will raise to David a Branch of righteousness;

A King shall reign and prosper,

And execute judgment and righteousness in the earth.

(Jer 23:6 NKJV) In His days Judah will be saved,

And Israel will dwell safely;

Now this is His name by which He will be called:

THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS' "

****** EXCERPT FROM STUDY ON JESUS' GENEALOGY ******

B) THE GENEALOGY OF LUKE INVESTIGATED

1) INTRODUCTION

Luke was a physician, who was widely traveled and well placed in society. He was probably a doctor who traveled in the ships. He knew many well placed aristocrats as is indicated in his addressing of the gospel and the book "Acts of the Apostles" to the most excellent Theophilos. Theophilos mentioned here is considered to be Titus Flavious of Clement of Rome who was a cousin of Emperor Domitian who ruled from AD 95 onwards. Flavious was the Roman Consul and was later martyred along with his wife Domitilla for being Christians. It can therefore be deducted that Luke had very high connections. We have no records to show that he ever met Jesus while Jesus was alive. He was probably a Jew in dispersion and was a free man of great wealth.

Luke had a scientific outlook, which is to be expected from a physician. He has written his books after serious research into the events as he claims in his introduction

(Lk 1:1 NKJV) "Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled[a] among us,

(Lk 2:1 NKJV) just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us,

(Lk 2:3 NKJV) it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus,

(Lk 2:4 NKJV) that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed."

Luke had [evidently] known and read all the existing documents on the life of Jesus which were written by people who had seen and heard and lived with Jesus. Luke accordingly may not be considered as an eyewitness. But he had taken the pains to do extensive research in the life of Jesus before embarking upon the venture. The gospel itself clearly exemplifies this claim. Many of the personal stories of Mary, Joseph, disciples, women and other Gentile people are given in greater depth and detail in Luke.

Why did Luke take up the writing, since there were an abundance of such documents? The reason is also given in the introduction: "so that you may know the certainty of things you have been taught." Earlier documents were [evidently] written by eyewitnesses as personal anecdotes and memoirs and were not comprehensive enough to be presented as a gospel to the Gentile world. Others were all personal documents and were written essentially by the Jews and for the Jews. Luke was writing to the Gentiles who did not understand the Jewish traditions and customs. The legalism of the Jews and the custom of counting the lineage by legal right whether by levirate marriage or by kinsman-redeemer marriage or even ghost marriage was not understood by outsiders. Hence it is natural for him to adopt the blood relation as the basis of tracing the lineage. In tracing the lineage, he traces the lineage back to Adam and to God.

[Mantague Stephen Mills states, {'A COMPARISON OF THE GENESIS AND LUKAN GENEALOGIES (The Case for Cainan), A Thesis Presented to Dallas Theological Seminary, April 1978, Chapter II, p. 8]

"Luke claims that the record is an account handed down by eyewitnesses and servants of the word. The term 'servants of the word' warrants study for the word translated servant is 'uperetes' and an examination of its use in the New Testament demonstrates that it usually denotes an officer of rank whose authority is derived from another. (Paul used 'uperetes' to describe his appointment by Christ as an apostle) and this use, at the hand of the same author, indicates that the servants Luke refers to are people with apostolic office who have derived their authority from Christ, or at the least people in authority in the churches who have derived their authority, if not from Christ then from the Apostles). We can therefore safely conclude that Luke's human sources were eyewitnesses, apostles, or at least people holding high office in the early church. Luke makes this point specifically in verse 3 for the adverb translated 'from the beginning' (NASB) is 'anothen' which is more usually used as an adverb of place, consequently a more appropriate understanding is 'from their source.' As Luke was contemporaneous with the apostles no allowance for intermediaries between the original sources and him need be made. This claimthen, applied to Luke's gospel, asserts that it represents the authentic, orthodox authorized teaching of the original church. Furthermore Luke claims to have investigated 'everything' so his sources must be widened from purely verbal human sources to documentary sources. This is confirmed in verse 1 for there Luke talks of accounts (narratives) that others have compiled ('anastassomai').

Luke's claim to authenticity is supplemented by an emphatic claim to accuracy for he claims to have investigated everything carefully. The word translated 'investigate' is 'parakolotheo' which caries a connotation not only of investigating but also of understanding. Luke thus makes the impressive claim that he was careful to understand what he wrote and that it was accurate. (The adverb translated 'carefully', 'akrebos' has another primary meaning of accuracy). This claim is further reinforced by his statement that his desire is that Theophilus shall know the certainty 'asphiales' (NASB - exact truth) of the events recorded. Luke's final claim is that his record is in consecutive order for that is the sense of the adverb 'kathexes'. Luke's claims are thus that the gospel he has written is a careful work which he has thoroughly investigated and understood, that it is accurate and that it conveys the certainty (exact truth) of the events reported.

Add to Luke's claims, the pre-supposition of Divine Inspiration, which would axiomatically include guidance in the sources selected, and one has a most positive assertion that the genealogy in Chapter 3 of Luke's gospel is a detailed and accurate one."}

b) EXPLANATION OF THE 'EXTRA' NAME CAINAN IN LUKE'S GENEALOGY

We notice that one name is missing in the Old Testament series which is found in Luke’s genealogy.

Cainan is the son of Arphaxad and Shelah is the son of Cainan according to Luke; while in the Chronicle this name is not found. However in Hebrew traditional lineage this name can be found in the Septuagint......

[The name Cainan is found in certain key papyri manuscript copies and the Septuagint (LXX) as well; the latter of which is an early Greek translation of the Old Testament which dates from about 250 BC. Yet most Old Testament translations favor the Masoretic Text (~500 AD) when it comes to the exclusion of Cainan.

On the other hand, as stated by Mantague Stephen Mills, (op. cit. p. 11), there is much evidence for the name Cainan to be included:

'''The argument to support the authenticity of the Cainan reading in the original manuscript is strong. C. Robert Fetter, who has made a detailed study of this problem, states that Codex Bezae (Uncial D) is the only manuscript of consequence which excludes Cainan....

{Robert Fetter, 'A Critical Investigation of the 'The Second Cainan' in Luke 3:36. Unpublished B.D. monograph, Grace Theological Seminary, May 1956. p. 51.}

Metzger has this to say about Uncial D.

"Different in several respects from all the manuscripts mentioned above (all the papyri and A B C ....

Dating from the fifth or possibly sixth century......

The text is presented in Greek and in Latin....

The Gospels stand in the so-called Western Order (Matthew, John, Luke and Mark)

.... No known manuscript has so many and such remarkable variations from what is usually taken to be the normal New Testament text. Codex Bezae's special characteristic is the free addition (and occasional omission) of words, sentences and even incidents. Thus in Luke IV... between verses 4 and 6 it contains the following account 'On the same day, seeing one working on the Sabbath day, He said to him 'Man if you know what you are doing you are blessed; but if you do not know you are accursed and a transgressor of the law.' "

After listing several other peculiarities Metzger concludes:

"These examples will be sufficient to indicate the characteristic freedom of what is called the Western Text, of which Codex Bezae is the principal representative. More study has been expended upon this manuscript, particularly where the Greek text differs from the parallel Latin text and where one or both differ from other witnesses, than has been devoted to any other New Testament witness. There is still no unanimity of opinion regarding the many problems which the manuscript raises."

Henry Alford has this to say about Codex Bezae:

"The text of the Codex Bezae is a very peculiar one, deviating more from the received readings and from the principal manuscript authorities than any other....

It is closely and singularly allied to the ancient Latin versions, so much so that some critics have supposed it to have been altered from the Latin; and certainly many of the phenomena of the manuscript seem to bear out the idea... in critical weight it ranks the lowest of the leading manuscripts."

The foregoing quotations amply highlight the weaknesses of the witness of D. The text's established freedom from the generally accepted New Testament texts, its lack of concord within itself between the Greek and Latin texts and the obviously spurious addition in Luke chapter 4 (the sentiment of this addition is clearly contrary to the general tenor of New Testament teaching) make it a very dubious witness for the exclusion of Cainan, a matter which can readily be understood as of not much concern to the scribe. The solid support of the papyri X A B LT D A P leave little room for questioning the originality of the reading supporting the inclusion of Cainan and it is little wonder therefore that no variant readings are even listed in the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament. The Nestle text does likewise but the text edited by Alford mentions the variant."]

[Dr. Ninan, cont.]

Why was this name not in our Bible and found in Septuagint and tradition? Again we have to look back into Hebrew tradition. If a person died when they are very young before they have a chance to establish a name for himself, the child born to them will be known as the child of the living grandfather. This practice is echoed in the book at 4:17.

a) [Ruth 4:17]:

"The women living there said, 'Naomi has a son.' And they named him Obed. He was the father of Jesse, the father of David"

If the son of Arphaxad, Cainan died very young after begetting Shelah, the Jews would refer him as the son of Arphaxad and not as the son of Cainan. Cainan will not be practically referred to in any legal documents, since he died before he established himself and legally took possession of the properties and rights as a son. But this will not be acceptable to the Gentile world where actual parenthood is always counted. Thus it is interesting that Luke brings his name into the line.

c) JOSEPH, HELI AND MARY

The Zelophehad custom:

Again when we reach the pinnacle of the tree, Luke claims that Joseph is the son of Heli while Matthew puts Joseph as the son of Jacob. Here we have to call for another adoption custom which is widely practiced all over the world. In this custom if a family had no male offspring to provide a lineage, one of the husbands of the girls may be adopted to the heir of the family. They will then be legal heir to the family titles. Mary being the only daughter of Heli, had adopted Joseph according to the law of Zelophahad. This mode of marriage is confirmed by God during the division of Palestine by Moses.

Num 27:1 The daughters of Zelophehad son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Makir, the son of Manasseh, belonged to the clans of Manasseh son of Joseph. The names of the daughters were Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah and Tirzah. They approached

Num 27:2 the entrance to the Tent of Meeting and stood before Moses, Eleazar the priest, the leaders and the whole assembly, and said,

Num 27:3 "Our father died in the desert. He was not among Korah's followers, who banded together against the LORD, but he died for his own sin and left no sons. Num 27:4 Why should our father's name disappear from his clan because he had no son? Give us property among our father's relatives."

Num 27:5 So Moses brought their case before the LORD Num 27:6 and the LORD said to him,

Num 27:7 "What Zelophehad's daughters are saying is right. You must certainly give them property as an inheritance among their father's relatives and turn their father's inheritance over to them.

Num 27:8 "Say to the Israelites, 'If a man dies and leaves no son, turn his inheritance over to his daughter.

Num 36:6 This is what the LORD commands for Zelophehad's daughters: They may marry anyone they please as long as they marry within the tribal clan of their father.

Joseph being the family of Judah and of David was therefore adopted in accordance with the law. Hence though Heli was the father of Mary, Joseph the son of Jacob became the son of Heli by adoption."

III) SKEPTICS QUESTIONS ANSWERED:

A) IF THE VIRGIN BIRTH STORY IS TRUE, THEN WHY DO THE GENEALOGIES REPORT JOSEPH AS BEING THE FATHER OF JESUS?

[Dr. Henrietta Mears states: http://www.yfiles.com/duel.html]

"The skeptic asks:

'The New Testament gives a detailed line of descent for Jesus demonstrating that Jesus was born of the line of King David. This is done to meet the prophetic requirement of the Messiah being an heir to the house of David. It is unfortunate that the writer traces Jesus descent from David through Joseph. Joseph isn't the father if we are to believe the story of a virgin birth.'

...In the genealogy in Matthew 1, notice one name, Jechonias (Jeconiah), in verse 11. If Joseph had been Jesus' father according to the flesh, He could never have occupied the throne, for God's word barred the way. There had been a curse on this royal line since the days of Jeconiah. In Jeremiah 22:30 we read, Thus says the Lord: write this man down as childless, a man who shall not prosper in his days: for none of his descendants shall prosper, sitting on the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah. Joseph was in the line of this curse. Hence, if Jesus had been Joseph's son, He could not have sat on David's throne.

But we find another genealogy of Jesus in Luke 3. This is Mary's line, back to David, through Nathan, not Jeconiah (Luke 3:31). There was no curse on this line. Then the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you shall conceive in your womb, and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David: And he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of His kingdom there will be no end (Luke 1:30-33).

In Matthew 1:1-17 we have the royal genealogy of the son of David, through Joseph. In Luke 3:23-38 it is His strictly personal genealogy, through Mary. In Matthew it is His legal line of descent through Joseph; in Luke it is His lineal descent through Mary. In Matthew His genealogy is traced forward from Abraham; in Luke it followed backward to Adam, Each is significant! Matthew is showing Jesus' relation to the Jew, hence he goes back no further than to Abraham, father of the Jewish nation. But in Luke is His connection with the human race; hence His genealogy is traced back to Adam, the father of the human family.

In Luke, Jesus' line is traced back to Adam, and is, no doubt, His mother's line. Notice in Luke 3:23, it does not say Jesus was the son of Joseph. What are the words? As was supposed. In Matthew 1:16, where Joseph's genealogy is given, we find that Joseph was the son of Jacob. In Luke it says he was the son of Heli. He could not be the son of two men by natural generation. But notice this carefully - the record does not state that Heli begot Joseph, so it is supposed that Joseph was the son by law (or son-in-law) of Heli. Heli is believed to have been the father of Mary.

The Davidic genealogy goes through Nathan, not Solomon. This too is important. The Messiah must be David's son and heir (2 Sam. 7:12, 13; Romans 1:3; Acts 2:30, 31) and his seed according to the flesh. He must be a literal flesh and blood descendant. Hence Mary must be a member of David's house as well as Joseph (Luke 1:32).]

B) THE TERM BEGOTTEN IS NOT USED IN LUKE'S GENEALOGY SO IT IS SUSPECT OF BEING A TRUE GENEALOGY

[Guy Cramer states, "The Genealogy Jigsaw Puzzle" http://www.yfiles.com/duel.html]:

"The skeptic responds:

'Allowing [the] argument that this phrasing is used to indicate that Joseph was the son-in-law of Heli, I find it interesting that this entire passage does not use the term begotten all the way back to David and beyond.'

Following [the skeptic's] line of reasoning, these men were all son-in-laws and not sons to the previous generation. Considering that the Israelites did not trace lines of descent through matriarchal lines but through patriarchal lines this seems to be a very tenuous linkage at best.

The original Greek in Luke 3:24 reads: being, as was supposed, son of Joseph, of Heli, of Matthat,... notice it does not say son of Heli... sure they could be sons-in-law and not sons but you must take note that it does not say son of Heli...

But if we look at the original Greek of Matthew 1:2 we read that Abraham fathered Isaac, Isaac and fathered Jacob... so here we have a definite patriarchal line.

Matthew was written for the Jews so we have the patriarchal line listed in Matthew 1. Luke was written to the Greeks, a highly feminized culture in the first century so a matriarchal line is possible. Can we confirm that Matthew was written for the Jews? Often Matthew leaves Jewish phrases and customs unexplained, assuming that his readers are familiar with them. And where Luke would say "kingdom of God," Matthew uses the phrase "kingdom of heaven," out of respect for Jews, who never wrote out the word God.

Matthew 1:18-25 even states that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus. So the genealogy he gives prior to this is only a legal line of decent.

Sons from Luke 3

Do we have proof that any of the Men listed in the Luke 3:23-38 are not son-in-laws?

First the genealogy in Matthew 1:1-17 shows in the original Greek that each man is the father of the next. The genealogy in Luke just says that the man "of" the next one all the way to Adam of God. But both genealogies lists the same 12 men from David to Abraham. Therefore, those passages in Luke 3:32-43 are showing the actual fathers and cannot be understood as son-in-laws.

Our question now shifts to the prior men in Luke 3:23-31 were they all son-in-laws?

As mentioned before, the split in genealogies happens with David's sons. Matthew lists the line of Solomon, Luke lists the line of Nathan.

In 2 Samuel 5:13-14 we read "...Also more sons and daughters were born to David. Now these are the names of those who were born to him in Jerusalem: Shammua, Shobab, Nathan, Solomon,...

So we know that Nathan was David's son.

If we turn to Zechariah 12:12-14 we read in this Old Testament book a prophecy who will mourn for the Messiah when He is pierced:

"And the land shall mourn, every family by itself: the family of the house of David by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Levi by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of Shimei by itself, and their wives by themselves.

It turns out that the pierced Messiah is not the only prophecy in these passages.

If we go back to the genealogy in Luke 3:26, 3:29, 3:31 we find all four of these same names in the proper order. This doesn't mean that the names are one immediately after the other, but If we look at the first two names in Zechariah David and Nathan we do find these are one after the other in Luke 3. The next name in Zechariah 12 is Levi. If we begin at David and then Nathan we have to skip 9 names until we run into Levi. If we skip ahead 17 more names from Levi we find Semei. The Hebrew name in Zechariah 12 is Shimei. This same Hebrew name in the Greek New Testament would be translated as Semei.

I asked James D. Price a Professor of Hebrew, if this was correct. His response: "The Greek language has no "sh" sound, and no letter for "sh". So both the Greek Septuagint and the Greek NT transliterate Hebrew "sh" with "s"." I also asked him, "Can the Hebrew name Shimei be understood as Semei?" His responded, "If you are talking about a Greek translation, yes."

So considering that the Israelites did not trace lines of descent through matriarchal lines but through patriarchal lines, if we look at Zechariah 12:12-14 we find that the author who is an Israelite traces this line through a patriarchal system from David to Shimei.

This only leaves us with 14 generations from Joseph to Semei (not 41 from Joseph to David) in which could have had been son-in-laws in the Luke 3 genealogy. There is no other data in the Bible on these remaining 14 generations to express a dogmatic view on the issue but the information from the prophecy of Zechariah seems to suggest that we should expect only one in the genealogy who is a son-in-law - Joseph.

Zechariah picked four names in correct order from the blood line of the Messiah 500 years before Jesus was born. Zechariah knew from other prophecies the Messiah was to come from the line of David. In 1 Chronicles 3:1-9 we find that David had at least 15 sons. So Zechariah correctly picked Nathan as the line in which the Messiah would come. He also correctly picked the names Levi and Shimei (Semei) to be part of that line in his prophecy. What are the odds?

The skeptic has his answer.

References: 1. Mears, Henrietta C., "What The Bible Is All About", G/L Publications 1953,1954,1960,1966, p. 356-357, 396 Presented by Trinity Consulting"

C) MARY SHOULD BE DISQUALIFIED TO TRANSFER THE RIGHTS OF HER LINEAGE TO HER SON JESUS SINCE SHE IS A WOMAN

[Phil Luna states, "The Lineage Loophole", http://www.yfiles.com/loophole.html]:

"Mary should be disqualified to transfer the rights of her lineage to her son Jesus, except for a little known exception to the rule.

In Matthew 1:1-16 and Luke 3:23-38 we are presented with two genealogies of Jesus Christ. On the surface these different listings would appear to be a contradiction in the scriptures. The genealogy found in Matthew's gospel is the lineage of Jesus' earthly father Joseph, while the genealogy found in Luke's gospel is the lineage of Jesus' mother Mary... However, many of the people that teach on the genealogies fail to realize or address a major problem associated with the genealogical listing found in Luke's gospel, the lineage of Mary. Once you have established that the line is indeed Mary's you must deal with a second difficulty. The rights of the line are not passed through the mother, only the father. Even though Mary, through her lineage, was of the Davidic bloodline, she should be excluded from being able to pass those rights of the bloodline because of being a female (Deut 21:16). So it is not enough to prove that Mary was an unblemished descendant of David, she had to be a male to transfer the rights. Therefore she would be disqualified to transfer the rights to her son Jesus, except for a little known exception to the rule.

In Numbers 26 we are introduced to Zelophehad. Zelophehad, we are told, had no sons, only daughters. In Numbers 27, following the death of Zelophehad, the daughters of Zelophehad came before Moses and argued their plight. Because their father had died with no sons, all of their rights of inheritance were to be lost and they felt this was unfair. So Moses prayed to God and God gave Moses an exception to the rule. The Lord told Moses that the inheritance CAN flow through a female, IF they fulfill two requirements. There must be no male offspring in the family (Num 27:8) and if the female offspring should marry, they must marry within their own tribe (Num 36:6).

Now we come back to Mary. On the surface she should be unable to transfer the rights to her Son. But when you research you find that Mary had NO brothers, AND Mary did indeed marry within her own tribe to Joseph.

What an awesome God we serve that set in order the requirements to allow the virgin birth to take place 1,400 years in advance! Did Mary have any brothers? By Guy Cramer After reading the detailed information above, I asked Phil if he knew of any information on Mary's brothers. He cited numerous non-canonical works such as The Catholic Encyclopedia, the apocryphal book called, the Protoevangelium of James... tradition states that Mary had no brothers.

Curious, I went through the four gospels looking for any reference to collaborate Phil's references.

In John 19:25-27 we read:

Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His Mother, and His mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw His Mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing by, He said to His mother, "Woman, behold your son!" Then He said to the disciple, "Behold your mother!" And from that hour that disciple took her to his home.

We see from this passage that Mary had a sister.

Jesus is not saying to His mother "Look at me on the cross" with the statement "Woman, behold your son!" Jesus is telling his mother that John (the only disciple at the cross) is going to care for her. Jesus also tells John that he must care for Mary.

We must acknowledge that Joseph (Jesus Father) has probably died since we see no references to Joseph after Jesus was 12 years old in Luke 2:41-52.

To understand why Jesus is telling John to care for Mary we must understand the Jewish culture at that time. When an woman with children was widowed she would move back with her father or brother. If her father had also died and there were no brothers then one of her sons might care for her.

In this case, Jesus was the eldest son of Mary and was probably supporting her at this time. He passes the responsibility to John one of His disciples and not a son of Mary.

From the comments of Jesus we can extrapolate that Jesus was caring for Mary, which means that Mary had no brothers (at least none that were alive at this time). Taken with the extra-biblical literature that Mary had no brothers we can assume that she passed the first prerequisite that God had given as law (Num 27:8).

Now we see the reason for two different genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3. Not only do we see Joseph's line in Matthew 1 but also Mary's line in Luke 3. Both these genealogies show that both Mary and Joseph come from the same tribe of Judah fulfilling the second requirement by Law (Num 36:6). So the reason for God placing two genealogies is to show that Jesus being of Virgin birth came from Mary's line which was not cursed as was Joseph's. Also to show that both Mary and Joseph come from the same line which was a legal necessity if Jesus was to claim Mary's line and not Joseph's cursed line.

We find that on the surface the Bible can be a simple enough to understand but the complexity we are discovering in which it was written is astonishing. Phil Luna is an ordained Assemblies of God minister. He teaches a weekly Bible study verse by verse through the Bible. His favorite area of study is the Hebraic roots of Christianity.

D) MATTHEW'S LINEAGE DOES NOT HAVE EVERY NAME IT'S SUPPOSED TO HAVE AND IS THEREFORE SUSPECT

[Dr. M.M.Ninan states via email,

[http://www.acns.com/~mm9n/Genealogy/cha1.htm]

Matthew's lineage is certainly not all inclusive. We know for certain that he omitted six names from the list of actual rulers who sat on the throne of David. These names were known to every historian and the scribe when Matthew wrote his gospel and he certainly knew it. So he omits certain people for reasons of legitimacy, curse, unacceptable behaviour etc. The same is applicable through out the line. If he missed 6 during the period of monarchy we do not know how many were missed after the captivity for similar and legitimate reasons. Since we do not have the records we do not also know why. Jews would have been the first to point out such blatant errors and laughed at the history at its inception. The life of the captives in dispersion were so mixed up they certainly must have resorted to levirate marriage. There was no need of a grandfather to adopt (officially I mean) a grandson to be made a legal heir.... Then [this] was considered cultural norm. If an older son died the younger son became heir without any formality. All these factors are to be taken into account especially during the turbulent dispersion era.

Let me give some example.

A is the patriarch

He begets B while A was 25 years old

B begets C while he was 25 years old

B died or was taken prisoner or sold in slavery when he was 30

Then C is the heir to A But he becomes the sole holder of the title of the family only when A dies.

If A died at the age of 90 C comes to his heritage only at the age of 40.

Suppose C died while he was 30 and had a son by 20 called D, the heir to A is now D and we will have missed B and C from the legal line.

For Matthew A (first) to D (second) is just two generations till D's death. The alienation need not be death. It can be socially unacceptable behaviour. It can be simply a disappearance or conviction of crime or marrying outside of the community etc. A recent example of this was King Edward's abdication of the throne of England. In the context of Matthew's presentation this is to be expected.

So the names were omitted as a result of God's judgment. The fact that fourteen names come up in each period of time does not prove out a contrived genealogy unless other names were actually left out for illegitimate reasons creating an error of omission. This is not the case as this study has shown. There is therefore proved no error of omission. It is evident that the decrees and sovereignty of God are testified to in this number fourteen rather than the contrivance of Matthew.

E) OBJECTORS MAINTAIN THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE GENEALOGIES IN MATTHEW, LUKE AND ELSEWHERE IS NOT TO GIVE AN ACCURATE HISTORY WHICH THEY MAINTAIN ARE NOT BIOLOGICAL BUT ARE FALSELY CONTRIVED TO MAKE ONE THEOLOGICAL POINT OR ANOTHER

An unbiased reading of the biblical genealogies within the context will indicate that they simply attempt to establish our Lord's actual and real biological lineage which was prophesied in Scripture so as to qualify Him for consideration as the true Messiah that was foretold. So if the genealogies are purposed not to give 'accurate history' then they are not genealogies at all but nothing but nonsense.

John Nolland states, [WORD BIBLICAL COMMENTARY, WORD BOOKS, PUBLISHER, DALLAS , TEXAS, 1989, Vol. 35A, Luke 1-9:20, pp. 169:

"Ancient genealogies were used for a complex variety of purposes... Genealogies established individual identity; reflected, established, or legitimated social structures, status, and entitlements to office; functioned as modes of praise or delineations of character or even as basis of exhortation...."

Careful observance of Matthew's genealogy will discover that it is not all inclusive nor intended to be. Matthew could not be claiming that it is all inclusive in view of the fact that the omissions are too obvious for the contemporary Jewish community to miss. Furthermore, in consideration of the great attention over the millennia the Jews have paid toward their genealogical history relative to the preservation of their race and the identification of the Messiah, if any genealogy in the Bible was suspect of not being truly biological the bible would not have survived all of these years intact and as originally written. The genealogies of Scripture stand out as highly specific and biological and thus authenticatable at the time each was written. Yet there has not been forthcoming over hundreds of years any trustworthy alternative evidence totally refuting any name listed in any genealogy in Scripture.

Due to numerous factions inside and outside of the nation Israel and the many years which have transpired, objectors' ideas of a contrived, non-biological genealogy as a result of a conspiracy of millions of Jews over the ages and the silence of all of their enemies is quite preposterous.

F) OBJECTORS MAINTAIN THAT SINCE THE MATTHEW AND LUKAN GENEALOGIES ARE NOT IDENTICAL IN FORM AND CONTENT THIS INDICATES THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE A COMMON SOURCE, AND BOTH ARE INACCURATE AND CONTRIVED AND CERTAINLY NOT BIOLOGICAL

The objectors further point out that Matthew’s genealogy is a narrative, a series of subjects and verbs that begins with Abraham and comes forward to Jesus. By contrast they falsely maintain that Luke’s genealogy is not a narrative, but a series of genitive nouns that begins with Jesus and goes backward to Adam and God.

The truth of the matter is that two authors can use a common source and for each's intended purpose produce biologically accurate, non contrived and truthful documents of differing form and content. Normative rules of language and style permit this diversion. It is furthermore, a false presupposition that both genealogies are intended to relay the same identical lineage in precisely the same manner and therefore must be identical. Neither point of this presupposition is accurate as shown in detail in this study.

Both genealogies have minor grammatical and stylistic differences. Neither can actually be considered much more literary than the other. The simple addition of one word, the verb, "begat" = egennesen" and a few explicatory phrases does not make Matthew's style appreciably more literary or novelistic than Luke's. Matthew chose a slightly more narrative form and moved forward historically. Luke chose a shorter, punctuated format similar to the genealogies in Genesis and chose to move backwards in chronology. Both formats are legitimate normative language constructions and cannot be viewed as proving contrivance or inaccuracies. The content is the issue - is each genealogy biologically accurate? Surely one can read about an event in half a dozen different newspapers and find that they all accurately report the event yet are legitimately characterized by differences in style and content.

G) THERE IS A DEFINITIVE LACK OF GENEALOGICAL EVIDENCE TODAY WHICH PROVES THAT GENEALOGIES ARE NOT TO BE BIOLOGICALLY ACCURATE

Objectors to the validity of our Lord's genealogies in Matthew and Luke maintain that except in priestly families, detailed genealogical records were rarely available. Many genealogies were tangled, and even some religious leaders could not trace their own genealogy. Some rabbis taught that clarification would occur in the messianic times when Elijah appeared. Occasionally genealogies were produced by imaginative puns on the words involved rather than from history or tradition. Joshua and Jonah were provided with genealogies by imaginative Midrashic exegesis, as were famous rabbis.

John Nolland states, [WORD BIBLICAL COMMENTARY, WORD BOOKS, PUBLISHER, DALLAS , TEXAS, 1989, Vol. 35A, Luke 1-9:20, pp. 169:

"Ancient genealogies were used for a complex variety of purposes... Genealogies established individual identity; reflected, established, or legitimated social structures, status, and entitlements to office; functioned as modes of praise or delineations of character or even as basis of exhortation...."

[From: http://fly.hiwaay.net/~andysh/genealogy.html]:

"The Jews had carefully maintained genealogical records. These records were preserved in the temple until its destruction in A.D. 70. The Gospel writers had access to these temple records and could accurately trace the genealogy of Jesus from them."

[J. Dwight Pentecost, The Words and Works of Jesus Christ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), p. 39]:

The Jews must have consulted the records to see whether the One Who made such claims (of Messiahship) for Himself had the right to make those claims. Had they found any flaw in His descent, they would have been quick to accuse Him of being an impostor. Even though the nation rejected Him, it was not because He was outside the Davidic line and therefore ineligible to claim the David throne. (Ibid)]

An unbiased reading of the biblical genealogies within the context will indicate that they simply attempt to establish our Lord's actual and real biological lineage which was prophesied in Scripture so as to qualify Him for consideration as the true Messiah that was foretold. So if the genealogies are purposed not to give 'accurate history' then they are not genealogies at all but nothing but nonsense.

H) OBJECTORS MAINTAIN THAT SINCE ISRAEL HAD KINGS AFTER THE EXILE THAT WERE NOT OF THE DAVIDIC LINE, THAT THIS FALSIFIES THE GENEALOGIES IN MATTHEW AND LUKE

Irrelevant and immaterial. The issue is whether or not the Matthean and Lukan genealogies are accurately portraying the legal blood line of David to our Lord. Neither genealogy lists non-Davidic kings nor are such usurpers considered legitimate kings of the Throne of David.

I) THE MATTHEAN GENEALOGY IS ARTIFICIAL BECAUSE IT OMITS SEVERAL NAMES IN ORDER TO ARRIVE AT FOURTEEN NAMES EACH FOR THE THREE PERIODS OF TIME DEPICTED. THIS DONE FOR CONTRIVED THEOLOGICAL REASONS

Matthew's lineage is certainly not all inclusive. We know for certain that he omitted six names from the list of actual rulers who sat on the throne of David. These names were known to every historian and the scribe when Matthew wrote his gospel and he certainly knew it. So he omits certain people for reasons of legitimacy, curse, unacceptable behaviour etc. The same is applicable through out the line. If he missed 6 during the period of monarchy we do not know how many were missed after the captivity for similar and legitimate reasons. Since we do not have the records we do not also know why. Jews would have been the first to point out such blatant errors and laughed at the history at its inception. The life of the captives in dispersion were so mixed up they certainly must have resorted to levirate marriage. There was no need of a grandfather to adopt (officially I mean) a grandson to be made a legal heir.... Then [this] was considered cultural norm. If an older son died the younger son became heir without any formality. All these factors are to be taken into account especially during the turbulent dispersion era.

Let me give some example.

A is the patriarch

He begets B while A was 25 years old

B begets C while he was 25 years old

B died or was taken prisoner or sold in slavery when he was 30

Then C is the heir to A But he becomes the sole holder of the title of the family only when A dies.

If A died at the age of 90 C comes to his heritage only at the age of 40.

Suppose C died while he was 30 and had a son by 20 called D, the heir to A is now D and we will have missed B and C from the legal line.

For Matthew A (first) to D (second) is just two generations till D's death. The alienation need not be death. It can be socially unacceptable behaviour. It can be simply a disappearance or conviction of crime or marrying outside of the community etc. A recent example of this was King Edward's abdication of the throne of England. In the context of Matthew's presentation this is to be expected."

So the names were omitted as a result of God's judgment. The fact that fourteen names come up in each period of time does not prove out a contrived genealogy unless other names were actually left out for illegitimate reasons creating an error of omission. This is not the case as this study has shown. There is therefore proved no error of omission. It is evident that the decrees and sovereignty of God are testified to in this number fourteen rather than the contrivance of Matthew.

J) TAMAR IS A CANAANITE WOMAN IN THE LINE OF MATTHEW THUS FALSIFYING THE TRUE BIOLOGICAL GENEALOGY OF OUR LORD

Objectors maintain that, (Mt 1:3), Tamar was the Canaanite wife of Judah’s eldest son, Er, who died prematurely (Gen 38:1-7). When the patriarch Judah refused her the normal considerations of remarriage, she tricked him into fathering her son, who then was incorporated into what was to become the messianic line (Gen 38:8-30). Judah declares her “righteous” (Gen 38:26), a key term in the Matthean story of Jesus’ birth (cf. 1:19).

K) OBJECTORS STATE THAT LUKE PRESENTS MARY AS BEING RELATED TO THE LEVITICAL FAMILY OF ZECHARIAH & ELIZABETH, AND THEREFORE NOT BELONGING TO THE TRIBE OF JUDAH AND THE LINE OF DAVID

Dr. Ninan Mammen states [Email: mm9n@hotmail.com, Sunday, February 15, 1999 6:23 PM]:

"Certainly Elizabeth was a descendant of Aaron, and Elizabeth was a relative of Mary. It does not follow that Mary was of Aaronic descent. In a patriarchal society descendance is only counted along the male line. If Mary's mother's sister (or father's sister) was married to Elizabeth's father of Aaronic descent (Levite) they are first cousins, but they are of two lineages"

Dr. Ninan Mammen states [Email mm9n@hotmail.com, Monday, February 16, 1999 10:15 AM]:

"The Protoevangelium of James... indicates that Anna was born in Bethlehem. She probably was the sister of Nachariah. If this is true Mary was simply Elizabeth's niece. Elizabeth was married into a Levitical family of Zach while Anna was married into the Davidic family of Heli."

L) OBJECTORS STATE THAT MT 1:17 INDICATES THAT ALL SEGMENTS OF THE GENEALOGY LISTED CONTAINS 14 NAMES, YET THE THIRD ONLY HAS THIRTEEN

Jeconiah is to be counted in both lists, since he lived both before and after the captivity. So, there are literally 14 names listed 'from the captivity in Babylon until the Christ,' just as Matthew says. There are also literally 14 names listed between David and the captivity, just as Matthew claims (Matt. 1:6-12).

****** END OF EXCERPT FROM STUDY ON JESUS' GENEALOGY ******

CONTINUE TO LUKE CHAPTER 4