Tuesday, February 10, 2026

PT-1 “Luke the Physician and Historian” (Luke 1:1-3a)

 

EVENING SPIRITUAL DIARY FOR 2/10/2026 8:29 PM

My Worship Time                                                    “Focus:  “Luke the Physician and Historian”

Bible Reading & Meditation                                                                    Reference:  Luke 1:1-3a

            Message of the verses:  “1 ¶  Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, 2  just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, 3  it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past,” (ESV)

            I mentioned in the last SD that Luke did not really want to be noticed in the two books that he wrote.  It seemed good to me also, is the only thing that contains a reference to Luke being the author, but still his name was not mentioned.  It has been mentioned that there was little problem knowing that it was Luke who wrote this gospel, as there was never any other suggestion concerning its authorship.

            The Bible does not tell us much about Luke’s life before he became one of Paul’s partners in the spreading of the Gospel.  In the last SD it was mentioned that Paul mentions Luke’s name in Colossian 4:14:  “14  Luke the beloved physician greets you, as does Demas.”  Now as one goes through the reading of the book of Acts they will see that there were many times that Paul would need a physician, and so the Lord provided Luke to travel with him beginning at the second missionary trip.  Let me just say that Luke is a Gentile as when Paul wrote in the later part of his letters he mentions those who were of the circumcision (Jewish) and it is reasonable to conclude that the people Paul refers to in verses 12-17, including Luke (v. 14), were Gentiles.  MacArthur adds “For further evidence that Luke was a Gentile, see the introduction to Luke in this volume.)  I did quote most of the introduction to this volume in the first SD I wrote on Luke.

            John MacArthur quotes Howard C. Kee as he gives a helpful historical perspective on the lives of physicians during this time period:

“An obvious question is: did most of the Roman populace share the exalted view of the medical art propounded by its chief practitioners, and particularly by Galen [a second-century A.D. Roman doctor]?  Galen is caustic in his denunciation of the money-seeking, routine bound quacks who ‘enter the sickroom, bleed the patient, lay on a plaster, and give an enema.’  Both from the epigrams and from non-medical writers of the second century [A.D.] it is evident that the medical profession was regarded as being characteristically greedy and fond of public display.  Plutarch, in The Flatters, mocks the smooth bedside manner of the day.  Dio Chrysostom describes the efforts of physicians to drum up trade by public lecture-presentations, intended to dazzle hearers and attract patients:

“This short recitation…is kind of a spectacle or parade…like the exhibition of so-called physicians, who seat themselves conspicuously before us and give us a detailed account of the union of joints, the combination and juxtaposition of bones, and other topics of that sort, such as pores and respirations, and excretions.  And the crowd is all agape with admiration and more enchanted than a swarm of children.”

“In his fine survey, Roman Medicine John Scarborough notes that there were two different classes of physicians serving  two different groups of patients.  The aristocrats had physicians as servants or as private employees in their own establishments, or had access to them despite their high fees and lofty reputations.  There were also many illiterate doctors, quacks, charlatans; exploiters of a gullible and needy public.  He remarks that, ‘The intellectuality of Galen fails to pierce the growing gloom of an age gradually turning from rational answers posed by the Greek heritage of questioning to the mystical, all-encompassing solutions of religion.’  By the second half of the second century, there were many wonder-workers and rhetoricians, of whom Lucian draws satirical sketches in Alexander the False Prophet and The Passing of Peregrinus…Although we cannot generalize from Lucian’s satirical remarks about the healing profession—in both its medical and its mystical aspects—we can safely conclude that [it] was [not] beyond criticism or universally esteemed in the later second century.

“In the New Testament there are only seven occurrences of the word hiatros, and in only one of these is there a positive estimate of the physician.  In Mt. 9:12 (=Mk. 2:17; Lk. 5:31) there is a proverbial expression about the physician’s role being to care for the ailing, rather than the well.  This is offered in the synoptics as justification for Jesus attention to the sick, the unclean and the outcasts.  In Mk. 5:26 (=Lk. 8:43),…the physicians have taken money from the woman with the menstrual flow but have not cured her ailment.  Another proverbial expression in Lk. 4:23, ‘Physician, heal yourself!’, is a challenge to the one who points out problems that he must cure them.  In Col. 4:14, Luke is identified as ‘the beloved physician,’ with no indication of the nature of the medical role he may have performed. (Medicine, Miracle and Magic in New Testament Times [London: Cambridge, 1986], 63-65)”

2/10/2026 9:19 PM

No comments:

Post a Comment