What I Learned: An Introduction to Luke

With insight gleaned from the book "The Crucifixion of the King of Glory"

For this “What I Learned,” I have to share some of what I’ve been learning from Eugenia Scarvelis Constantinou, PhD, and her book “The Crucifixion of the King of Glory: The Amazing History and Sublime Mystery of the Passion.” I listened to it on Audible during Lent and have been reviewing it on Kindle since.

The women’s Bible study I lead started studying the New Testament chronologically in 2017, starting with the Gospel accounts. I was very intrigued at that time regarding the events that were in each account, knowing skeptics like to critique the Gospels because of their differing content. Maybe I hoped I could glean information that would help me take on the skeptics?

Constantinou, who has a degree in law (as well as five theological degrees), offers an attorney’s perspective on eyewitness accounts. Accounts are more credible when multiple witnesses testify to the same thing, which is absolutely the case with the Gospels, as much of their content overlaps.

Constantinou also includes the perspective of classic historians on the credibility of ancient documents. The credibility of the Gospel accounts is supported by: their being written while eyewitnesses were still alive (concern for integrity and reputation dissuades lying when others can testify to the accuracy of accounts); the multiplicity of writers (four accounts instead of just one); reinforcement by other parts of the New Testament, written by yet other independent writers; and corroboration by other evidence, such as other ancient writings and archeological discoveries. She also introduces the term “verisimilitude.” The Gospel accounts correlate with what is known about first-century Judaism and the Roman empire, so they are considered historically reliable.

After we read Matthew and Mark, I went through the exercise of placing their timelines side-by-side. That was difficult enough, so I abandoned the aspiration of adding Luke’s outline to this format. And, while I may have initially approached a chronological study of the Gospels looking for ammunition to satisfy the skeptical, I’ve concluded that some skeptics will never be satisfied. I am intellectually satisfied that the Gospels are reliable. While Constantinou lays that foundation well, she also represents well the beautiful motive of each writer who so loved our Lord.

She writes, “Matthew’s community consisted of Jewish Christians—Jews who believed that Jesus was the Christ, the Messiah. Matthew focused on what was most important to his original readers: proving that Jesus fulfilled the Messianic prophecies.” Matthew included more Old Testament prophecies than any of the other Gospel writers.

“Mark’s Gospel, written for a Gentile audience, emphasized Jesus as the powerful Son of God. He also emphasized the mysterious nature of Christ’s saving ministry….[He also] most vividly highlights Christ as the suffering Messiah. The Passion narrative dominates his Gospel.”

Finally, she claims Luke’s Gospel “strongly emphasizes the theme of forgiveness.” She supports her thesis by highlighting the example that only Luke tells of Jesus’ forgiveness of the thief on the cross.

There are many events and details in the Gospel accounts that are informative and interesting. It’s easy to get caught up in the events. I found the events in each Gospel account have been easy to outline. What has not been easy to summarize is Christ’s teaching. I’m grateful for eyewitnesses who can recount for us the life of our Savior. I’m more grateful for the Word made flesh who dwelt among them, and then willingly went to the cross to save us from our sins. His Word reveals Him and He is worth knowing.