From: Over 50 Interpreters Explain the Gospel of
Luke Return to
Home
By
Roland H. Worth, Jr. © 2015
All reproduction of
text in paper, electronic, or computer
form both permitted and encouraged so long as
authorial
and compiler credit is given and the text is
not altered.
CHAPTER
SIX
Verses
27-49
Books Utilized Code Numbers at End of Chapter
WEB: "But
I tell you who hear: love your enemies, do good to
those who hate you,
Young’s: 'But I say to you who are hearing, Love
your enemies, do good to those hating you,
Conte (RC): But I say to you who
are listening: Love your enemies. Do good to those who
hate you.
do good to them
which hate you. The love enjoined is, essentially, good
will. It expresses itself in prayer to
God for their welfare, in kindness of word, and in benevolence of act. [52]
See
the precept beautifully enforced in Romans 12:17, 19-21. [56]
WEB: bless
those who curse you, and pray for those who mistreat you.
Young’s: bless those cursing you, and pray for
those accusing you falsely;
Conte (RC): Bless those who
curse you, and pray for those who slander you.
and pray for them
which despitefully use you. Those that have “done us dirty” through lies, prejudice, ignorance, or
simply because they have the power to do so. Rather than praying for a
meteorite to hit them on the head, pray that they might learn justice and
equity. Once I happened upon in the
church files where I attended a letter “disfellowshipping”
a certain individual. I was deeply
amused since it was the same person who had played a significant role in having
it done to me a few years earlier! I
could have prayed, “Thank you Lord!” but instead I prayed, “Lord, may he learn
from this never to treat people that unjustly again.” (For the accusations against him bore an
uncanny parallel to those against me.)
It certainly was never intended for us to
pray that they might prosper in their continued doing wrong nor for the
well being and success which will be taken by them as confirmation that
their behavior is blessed by God. But
for their growth in knowledge and insight and that they might repent and change
their behavior--that is profoundly different.
Nor did Jesus’ insistence on them being
prayed for do away with our obligations to treat them decently and right—think
of the wandering ox being returned to the enemy in the Old Testament. When Jesus first said “bless them” before
giving this additional admonition, he surely was not referring to mere polite
language in dealing with their excess, but in doing right to them (and
their possessions) as well. [rw]
despitefully use you. The Greek word implies the coarsest insults,
and is found in 1 Peter 3:16. Luke alone
records our Lord’s prayer for His murderers, 23:34, from which Stephen learnt
his, Acts 7:60. [56]
Weymouth: To him who
gives you a blow on one side of the face offer the other side also; and to him
who is robbing you of your outer garment refuse not the under one also.
WEB: To him
who strikes you on the cheek, offer also the other; and from him
who takes away your cloak, don't withhold your coat also.
Young’s: and to him smiting thee upon the cheek,
give also the other, and from him taking away from thee the mantle, also the
coat thou mayest not keep back.
Conte (RC): And to him who
strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also. And
from him who takes away your coat, do not withhold
even your tunic.
Our Lord, for
instance, himself did not offer himself to be stricken again (John xviii. 22,
23), but firmly, though with exquisite courtesy, rebuked the one who struck
him.
and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not to take thy coat also. Be willing to give him even more than he
demands. [rw]
Weymouth: To every one who asks, give; and from him who takes away
your property, do not demand it back.
WEB: Give to
everyone who asks you, and don't ask him who takes away your goods to give them
back again.
Young’s: 'And to every one who is asking of thee,
be giving; and from him who is taking away thy goods, be not asking again;
Conte (RC): But distribute to
all who ask of you. And do not ask again of him who takes away what is yours.
Remember, that, as God approveth not alms, or any other work, without charity
[love], so neither charity itself without discretion. Relieve the poor; but those, who are poor indeed; and the poor indeed are they, who
not only want the things they ask, but want also the means to get without asking. 1 Tim. v. 3; Ecclus. xii. 1-7-— Bp. Sanderson. [36]
and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again. Theft
seems unlikely to be under consideration:
a thief normally does not leave his name behind so you’ll know who to
protest to! Hence Jesus seems to have in
mind when individuals “under color of law”—presumably using it as a pretext—seizes
one’s goods. Asking for them back isn’t
going to get them back; it may even cause them to laugh at your lack of
power. Better to suffer injustice with
dignity than to suffer injustice and be insulted as well. [rw]
WEB: "As
you would like people to do to you, do exactly so to them.
Young’s: and as ye wish that men may do to you, do
ye also to them in like manner;
Conte (RC): And exactly as you
would want people to treat you, treat them also the same.
Most humans expect good treatment and
become quite upset when they do not receive it.
Ironically the same individuals are oblivious when they are
“giving out” such treatment to others.
The world does not exist for either you or me. It exists for all of us. [rw]
WEB: If you
love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love
those who love them.
Young’s: and -- if ye love those loving you, what grace have ye? for also the sinful
love those loving them;
Conte (RC): And if you love
those who love you, what credit is due to you? For even sinners love those who
love them.
for sinners also
love those that love them. Where Matthew (
Weymouth: And if you are kind to those who are kind to you, what
credit is it to you? Even bad men act thus.
WEB: If you do
good to those who do good to you, what credit is that
to you? For even sinners do the same.
Young’s: and if ye do good to those doing good to
you, what grace have ye? for also the sinful do the
same;
Conte (RC): And if you will do
good to those who do good to you, what credit is due to you? Indeed, even
sinners behave this way.
Weymouth: And if you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what
credit is it to you? Even bad men lend to their fellows so as to receive back
an equal amount.
WEB: If you
lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even
sinners lend to sinners, to receive back as much.
Young’s: and if ye lend to those of whom ye hope
to receive back, what grace have ye? for also the sinful lend to sinners -- that they may receive
again as much.
Conte (RC): And if you will loan
to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is due to you? For even
sinners lend to sinners, in order to receive the same in return.
for sinners also
lend to sinners, to receive as much again. Those
the quite consciously “righteous” were actually nowhere near what they thought
they were when they acted in the same way and out of the same purpose
as those who were unquestionably “sinners.”
What was actually required was to act out of motives superior to
such people—the kind Jesus is trying to instill in them. [rw]
WEB: But love
your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing
back; and your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High;
for he is kind toward the unthankful and evil.
Young’s: 'But love your enemies, and do good, and
lend, hoping for nothing again, and your reward will be great, and ye shall be
sons of the Highest, because He is kind unto the ungracious and evil;
Conte (RC): So truly, love your
enemies. Do good, and lend, hoping for nothing in
return. And then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most
High, for he himself is kind to the ungrateful and to the wicked.
and ye shall be
the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. By imitating this example of God—giving even
to those He will not even receive courteous respect from—we become His
children. We imitate Him. We share His attitude. “Godliness” is not merely a matter of overt
religion; it is also a matter of everyday behavior in the “world” in which we
live. [rw]
WEB: Therefore
be merciful, even as your Father is also merciful.
Young’s: be ye therefore merciful, as also your
Father is merciful.
Conte (RC): Therefore, be
merciful, just as your Father is also merciful.
Matthew
has “perfect” [of both man and God] (5:48); but that there is no essential
difference between the two Evangelists we may see in such expression as “the
Father of Mercies,” 2 Corinthians 1:3; “The Lord is very pitiful and of tender
mercy,” James 5:11; “Put on therefore as the elect of God . . . bowels of
mercies, kindness,” Colossians 3:12; Isaiah 30:18. “God can only be our ideal in His moral
attributes, of which Love is the center.”
Van Oosterzee.
“It is an attribute to God Himself, / And
earthly power doth then show likest God’s / When
mercy seasons justice.”
--Shakespeare. [56]
WEB: Don't judge, and you won't be judged. Don't condemn, and you won't
be condemned. Set free, and you will be set free.
Young’s: 'And judge not, and ye may not be judged;
condemn not, and ye may not be condemned; release, and
ye shall be released.
Conte (RC): Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you
will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.
For
comment read Romans 2:1-3,
and ye shall not
be judged. The
best way to keep other people from putting a harsh evaluation on what you do
and say is by avoiding treating them in that manner. It doesn’t guarantee it, of course; but the
best way to assure that you will have the worst motive and intention
attributed to you is by having the reputation of regularly treating others with
the assumption of malicious intent. [rw]
condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned. If you are known as always condemning
others, why should any one else seek a reason not to provide the harshest
condemnation of your actions and rhetoric as well? It’s somewhat like training a dog: train them to be mean and they’ll be
mean. Dogs may be cowed into submission
out of fear, but humans have the nasty habit of waiting until they can “bite”
with a vengeance. [rw]
forgive, and ye shall
be forgiven. The
“judge” and the “condemn” involve negative language and behavior toward
others. Here Jesus shifts to the
positive of forgiveness. The simple
truth of the matter is that every one of us either has or will—or both!—done
something to others that we have to apologize for and ask their forgiveness
(whether the specific term is invoked or not).
It is sometimes called “eating crow.”
But regardless of the language we are in a moral debt to others and know
it and seek to have the debt—well, forgiven.
[rw]
WEB: "Give, and it will be given to you: good measure, pressed
down, shaken together, and running over, will be given to you. For with the
same measure you measure it will be measured back to you."
Young’s: 'Give, and it shall be given to you; good
measure, pressed, and shaken, and running over, they shall give into your
bosom; for with that measure with which ye measure, it shall be measured to you
again.'
Conte (RC): Give,
and it will be given to you: a good measure, pressed down and shaken together
and overflowing, they will place upon your lap. Certainly, the same measure
that you use to measure out, will be used to measure
back to you again."
and it shall be given unto you. You will reap what you sow. [rw]
good measure, pressed down. As figs or grapes might be, and thus many more be put into the
measure. [11]
and shaken together. To make it more
compact and thus to give more. [11]
and running over. Even
when it is full and more is successfully added to the volume—even then
more is added so it overflows. Such is
the abundance one reaps. [rw]
shall men give into your bosom.
That is, to you. The word "bosom"
here has reference to a custom among oriental nations of making the bosom or
front part of their garments large, so that articles could be carried in them,
answering the purpose of our pockets.
Compare Exodus 4:6-7; Proverbs 6:27; Ruth 3:15. [11]
The image is an Eastern
one. In the dress then worn, a large
bag-shaped fold in the robe above the cincture or girdle was used instead of a
pocket. [18]
For with the same measure that ye mete
withal [the same measure that you use, NKJV], it shall be measured to you again. The same words we find in the
A
proverb almost verbally identical with this is found in the Talmud, but it must
be remembered that the earliest parts of the Talmud were not committed to
writing till more than two centuries after Christ, and long before that time
His sayings may have been “in the air,” i.e., they may have passed
unconsciously into the store of the national wisdom even among His
enemies. [56]
WEB: He spoke
a parable to them. "Can the blind guide the blind? Won't they both fall
into a pit?
Young’s: And he spake a
simile to them, 'Is blind able to lead blind? shall
they not both fall into a pit?
Conte (RC): Now he told them
another comparison: "How can the blind lead the
blind? Would they not both fall into a pit?
Can the blind lead the
blind?
Not in the Sermon on
the Mount, but recorded by Matthew in another and very striking connection (
Proverbs 19:27, “Cease, my son, to hear the
instruction that causeth to err.” Paul taunts the Jew with professing to be “a
guide of the blind,” Romans
shall they not both
fall into the ditch? Falling flat on their face would have said
it too or any other physical misadventure caused by the lack of sight. But falling into a ditch has a certain
element of drama to it—it is a major fall (ditches aren’t a mere inch or two
deep), the fall will inflict pain and quite easily significant injury, there is
likely “mess” of one kind or another at the bottom, and help will likely be
needed to get out of it. Elements that, on a spiritual level, will be the result if either
teacher or disciple persists in turning their back on Jesus’ teaching. In short, without it the only question is when
and not whether one will fall into major error of either belief or
behavior. [rw]
WEB: A
disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will
be like his teacher.
Young’s: A disciple is not above his teacher, but
every one perfected shall be as his teacher.
Conte (RC): The disciple is not
above his teacher. But each one will be perfected, if he is like his teacher.
but every one that
is perfect [perfectly trained, NKJV] shall be as his master. Any student may feel despair and tossed
about in concern as they wrestle with the teaching they are hearing. But if they take the time and effort to
become “perfect”—complete—in their understanding of it, then they will become
reliable teachers as well. [rw]
WEB: Why do
you see the speck of chaff that is in your brother's eye, but don't consider
the beam that is in your own eye?
Young’s: And why dost thou
behold the mote that is in thy brother's eye, and the beam that is in thine own eye dost not consider?
Conte (RC): And why do you see
the straw that is in your brother's eye, while the log that is in your own eye,
you do not consider?
mote . . .
beam. The entire illustration is Jewish and was
used to express impatience of just reproof so that “mote” and “beam” became
proverbial for little and great faults.
The proverb also implies, “How can you see others faults properly with a beam in the depth of your eye
(Matthew 7:5)? How dare you condemn when
you are so much worse? [56]
WEB: Or how
can you tell your brother, 'Brother, let me remove the speck of chaff that is
in your eye,' when you yourself don't see the beam that is in your own eye? You
hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you can see
clearly to remove the speck of chaff that is in your brother's eye.
Young’s: or how art thou able to say to thy
brother, Brother, suffer, I may take out the mote that is in thine eye -- thyself the beam in thine
own eye not beholding? Hypocrite, take first the beam out of thine own eye, and then thou shalt
see clearly to take out the mote that is in thy brother's eye.
Conte (RC): Or how can you say
to your brother, 'Brother, allow me to remove the straw from your eye,' while
you yourself do not see the log in your own eye? Hypocrite, first remove the
log from your own eye, and then will you see clearly, so that you may lead out
the straw from your brother's eye.
6:42 Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me
pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou
thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
It is a strange folly, that men will not endeavor to instruct and heal themselves before they undertake to instruct and heal others. It is no other than a continual state of
hypocrisy, for a man to take upon him a ministry which consists in directing
and instructing souls, and to make a show of exercising these functions, when he is altogether unable
to perform them by reason of his ignorance, his want of application, and
perhaps his incapacity to learn the several duties of his station. [27]
to thy brother, Brother. The word shows that Jesus has in view the
relation of members of His kingdom and is concerned lest the spirit of Pharisaism should establish itself there. [52]
mote. A difference between how we should evaluate other’s sins and our own?: I know there is a difference of sins. Our Saviour tells us there is a beam, and there is a mote;
but withal this I know, that the best way to
keep us from sin is to fear and to loathe even the least,
as if it were the greatest. If we look through this glass, it will make
every mote a beam. Sins, in themselves,
are unequal; but, in regard of us, and of our endeavors to avoid them, they are all equal— J.
Hales. [36]
Thou hypocrite. Romans 2:1, “Wherein thou judgest
another, thou condemnest thyself.” “If we condemn others when we are worse than
they, we are like bad trees pretending to bear good fruit.” Bengel.
cast out first the
beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy
brother's eye. Start
with self-correction: It always
seems easier to “help” fix other people’s problems, than our own even when they
are worse. It is so easy to dismiss
excuses and dodges and explanations when we would find the same
reactions as adequate reasons to avoid any changes on our own part. By the fact that we have changed, we
have the moral right to urge others to do so as well. [rw]
WEB: For there
is no good tree that brings forth rotten fruit; nor
again a rotten tree that brings forth good fruit.
Young’s: 'For there is not a good tree making bad
fruit, nor a bad tree making good fruit;
Conte (RC): For there is no good
tree which produces bad fruit, nor does an evil tree produce good fruit.
WEB: For each
tree is known by its own fruit. For people don't gather figs from thorns, nor
do they gather grapes from a bramble bush.
Young’s: for each tree from its own fruit is
known, for not from thorns do they gather figs, nor from a bramble do they crop
a grape.
Conte (RC): For each and every
tree is known by its fruit. For they do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they gather the grape from the bramble bush.
In depth: Good and
bad and the Manichean heresy [18]. This portion
of the report of the great sermon, at one period of the Church's history,
possessed a special importance. It was
used as one of the foundations of the system of dualism taught in the once
widespread Manichaean heresy, which apparently reached its culminating period
of popularity in the fifth century. This
heretical school taught that there were two original principles--one good,
from which good proceeded; one evil, from which evil came; that there
were two races of men, having severally their descent from the one and from the
other. The Manichaean teachers, while
rejecting many of the Christian doctrines, made much of the sermon on the
mount, calling it the "Divine
discourse," mainly on account of
the statement we are here discussing.
Yet here, when the words of Jesus are carefully considered, there is no
assertion of Manichaean dualism, neither does the Master hint that there is
anything irrevocably fixed in men's natures, so that some can never become
good, and others never evil, but only that, so long as a man is as an evil
tree, he cannot bring forth good fruit; that if he would do good he
must first be good
WEB: The good
man out of the good treasure of his heart brings out that which is good, and
the evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart brings out that which is
evil, for out of the abundance of the heart, his mouth speaks.
Young’s: The good man out of the good treasure of
his heart doth bring forth that which is good; and the evil man out of the evil
treasure of his heart doth bring forth that which is evil; for out of the
abounding of the heart doth his mouth speak.
Conte (RC): A good man, from the
good storehouse of his heart, offers what is good. And an evil man, from the
evil storehouse, offers what is evil. For out of the abundance of the heart,
the mouth speaks.
out of the good
treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is
good. It
reflects the essence of the person. If
your character is fundamentally sound and praiseworthy, how you act toward
others will reflect that value system. [rw]
and an evil man
out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth
that which is evil. What
you are is inevitably reflected in how you
act: that is true not only in those
cases when behavior is beneficial and constructive to others (as in the first example),
but also when it is destructive and hurts and injures others. When it does that, no plea of inner
purity and good will is of any value:
you have stripped the pretense from your claims and revealed you, in
your nakedness, as fundamentally flawed in character. [rw]
for of the abundance of the heart. “O veneration
of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good
things?” Matthew 12:34; “the vile person
will speak villany,” Isaiah 32:6. [56]
It is not
true, as some allege, that no one can know anything of the state of another's
heart, and that, although men are living wickedly, they have good hearts. If a man's conversation [= behavior] is
carnal, worldly, irreligious or profane, his heart is of a corresponding
character. [9]
his mouth speaketh. Words are our means of communication. Whether intended or not, they are revelations
of our own true character. When our
heart is a bubbling pot of suspicion, contempt, and conceit what comes out of
our mouth will reflect that reality.
When our words encourage others to live up to their own full potential
for good, when we are more interested in their reformation than their
censure—in such cases we see a heart interested in what is noble and
praiseworthy. [rw]
WEB: "Why
do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' and don't do the things which I say?
Young’s: 'And why do ye call me, Lord, Lord, and
do not what I say?
Conte (RC): But why do you call
me, 'Lord, Lord,' and not do what I say?
“If
I be a master, where is my fear, saith the Lord of
hosts?” Malachi 1:6. Painful comments are supplied by the language
of two parables, Matthew 25:11, 12; Luke 13:25.
[56]
and do not the
things which I say? Even in earthly matters one obeyed one’s
earthly master whether slave to owner or employee to boss or student to teacher. The respectful words are repudiated by
behavior that undercuts or refuses to do what one has been told to do. [rw]
Weymouth: Every one who
comes to me and listens to my words and puts them in practice, I will show you
whom he is like.
WEB: Everyone
who comes to me, and hears my words, and does them, I will show you who he is
like.
Young’s: Every one who is coming unto me, and is
hearing my words, and is doing them, I will shew you
to whom he is like;
Conte (RC): Anyone who comes to
me, and listens to my words, and does them: I will reveal to you what he is
like.
To
"hear" the saying of Christ is just to have them addressed to us, to
have an opportunity of becoming acquainted with them. To "do" these sayings is something
more than merely to perform the actions which he requires; it is to conform the whole inward and outward life to them, to form
our whole character by them, to fashion our habits of thought, feeling and
action in accordance with them. [9]
WEB: He is
like a man building a house, who dug and went deep,
and laid a foundation on the rock. When a flood arose, the stream broke against
that house, and could not shake it, because it was founded on the rock.
Young’s: he is like to a man building a house, who
did dig, and deepen, and laid a foundation upon the rock, and a flood having come,
the stream broke forth on that house, and was not able to shake it, for it had
been founded upon the rock.
Conte (RC): He is like a man
building a house, who has dug deep and has laid the
foundation upon the rock. Then, when the floodwaters came, the river was
rushing against that house, and it was not able to move it. For it was founded
upon the rock.
and when the flood
arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for
it was founded upon a rock. Such
a thing as the Saviour here describes might happen in
our land, but it was far more likely to happen in
Not only is the true
believer, however, destined to trials and afflictions, but so is the man, also,
whose religion is false. [9]
Weymouth: But he who has
heard and not practised is like a man who has built a
house upon the soft soil without a foundation, against which the torrent
bursts, and immediately it collapses, and terrible is the wreck and ruin of
that house."
WEB: But he
who hears, and doesn't do, is like a man who built a house on the earth without
a foundation, against which the stream broke, and immediately it fell, and the
ruin of that house was great."
Young’s: 'And he who heard and did not, is like to
a man having builded a house upon the earth, without
a foundation, against which the stream brake forth, and immediately it fell,
and the ruin of that house became great.'
Conte (RC): But whoever hears
and does not do: he is like a man building his house upon the soil, without a
foundation. The river rushed against it, and it soon fell down, and the ruin of
that house was great."
6:49 But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a
foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat
vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great. On this passage, father Quesnel,
who was a most rigid predestinarian, makes the
following judicious remark, “It is neither by the speculations of astrologers,
nor by the Calvinian assurance of predestination,
that we can discover what will be our portion for ever: but it is by the examination of our heart,
and the consideration of our life, that we may in some measure [predict] our
eternal state. Without a holy heart and
a holy life, all is ruinous in the hour of temptation, and in the day of
wrath.” To this may be added, “he that believeth on the Son of God, hath the witness in
himself” (1 John
upon the earth.
In St. Matthew, more graphically, “upon the sand;” e.g. the sand of
superficial intellectual acceptance. [56]
In depth: How a
person might indeed make the mistake of the unwise builder [18].
"The surrounding scenery may, in this as in other instances, have
suggested the illustration. As in all
hilly countries, the streams of
Books Utilized
(with
number code)
1 = Adam Clarke. The New
Testament . . . with a Commentary and
Critical Notes.
Volume I: Matthew to the Acts. Reprint,
2 = Marvin R. Vincent. Word Studies in the New Testament. Volume I:
The Synoptic Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, Epistles
of Peter, James,
and Jude. New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1887;
1911 printing.
3 = J. S. Lamar. Luke.
[Eugene S. Smith, Publisher; reprint, 1977 (?)]
4 = Charles H. Hall. Notes,
Practical and Expository on the Gospels;
volume two: Luke-John.
1871.
5 = John Kitto.
Daily Bible Illustrations. Volume II:
Evening Series:
The Life and Death of Our Lord.
Brothers, 1881.
6 = Thomas M. Lindsay. The Gospel According to St. Luke. Two
volumes.
7 = W. H. van Doren. A Suggestive Commentary on the New
Testament:
Saint Luke. Two volumes.
1868.
8 = Melancthon W. Jacobus.
Notes on the Gospels, Critical and
Explanatory: Luke and John.
Brothers, 1856; 1872 reprint.
9 = Alfred Nevin.
Popular Expositor of the Gospels and Acts: Luke.
10 = Alfred Nevin.
The Parables of Jesus.
Board of Publication, 1881.
11 = Albert Barnes.
"Luke." In Barnes' Notes on the New Testament.
Reprint, Kregel Publications,
1980.
12 = Alexander B. Bruce. The Synoptic Gospels.
In The Expositor's
Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll. Reprint, Grand
Rapids,
13 = F. Godet.
A Commentary on the Gospel of St. Luke. Translated
from the Second French Edition by E. W. Shalders
and M. D. Cusin.
14 =
15 = Henry Alford. The
Greek Testament. Volume
I: The Four Gospels.
Fifth Edition.
16 = David Brown. "Luke"
in Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and
David Brown, A
Commentary, Critical and Explanatory, on the
Old and New Testaments.
Volume II: New Testament.
S. S. Scranton Company, no date.
17 = Dr. [no first name provided] MacEvilly. An Exposition of the Gospel
of St. Luke.
18 = H. D. M. Spence. “Luke.”
In the Pulpit Commentary, edited by H. D.
M. Spence. Reprinted by Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company,
1950.
19 = John Calvin. Commentary on a
Harmony of the Evangelists,
Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Translated by William Pringle. Reprint,
20 = Thomas Scott. The Holy Bible
. . . with Explanatory Notes (and)
Practical Observations.
21 = Henry T. Sell. Bible Studies
in the Life of Christ: Historical and
Constructive.
22 = Philip Vollmer. The Modern Student's Life of Christ.
Fleming H. Revell Company, 1912.
23 = Heinrich A. W. Meyer. Critical
and Exegetical Handbook to the
Gospels of Mark and Luke.
Translated from the Fifth German
Edition by Robert Ernest Wallis. N.
Y.: Funk and Wagnalls,
1884; 1893 printing.
24 = John Albert Bengel. Gnomon
of the New Testament. A New
Translation
by Charlton T. Lewis and Marvin R. Vincent.
Volume One.
25 = John Cummings. Sabbath
Evening Readers on the New Testa-
ment:
St. Luke.
26 = Walter F. Adeney, editor. The Century Bible: A Modern
Commentary--Luke.
missing from copy.
27 = Pasquier Quesnel.
The Gospels with Reflections on Each Verse.
Volumes I and II. (Luke
is in part of both).
D. F. Randolph, 1855; 1867 reprint.
28 = Charles R. Erdman. The Gospel
of Luke: An Exposition.
29 = Elvira J. Slack. Jesus: The Man of
Board of the Young Womens
Christian Associations, 1911.
30 = Arthur Ritchie. Spiritual Studies in St. Luke's Gospel.
The Young Churchman Company, 1906.
31 = Bernhard Weiss. A Commentary on the New Testament. Volume
Two: Luke-The Acts.
32 = Matthew Henry. Commentary on the Whole Bible. Volume V:
Matthew to John. 17--. Reprint,
Company, no date.
33 = C. G. Barth.
The Bible Manual: An
Expository and Practical
Commentary on the Books of Scripture. Second Edition.
34 = Nathaniel S. Folsom. The Four
Gospels: Translated . . . and with
Critical and Expository Notes. Third Edition.
Upham, and Company, 1871; 1885 reprint.
35 = Henry Burton. The Gospel
according to Luke. In the Expositor's
Bible series.
36 = [Anonymous]. Choice Notes on
the Gospel of S. Luke, Drawn from
Old and New Sources.
37 = Marcus Dods.
The Parables of Our Lord.
Revell Company, 18--.
38 = Alfred
Edersheim. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah.
Second Edition.
1884.
39 = A. T. Robertson. Luke the Historian in the Light of Research.
New York:
Charles Scribner's Sons, 1920; 1930 reprint.
40 = James R. Gray. Christian
Workers' Commentary on the Old and
New Testaments.
ion/Fleming H. Revell Company, 1915.
41 = W.
Sanday. Outlines of the Life of Christ.
Scribner's Sons, 1905.
42 = Halford E. Luccock. Studies in the Parables
of Jesus.
Methodist Book Concern, 1917.
43 = George
H. Hubbard. The
Teaching of Jesus in Parables.
New
44 = Charles S. Robinson. Studies in Luke's Gospel. Second Series.
45 = John
Laidlaw. The Miracles of Our Lord.
Wagnalls Company, 1892.
46 = William
M. Taylor. The
Miracles of Our Saviour. Fifth Edition.
New York:
A. C. Armstrong & Son, 1890; 1903 reprint.
47 = Alexander
Maclaren. Expositions
of Holy Scripture: St. Luke.
New York: George H. Doran
Company, [no date].
48 = George
MacDonald. The
Miracles of Our Lord.
George Routledge
& Sons, 1878.
49 = Joseph
Parker. The People's Bibles: Discourses upon Holy Scrip-
ture—Mark-Luke.
50 = Daniel
Whitby and Moses Lowman. A Critical Commentary and
Paraphrase on the New Testament:
The Four Gospels and the Acts
of the Apostles.
51 = Matthew
Poole. Annotations
on the Holy Bible. 1600s.
Computerized.
52 = George
R. Bliss. Luke. In An American Commentary on the New
Testament.
1884.
53 = J.
W. McGarvey and Philip Y. Pendleton. The Fourfold Gospel.
1914. Computerized.
54 = John Trapp. Commentary on the Old
and New Testaments. 1654.
Computerized.
55 = Ernest D. Burton and Shailer Matthews. The Life of Christ.
Chicago, Illinois: University of
Chicago Press, 1900; 5th reprint,
1904.
56 = Frederic W. Farrar. The Gospel According to
St. Luke. In “The
the
University Press, 1882.