Topic: Luke's Perspective of Jesus: Ch. 3 Message Outlines
by Darrel Cline (darrelcline biblical-thinking.org)
Chapter # 3 Paragraph # 6 Study # 1 June 4, 2006 Lincolnton, N.C.
(254)Thesis:Jesus is the Man of God Who came to be the High Priest of the Heavenly Tabernacle so that He could "save to the uttermost" those who come to God by Him (Hebrews 7:26 and &:1-2).
Introduction:Last week we saw that God Himself validated the identity of Jesus as the "Spirit possessing, beloved Son of the God of the Third Heaven." Unless Luke was flat-out lying to us, Jesus was absolutelyestablished at His baptism as the only Person Who deserves our unreserved loyalty. As strange as it might sound, even the Father does not seek our loyalty to Himself as much as He seeks our loyalty to Jesus. If Jesus really is the Beloved Son of the Father, nothing gives the Father greater satisfaction than for us to be "fixated" on Jesus as the Center of the Universe. And, for this cause, there is no greater focus of conflict in our lives than the battle for our final loyalty. Satan leaves no stone unturned in his search for an "issue" in our lives which he can use to separate us from loyalty to Jesus. God the Father also gradually presses us by his sovereign oversight to come to anunqualified loyalty to Jesus. So, Luke, in his record for the sake of Theophilus, being fully aware of the truth of 2 Timothy 1:15 (note 4:11),strove to present every detail of his Picture of Jesus so that there might be at least one or two who wouldnot bemisled by the adversary,nor would bedissuaded by the pressure of the Father from owning Jesus Christ as our Beloved. One of those details is before us this morning in the form of Jesus' age as a man. So, as is our custom, we are going to look into the record to find one more detail for the Spirit of Jesus to use to wean our hearts and our minds from the trash of this world.
I. Jesus as a Thirty-Year-Old.
A. The theological confusion of Judah in the first century.
1. First, the confusion began as soon as God became a "Means" to an end.
a. Early in the record of man, man was "tempted" to exchange places with God so that he would become the "end" and God would become the "means".
1) This temptation was profound in the subtle way that it twisted the character of God so that Heneeded to be displaced.
a) The temptation's claim was that God was, at least ultimately (if not wholly), a self- serving Person Who creates merely to satisfy Himself.
b) Thus the temptation seriously claims that God cannot be ultimately trusted because He will react violently against anyone who frustrates His desire to satisfy Himself.
c) No one can "trust" a self-centered person.
2) But, the temptation offered nothing to really solve the "self-centered" issue.
a) No creature can "rebel" against the Creator without establishing the "self-centered" issue as "legitimate" -- and if it is "legitimate", why the "rebellion"?
b) Neither can a creature "rebel" against the Creator with any hope of success at all for the simple fact that creatures cannot supplant the Creator without dying.
3) So, the reality is that the temptation was nothing more or less than a foolish attempt to turn God from being our "End" into being our "Means".
b. Then it deepened as the "theology" of salvation by performance developed so that men could make their "service" to God a "means" to their own exaltation.
2. Then, the confusion deepened when the "scholars" twisted the doctrine of Messiah into a teaching about two different "people".
a. These scholars, not understanding the unity in the Plan of God, could only see diametrical opposition -- therehad to be two Messiahs.
1) The Scriptures were clear that there was to be a "Joseph-like" Messiah Who would not be able to keep from suffering.
2) The Scriptures were also clear that there was to be "Judah/Solomon-like" Messiah Who would put down all of the opponents and shower His people with blessedness.
b. Then, having claimed the necessity of "two", they exalted the one of their own preference: the Ruler Whose rule would allow them to rule without any suffering.
B. The "thirty-year olds" in the Messianic tradition.
1. The Scriptures tell us that Joseph was 30 years old when his trials were over and his rule was to begin.
2. The Scriptures also tell us that David was 30 years old when his rule began.
C. The Thirty-Year-Old in Luke's record.
1. He begins with a "Ruler" look.
2. He ends with a "Sufferer" look.
3. This "ending" absolutelykills any supposed "loyalty" factor in those who are only really loyal to their own blessedness.
II. Jesus as "From Adam".
A. There is no real way to Question the claim that Luke is making: Jesus descended from God via Adam.
B. There is no real way to "pit" the genealogies of Matthew and Luke against each other.
1. Lukeclearly presented his claim that Jesus' connection to Adam wasonly through Mary.
2. Matthewclearly presented his claim that Jesus' "regnal right" was through Joseph by way of the "cursed line".
a. See Jeremiah 22:24 where the "regnal line" was "cursed".
b. The "regnal line" was the "legal" line for succession, but it was rejected by God.
3. Thus the differing genealogies are completely "fitting" as to the authors' purposes.
III. The Point for Us.
A. By compelling us to face the "thirty-year-olds", we know what the issue is: are we going to embrace the divine loyalty issue?
B. By compelling us to face the "descent" issue, we know what the claim is: Jesus is "worth" our loyalty because He is theonly way out of the evil of being ultimately self-serving.
C. By both issues, we are confronted with the fact that "lip service" won't cut it.
1. Every "event" of life is a challenge to live out the reality of a powerful Replacement of Adam Whose essential makeup is other-centeredness.
2. Every "refusal" to draw from the Spirit of Jesus the selflessness to meet these events is a reentrenchment of the adversary's main thesis: God isn't worth serving.