The full height of this reverence may be suggested to us by certain passages in which the term ' Lord ' occurs in citations from the Old Testament, where its reference is to Jehovah, though in the citations It seems to be applied to Jesus. Like the other Synoptists, Luke cites, for instance, from Isaiah the promise of a voice crying in the wilderness, " Make ye ready the way of the Lord, make His paths straight" (3^), and applies it to the coming of John the Baptist whom he rep- resents as preparing the way for Jesus' manifestation. As in the case of the other evangelists, the inference lies close that by ' the Lord ' here Luke means Jesus, whose coming he thus identifies with the advent of Jehovah and whose person he seems to Identify with Jehovah. -^^ On the other hand, in passages like i^'^-'''^ although the language Is similar. It seems more natural to understand the term ' Lord ' as referring to God Himself, and to conceive the speaker to be thinking of the coming of Jehovah to redemption in Jesus without necessary identification of the person of Jesus with Jehovah," The mere circumstance, however, that the
12 Cf. Sven Herner, as cited, p. ii: "With a reference to our discusr sion of the citation in the passages in Matthew and Mark we hold it most probable that Christ is meant, and this view is more easily main- tained in the case of Luke than of Matthew because Luke compara- tively frequently uses the designation ' Lord ' of Jesus." Proceeding to discuss the parallel passage, i^^, he decides that there 'Lord' probably refers to God the Father; which appears just. It does not follow, however, that Godet's remark may not also be accepted : " In saying the Lord Zacharias can only be thinking of the Messiah: but he could not designate Him by this name, unless, with Malachi, he recognized in His coming the appearing of Jehovah (cf. i^^'^s 2II)" — if this can be read of the advent of Jehovah in His Representative.
13 Hahn says, rightly as we think, at i^^: "Not to be understood of the Messiah (Ambr., Beda, Euthym., Beng., Cast., Bisp., Schegg, Schanz) but of God"; and at i'^^: "Not to be understood of the
lo6 The Designations of Our Lord
reader is led to pause over such passages and to con- sider whether they may not intend by their ' Lord ' — who is Jehovah — to identify the person of Jesus with Jehovah, is significant. We should never lose from sight the outstanding fact that to men familiar with the LXX and the usage of ' Lord ' as the personal name of the Deity there illustrated, the term ' Lord ' was charged with associations of deity, so that a habit of speaking of Jesus as ' the Lord,' by way of emi- nence, such as is illustrated by Luke and certainly was current from the beginning of the Christian proclama- tion (19'^^), was apt to carry with it Implications of deity which, if not rebuked or In some way guarded against, must be considered as receiving the sanction of Jesus Himself.
The leading designations of Jesus in Luke, as in the other Synoptists, however, are, broadly speaking. Mes- sianic. In other words, it Is distlnc- The . .
'Prophet' tively as the Messiah that Luke sets forth Jesus and represents Him as hav- ing conceived of Himself and as having been revered by His followers. We find in Luke, as In the other Synoptists, to be sure, traces of a widespread recogni- tion of Him as a prophet (7^^-^^ 9^*^^). His followers set their hopes upon Him in that office (24^^) ; and Indeed with no uncertainty He Himself assumed the
Messiah (Kiin., 01s., Bisp., Schanz), but of God"; but, we think, wrongly at 3*: "By the xoping there is here, just as in the Old Test, passage, to be understood, not the Messiah (Kiin., Bl., Haupt) but God, for Luke wishes to say that in the Messiah God would hold His own advent." So far as the mere language goes, that might be ac- cepted: but the passage seems to mean otherwise (see Plummer per contra). Meyer has an excellent note on iis.ir apj decides rightly also at i''^^; whom Weiss properly follows; so also Plummer.
The Designations in Luke 107
role of a prophet (4''* I3^^'^'*). But no more In Luke than in the other Synoptists is this particularly empha- sized, and in Luke, too, the prophetic character is, no doubt, conceived as part of the Messianic function, — as indeed the collocation of His prophetic calling and His redemption of Israel in the thought of the dis- ciples going to Emmaus not obscurely suggests (241^-1, cf. also f^)}"^