Gospel of Luke
Home > New Testament > Gospel of Luke Gospel of Luke At a Glance Gospel Genre: (4/5) **** Reliability of Dating: (4/5) **** Length of Text: Greek Original Language: Ancient Translations: Modern Translations: English Estimated Range of Dating: 80-130 A.D. Chronological List of Early Christian Writings Discuss this text on the Early Writings forum. Text Gospel of Luke: American Standard Version Gospel of Luke: King James Version Gospel of Luke: World English Bible Resources e-Catena: References to the New Testament in the Church Fathers Patristic References to Luke, Chapters 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Edgar Goodspeed: The Work of Luke Alfred Loisy: Analysis of the Writings attributed to Luke The Priority of Mark Catholic Encyclopedia: Gospel of Luke Offsite Links Gospel of Luke: Perseus NT (English/Greek/Latin) The Five Gospels Parallels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Thomas; English) Parallel Synoptic Table (Matthew, Mark, Luke; Greek) Color-Coded Luke (designating special Lukan, Markan, and Q material) Luke's Good News: An EasyEnglish Commentary Luke and Josephus The great omission in Luke's gospel The Atonement In Lucan Theology in Recent Discussion How Does Luke Portray Jesus as Servant of YHWH From Enthymeme to Theology in Luke 11:1-13 JesusÂ’' First Trial: Messiah and Son of God Richard Anderson's Blog IVP Commentary A Historical Introduction to the New Testament: The Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts An Introduction to the New Testament: The Gospel of Luke Gospel of Luke: Daniel Wallace's Introduction Gospel of Luke: NAB Introduction The Synoptic Problem Website The Synoptic Problem (Defense of the Two-Source Hypothesis) Books Udo Schnelle, translated by M.
Eugene Boring, The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998), pp. 238-257. Raymond Edward Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (New York: Doubleday, 1997), pp. 225-278. Burton L. Mack, Who Wrote the New Testament? : The Making of the Christian Myth (San Francisco, CA: HarperCollins, 1996), pp. 167-173. Joel B. Green, The Theology of the Gospel of Luke (Cambridge Univ Pr 1995) Luke Timothy Johnson, The Gospel of Luke (Liturgical Press 1991) Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to Luke, I-IX (Doubleday 1981) Recommended Books for the Study of Early Christian Writings Information on the Gospel of Luke The first question that confronts one when examining Luke and Acts is whether they were written by the same person, as indicated in the prefaces.
With the agreement of nearly all scholars, Udo Schnelle writes, "the extensive linguistic and theological agreements and cross-references between the Gospel of Luke and the Acts indicate that both works derive from the same author" (The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings, p. 259). This implies the implausibility of the hypothesis of such as John Knox that Marcion knew only Luke, not Acts, and that Acts was an anti-Marcionite production of the mid second century. The next higher critical question is, if Luke and Acts were written by the same person, who was that person? The oldest manuscript with the start of the gospel, Papyrus Bodmer XIV (ca. 200 CE), proclaims that it is the euangelion kata Loukan, the Gospel according to Luke.
This attestation probably does not stem from reading Irenaeus (Adv. haer. 3.1.1) or Tertullian (Adv. Marcionem 4.2.2), nor Clement of Alexandria (Paedagogus 2.1.15 and Stromata 5.12.82), who also ascribe the third Gospel to one called Luke. Indeed, considering that the immediate recipient of Luke is mentioned in the preface, and given that the author of the third Gospel is aware that many other accounts have been drawn up before him, it is entirely probable that the author had indicated his name on the autograph. (The "most excellent Theophilus" mentioned in the preface of Luke is most likely his patron, as seen in the similar references to "most excellent X" in the prefaces to the De libris propriis liber of Galenus, the De antiquis oratoribus of Dionysius Halicarnassensis, the Scriptor De Divinatione of Melampus, the Peri ton kata antipatheian kai sumpatheian of Nepualius, and both Josephi vita and Contra Apionem of Josephus.) This Luke has traditionally been identified as the one named in Philemon 24 as a co-worker of Paul.
Does the internal evidence support the idea that the author of Luke-Acts had known Saul of Tarsus? Chief among the features of Luke-Acts that have always been thought to support the idea that the author knew Paul are the "we passages" found in 16:10-17, 20:5-15, 21:1-18, and 27:1-28:16. For example, Acts 16:10-17 reads, "We set sail from Troas, making a straight run for Samothrace, and on the next day to Neapolis, and from there to Philippi, a leading city in that district of Macedonia and a Roman colony. We spent some time in that city. ... As we were going to the place of prayer, we met a slave girl with an oracular spirit, who used to bring a large profit to her owners through her fortune-telling.