Luke - Introduction

Luke - Introduction AUTHOR – Some books tell us who the author was and because of this the name of the book typically will reflect who it was from or who it was too (Example: Peter[from], Timothy[to], Galatians[to]). The Gospels are all interesting, because although the books have been named after specific men that are thought to have written them, they actually do not themselves tell us who wrote them. Church history tells us the Luke wrote the Gospel of Luke. There are those that both agree and disagree with this and you will find reasons for both. Although there is evidence that suggests that Luke wrote it, the reader must be content knowing that it is still God breathed and beneficial whether Luke is the author or not. We will treat the Gospel of Luke as if Luke wrote it for a few reasons: (1) The earliest copy of the Gospel dated around 175-225 AD suggest that Luke is the author. (2) Several extra biblical sources from 170AD-398AD all suggest that Luke is the author. (3) The book of Acts, which is the 2nd book in this two book volume, shows the author of these books switching to first person (Acts 16:10–17; 20:5–15; 21:1–18; 27:1–28:16). These sections imply that the author was with Paul during these periods of time and we know that Luke was a traveling companion of Paul’s and at times the only one with him (specifically when he was in Rome and we know that the author of Luke-Acts travelled to Rome with Paul). AUDIENCE – The Gospel of Luke appears to be written to Gentile Christians. Theophilus is the named recipient. We do not know much about Theophilus. He could have been a patron of this writing or someone that Luke was specifically writing to, but it is thought that Luke was written to a much larger predominantly Gentile audience. This is based off of the writing style, the writing content, and the way that he refers to the Jews in third person instead of first person. DATE WRITTEN – It is most likely that Luke-Acts were written together. That being the case, the earliest they could have been written would be around 60-62 AD because that was when Paul was imprisoned in Acts 28. Many believe that Luke was written after Mark (we will get to this next), but then we would have to know exactly when Marks was written to help date that. The latest that Luke could have been written was around 95-96 AD because extra Biblical literature (specifically 1 Clement written around 95-96 AD) begin referencing the Gospel of Luke at this point. It is commonly thought that Luke was written between 70-95 AD because Matthew and Mark allude to a coming “abomination of desolation” (Mark 13:14) and Luke defines that abomination as Jerusalem being surrounded by armies (Luke 21:20). Meaning Luke would have been written after the destruction of Jerusalem (70 AD). NOTES Luke - Introduction PURPOSE – Luke states that the purpose of his Gospel is to give certainty as to things that Theophilus has been taught. This is an ambiguous statement and could have several meanings: among them it could have been to gather historical evidence to give proof, it could also have been to give the Gentiles certainty of their salvation. COMMENTARY Perhaps it is best to suggest that Luke-Acts was written primarily for Gentiles who needed “assurance” in a number of areas, both historical and theological. Perhaps they did need the account of a careful and educated historian to give them confidence that events they heard about had actually occurred. Luke, College Press NIV, 1995 SOURCE – This is an area of academic debate. No matter where you stand on this, it is best to begin by remembering that all scripture is God-breathed and beneficial. The order in which the Gospels were written could shed some light for us if we had 100% certainty on the order in which they were written. Without 100% certainty though, they can only give us assumptions and speculation. Some believe that Mark was written first and that Matthew and Luke pulled from Mark. The reason is because there are similarities that exist in all three of the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), but there are similarities in Matthew and Luke that are not in Mark. Leading to the belief that Mark then would have been written first. Also, because of this, some believe that there is a 2nd mysterious source that they name “Q”. This 2nd source accounts for why Matthew and Luke agree. There is no real evidence of this source though, it is just speculation. Others speculate that Mark wrote, then Matthew wrote, then Luke pulled from both. Still others suggest that all three were written independently of each other, but since they were all God-breathed they have similarities. The most important thing to recognize here is that although they may have pulled from each other, they are not identical. Which means that they did not attempt to give us a chronological order of events. Rather, the authors of the Gospels each have different audiences and purposes and those purposes drove the order in which they recorded the events that occurred. NOTES