But he gives high profile to Jesus' healing ministry and how he viewed that. And I would venture to say that if I asked you, you probably couldn't talk about Luke for two minutes. This means that the gospel of Luke was written within 30 years of Jesus' death. Absolutely nothing hinges on the success or failure of Paul's defense before Caesar, for Luke's apologetic has not been concerned primarily with Paul's safety or even the legitimacy of the Christian religion within the empire. Such a failed prediction by Jesus is unacceptable toboth Christians and non-believers alike. Boy, there were some of those that appeared.
It is also a difficult judgment to make that something is 'the most important of Jesus' miracles. Matthew, The Thompson Chain-Reference Study Bible New King James Version, B. That this guiding factor was only a continuation of what had been present all along is shown by Jesus' repeated references to the Spirit of God throughout the period of his public ministry. These people had undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us. Yet he could not have been very high up in the Roman government because nothing is known about him from other historical evidence. He was not an eye witness to those events.
Mark, the first gospel to be written, uses a variety of sources, including conflict stories Mark 2:1—3:6 , discourse 4:1—35 , and collections of sayings, although not the sayings gospel known as the and probably not the used by Matthew and Luke. So I don't want you to think it's going to get technical when we get into the gospel of Luke. Luke—Acts: The Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles. Remember the terrible storm, and the shipwreck in Acts 27? He was with Paul when Paul returned after his third journey to Jerusalem, remember. They were all weeping loudly as they threw their arms around Paul and kissed him, for they were deeply distressed that he had said that they would never see his face again.
Luke had not made full use of the Isaiah 6:9-10 passage in his Gospel, for that was the time of the first visitation of the prophet, and the rejection of that prophet was mitigated by the ignorance of the people. The divine man motif is important even through Jesus' suffering and death, because Jesus dies the perfect martyr's death, an exemplary death. Though he was an official in the Roman empire, Theophilus was probably raised in Greek culture, learning first and foremost the Greek language. What he wrote was sufficient to fill up the full detail that God desired for us to have of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ and the proclamation of the gospel of Christ to the ends of the earth. On the basis of this evidence, we can suggest that the Gospel According to St Luke was probably written in the late 90s of the first century, or quite early in the second century. Luke reported Jesus' announcement to his disciples that he would send what my Father promised Luke 24:49 , and in Acts of the Apostles this was the Holy Spirit that came upon the disciples at Pentecost Acts 1-2. As we have mentioned before, the books of Luke and Acts are a single work, often referred to as Luke-Acts.
He places the highest value on good character regardless of a person's race or nationality. Matthew was there and his experience is there in his gospel, but superintended by God's Holy Spirit so it came out actually accurate and inerrant. He wasn't there during the life of Christ. This is significant because Jesus had prophesied concerning the temple when He said As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down. From a spiritual point of view, the Gospel of Luke and Acts of the Apostles were both addressed to the name 'Theophilus' because of the meaning of that name, not because of the individual with that name. He shows, for example, that the opposition to Jesus and his work was present during Jesus' early ministry in Galilee and was demonstrated in people's reactions to the sermon Jesus preached in the synagogue at Nazareth.
And it's a story about repentance. Further direct information about Luke is scanty in the New Testament, but certain may be drawn. For example, in the story of the Publican and the Pharisee, both of whom go to the Temple to pray, only the Publican is commended for the attitude that he expresses. Mark and Q account for about 64% of Luke. What's the picture of Jesus that emerges from Luke's writing? And he lets the majesty of the Lord Jesus Christ, who is the theme of his writing, dominate. This fragment was found in Egypt, and a considerable amount of time is needed for the circulation of the gospel before it reached Egypt. Not only as an historian but also as a medical doctor, Luke paid great attention to detail, including dates and events that happened throughout the life of Christ.
The gospels, all four of them, are salvation history. He was compassionate to the poor, the sick, the hurting and the sinful. The great fire of Rome and the persecution of Christians as Nero's scapegoats in a. Demas, Demas is not mentioned in Acts but he couldn't have written the gospel of Luke because remember what he did? By accepting this message, you will be leaving the website of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. So how do we know who really wrote them? But let's look at the textual side, okay? Early Christian tradition, from the late second century on, identifies the author of this gospel and of the Acts of the Apostles as Luke, a Syrian from Antioch, who is mentioned in the New Testament in , and.
The Cambridge companion to biblical interpretation. It is through attention to Luke's overall narrative interests that we are best able to appreciate this ending not as the result of historical happenstance or editorial ineptitude, but as a deliberately and effectively crafted conclusion to a substantial apologetic argument. He begins his gospel with a preface addressed to Theophilus: the name means Lover of God, and could be an individual or simply any Christian. Tradition holds that Luke was actually a traveling companion of Paul. But there were the apostles and no doubt many of them had written down accounts of various aspects of the life and ministry of Jesus.
The Anchor Bible Dictionary, v. By the selection and interpretation of his sources, he charted the path by which the church would understand both its own uniqueness in the world and also its continuing relationship to Judaism and to the world. Luke wrote both his Gospel and Acts for Theophilus and the Christians who influenced him to take an interest in Christ. And it may have been that when that church was planted there he heard the gospel in that church. In modern terms, the Gospel of Luke and Acts are each like a long personal letter, which was not originally intended by the author to be seen by many persons. But he is an eye witness to the things he's writing about in the book of Acts and the reason we know that is because starting in chapter 16 he starts to use the plural pronoun we and he's right involved in the ministry of the apostle Paul which, as you know, starts in Acts 14 and goes to the end of the chapter.
Theophilus, however, was more than a publisher. Stevan Davies writes Jesus the Healer, p. Luke had a Gentile audience in mind. Since Luke agrees with Matthew, Mark, and John and since there is no contradictory information coming from any of the disciples stating that Luke was inaccurate and since Luke has proven to be a very accurate historian, we can conclude that Luke's account is very accurate. The author makes it very clear, even in the first verse of Luke that he was not writing a first-hand account, nor one based on witnesses or friends, when he talks of what things are most surely believed among us. The is another controversial and ancient text that purports to tell the story of the gospel from the perspective of Judas, the disciple who is usually said to have betrayed Jesus. This is probably the case, for example, with the epistles of Peter.