| Gospel Of Luke |
Article Index for Gospel Of |
Website Links For Gospel |
Information AboutGospel Of Luke |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT GOSPEL OF LUKE | |
| new testament books | |
| new testament narrative | |
|
The Gospel of Luke (literally, ''according to Luke''; Greek , Κατά Λουκαν, ''Kata Loukan'') is a Synoptic Gospel , and the third and longest of the four Canon ical Gospel s of the New Testament . The text narrates the life of Jesus , with particular interest concerning his birth, ministry, death, and resurrection; and it ends with an account of the ascension. The author is characteristically concerned with social ethics, the poor, women, and other oppressed groups. and the Good Samaritan , are found only in this gospel. The Gospel also has a special emphasis on prayer, the activity of the Holy Spirit, and joyfulness.Donald Guthrie, ''New Testament Introduction'' (Leicester, England: Apollos, 1990), p. 105. D. Guthrie stated, “it is full of superb stories and leaves the reader with a deep impression of the personality and teachings of Jesus. It is perhaps for this reason that for many it is their favourite gospel.Donald Guthrie, ''New Testament Introduction'' (Leicester, England: Apollos, 1990), p. 102. The introductory dedication to , Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. Scholarship today is in wide agreement that both the Gospel and Acts have the same author.Udo Schnelle, ''The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings'', p. 259. Likewise, the traditional view of Lukan authorship is “widely held as the view which most satisfactorily explains all the data.”Donald Guthrie, ''New Testament Introduction'' (Leicester, England: Apollos, 1990), p. 119. However, there is scholarly division concerning the traditional attribution that the text was written by Luke the companion of Paul (named in Colossians ), division which R. E. Brown characterized as "evenly divided".1 Scholars are also in disagreement concerning the date of the Gospel, arguing either for a pre- or post-70 date, though most all would agree that the text is a first century work. CONTENT Formal introduction
Jesus' birth and boyhood
Jesus' baptism and temptation
Jesus' ministry in Galilee
Jesus' teaching on the journey to Jerusalem
Jesus' Jerusalem conflicts, crucifixion, and resurrection
CONTENT SUMMARY The Gospel of Luke tells the story of Jesus' miraculous birth, ministry of healing and parables, passion, and resurrection. Introduction Luke is the only gospel with a formal introduction, in which the author explains that many others have already "undertaken to set down an orderly account of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed on to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word."translation from Richard Bauckham, ''Jesus and the Eyewitnesses'' (Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2006), pp. 116-117. The author adds that he too wishes to compose an orderly account for Theophilus, so that he "may know the truth concerning the things about which you have been instructed."translation from Richard Bauckham, ''Jesus and the Eyewitnesses'' (Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2006), pp. 116-117. Birth narratives and genealogy Like Matthew, Luke recounts a royal genealogy and a virgin birth for Jesus. Unique to Luke is John the Baptist's birth story, the census and travel to Bethlehem, the birth in a manger, and a story from Jesus' boyhood. Miracles and parables Luke emphasizes Jesus miracles, recounting twenty, four of which are unique. Like Matthew, it includes the Sermon on the Mount and other important sayings. More than a dozen of Jesus' most memorable parables are unique to Luke. Role of women More than the other gospels, Luke mentions women as important among Jesus' followers, such as Mary Magdalene Trials and crucifixion Luke emphasizes that Jesus had committed no crime against Rome, as confirmed by Herod, Pilate, and the thief crucified with Jesus. In Luke's Passion narrative Jesus prays that God forgive those who crucify him and his assurance to a crucified thief that they will be together in Paradise. Resurrection appearances Luke's accounts differ from those in Mark and Matthew. Luke tells the story of two disciples on the road to Emmaus, and (as in John) Jesus appears to the Eleven and demonstrates that he is flesh and blood, not a spirit. Jesus' commission that the Eleven carry his message to all the nations affirms Christianity as a universal religion. The account of Jesus' ascent at the end of Luke is apparently an addition subsequent to the original redaction. COMPOSITION Contemporary scholars generally conclude that the author, probably a Gentile Christian, wrote the gospel about 85-90. As sources, he used the Gospel of Mark (written 65-70), the hypothetical Q document, and unique sources (designated L). Like the rest of the New Testament, the gospel was written in Greek. Like Mark but unlike Matthew, the intended audience is Gentile, and it assures readers that Christianity is an international religion, not a Jewish sect. Scholars are divided on whether the author is indeed Paul's physician companion, Luke. Several cities have been proposed as it place of origin with no consensus. . Harris, Stephen L. , Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. Alternatively, some scholars hold to the traditional view that Luke is based on Matthew (which was the first-written gospel), and that it was written before the fall of the Second Temple (70). Author illustration of Luke The Evangelist .]] See Also: Acts of the Apostles#Authorship Early tradition, witnessed by the Muratorian Canon, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origin, and Tertullian, held that the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles were both written by Luke, a companion of Paul.Donald Guthrie, ''New Testament Introduction'' (Leicester, England: Apollos, 1990), pp. 37-40. The oldest manuscript with the start of the gospel (ca. 200) carries the title “the Gospel according to Luke”. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/luke.html Donald Guthrie describes the early Christian testimony concerning the gospel's authorship as in full agreement, although "some scholars attach little importance to it".Donald Guthrie, ''New Testament Introduction'' (Leicester, England: Apollos, 1990), p. 114. The claim that the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles were written by the same author is considered by contemporary scholarship to be “almost certain”.Horrell, DG, An Introduction to the study of Paul, T&T Clark, 2006, 2nd Ed.,p.7; cf. W. L. Knox, ''The Acts of the Apostles'' (1948), p. 2-15 for detailed arguments that still stand. The most direct evidence comes from the prefaces of each book. Both prefaces are addressed to Theophilus , the author's patron, and the preface of Acts explicitly references "my former book" about the life of Jesus. Furthermore, there are linguistic and theological similarities between the two works, suggesting that they have a common author.on linguistics, see A. Kenny, ''A stylometric Study of the New Testament'' (1986). Both books also contain common interests.F. F. Bruce, ''The Acts of the Apostles'' (1952), p2. 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. Those Biblical Scholars who consider the two books a single, two-volume work often refer to both together as Luke-Acts .E.g., C. Kavin Rowe, "History, Hermeneutics and the Unity of Luke-Acts," ''JSNT'' 28 (2005): 131-157, raising questions about the literary unity of Luke-Acts. Given this, the internal evidence of the Acts of the Apostles concerning its author pertains to the authorship of the Gospel. This evidence, especially passages in the narrative where the first person plural is used, points to the author being a companion of Paul.M. A. Siotis, ‘Luke the Evangelist as St. Paul’s Collaborator’, in ''Neues Testament Gesichichte'', pp. 105-111. As D. Guthrie put it, of the known companions of Paul, Luke is “as good as any… {Link without Title} since this is the traditional ascription there seems no reason to conjecture any other.”Donald Guthrie, ''New Testament Introduction'' (Leicester, England: Apollos, 1990), p. 117. There is further evidence from the Pauline Epistles.analyzed in detail in Donald Guthrie, ''New Testament Introduction'' (Leicester, England: Apollos, 1990), pp. 117-118. Paul described Luke as “the beloved physical”, and scholars have long found evidence of technical medical terminology used in both the Gospel and Acts,e.g. W. K. Hobart, ''The Medical Language of St. Luke'' (1882); A. Harnack, ''Lukas der Arzt'' (1906. though this argument has been challenged and it without universal acceptance. The traditional view of Lukan authorship is “widely held as the view which most satisfactorily explains all the data.”Donald Guthrie, ''New Testament Introduction'' (Leicester, England: Apollos, 1990), p. 119. The list of scholars maintaining authorship by Luke the physician is lengthy, and represents scholars from a wide range of theological opinion.To list just some: I. H. Marshall, ''Acts'' (1980), pp. 44-45; F. F. Bruce, ''The Acts of the Apostles'' (1952), pp. 1-6; C. S. C. Williams, ''The Acts of the Apostles'', in ''Black’s New Testament Commentary'' (1957); W. Michaelis, ''Einleitung'', pp. 61-64; Bo Reicke, ''Glaube und Leben Der Urgenmeinde'' (1957), pp. 6-7; F. V. Filson, ''Three Crucial Decades'' (1963), p. 10; M. Dibelius, ''Studies in the Acts of the Apostles'' (1956); R. M. Grant, ''A Historical Introduction to the New Testament'' (1963), pp. 134-135; B. Gärtner, ''The Aeropagus Speech and Natural Revelation'' (1955), W. L. Knox, ''Sources of the Synoptic Gospels''; R. R. Williams, ''The Acts of the Apostles''; E. M. Blaiklock, ''The Acts of the Apostles'', in ''Tyndale New Testament Commentary'' (1959), W. Grundmann, ''Das Evangelium nach Lukas'', p. 39. But there is no consensus, and the current opinion concerning Lukan authorship has been described as ‘about evenly divided’.2 on who the author was. Date The ''. Doubleday, 1991, v. 1, pp. 43 Before 70 Arguments for a pre-70 date are largely bound up with the complicated arguments concerning the date of the book of Acts, with most proponents arguing for a date around 60-61 for the Gospel.A. Harnack, ''The Date of Acts and the Synoptic Gospels'' (1911), p. 90; J. A. T. Robinson, ''Redating the New Testament'', pp. 86-92; I. H. Marshall, ''Luke'', p. 35; A. J. Mattill Jr., ‘The Date and Purpose of Luke-Acts: Rackham reconsidered, in ''Catholic Biblical Quarterly'' 40 (1978), pp. 335-350. This incorporates the conjecture that Luke collected much of his unique material during the imprisonment of Paul in Caesarea, when Luke attended to him.Donald Guthrie, ''New Testament Introduction'' (Leicester, England: Apollos, 1990), p. 131. Acts does not mention Paul’s martyrdom, which occurred some time in the 60s, nor the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecies concerning the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, which occurred in 70. After 70 In contrast to the traditional view, many contemporary scholars regard , Eschatology , and Soteriology that are similar to the those found in Pastoral Epistles , which are often seen as Pseudonym ous and of a later date than The Undisputed Pauline Epistles .Brown, Schuyler. ''The origins of Christianity: a historical introduction to the New Testament.'' New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. p. 27 Debate continues among non-traditionalists about whether Luke was written before or after the end of the 1st century. Those who would date it later argue that it was written in response to heterodoxical movements of the early 2nd century, for example see . Those who would date it earlier point out both that Luke lacks knowledge of the Episcopal System , which had been developed in the 2nd century, and that an earlier date preserves the traditional connection of the gospel with the Luke who was a follower of Paul. Audience The consensus is that Luke was written by a Greek or Syrian for gentile/ non-Jewish Christians. The Gospel is addressed to the author's patron, Theophilus, which in Greek simply means ''Friend of God'', and may not be a name but a generic term for a Christian. The Gospel is clearly directed at Christians, or at those who already knew about Christianity, rather than a general audience, since the ascription goes on to state that the Gospel was written "so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught" (). MANUSCRIPTS See Also: Acts of the Apostles#Manuscripts The earliest ) and three others preserving only brief passages (P4, P69, P75, P111). These early copies, as well as the earliest copies of Acts, date after the Gospel was separated from Acts. . Verses are found in Western text-type. But they are omitted by a diverse number of ancient witnesses and are generally marked as such in modern translations. See Bruce M. Metzger 's ''Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament'' for details. RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER GOSPELS According to Farrar, "Out of a total of 1151 verses, Luke has 389 in common with Matthew and Mark , 176 in common with Matthew alone, 41 in common with Mark alone, leaving 544 peculiar to himself. In many instances all three use identical language." Mark is widely considered a principal direct source, and Martin Hengel has made the more controversial argument that Luke also made use of Matthew.Martin Hengel. 2000. ''The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ: An Investigation of the Collection and Origin of the Canonical Gospels''. Trans. J. Bowden. London and Harrisburg: SCM and Trinity Press International. Pp. 169-207. There are 17 , four-sevenths of Matthew , and two-fifths of Luke describe the same events in similar language. Luke's style is more polished than that of Matthew and Mark with fewer Hebrew idioms. He uses a few Latin words (Luke ; ; ; ; and ), but no Syriac or Hebrew words except ''sikera'', an exciting drink of the nature of wine but not made of grapes (from Heb. ''shakar'', "he is intoxicated"; Lev ), perhaps palm wine. According to Walter Bauer 's ''Greek English Lexicon of the NT'', in Aramaic (שכרא) it means Barley Beer , from the Akkadian ''shikaru''. This Gospel contains 28 distinct references to the Old Testament . Many words and phrases are common to the Gospel of Luke and the Letters of Paul; compare:
LUKE'S WRITING STYLE The main characteristic of this Gospel, as Farrar (''Cambridge Bible'', Luke, Introd.) remarks, is expressed in the motto, "Who went about doing good, and healing all that were Oppressed Of The Devil " (Acts ; cf. with Luke ). Luke wrote for the " Hellenistic world". Greek Most scholars believe that the Gospel of Luke was written originally in Greek. The first four verses of Luke are in more formal and refined Greek, which would be meant to be familiar to the elite citizens of the Greco-Roman era. Then the language changes into a style of Greek which is very similar to the Septuagint (the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible). Then the language makes its final change toward the end into a more secular form of 1st-century Greek (called "koine"). Popular opinion among scholars is to see these variations in writings as the Lukan author's ability to write in different literary styles. This view could be further substantiated by Luke's praise of Theophilus.
Attention to women Compared to the other canonical gospels, Luke devotes significantly more attention to women. The Gospel of Luke features more female characters, features a female prophet (), and details the experience of pregnancy (). Prominent discussion is given to the lives of Elizabeth and of Mary, The Mother Of Jesus (ch. ). DISPUTED VERSES Textual critics have found variations among early manuscripts and have used principles of textual criticism to tentatively identify which versions are original. Bart D. Ehrman cites two cases where proto-orthodox Christians most likely altered the text in order to prevent its being used to support heretical beliefs.Bart D. Ehrman. Misquoting Jesus. When Jesus is baptized, many early witnesses attest that Luke's gospel had the Father say to Jesus, "This day I have begotten you." In orthodox texts (and thus in most modern Bibles), this text is replaced by the text from Mark. Ehrman concludes that the original text was changed because it had Adoptionist overtones. When Jesus prays in the garden of Gethsemane, the text refers to him being comforted by an angel and sweating drops like blood (verses 43-44 in ). These two verses disrupt the literary structure of the scene (the Chiasmus ), they are not found in all the early manuscripts, and they are the only place in Luke where Jesus is seen to be in agony. Ehrman concludes that they were inserted in order to counter doceticism, the belief that Jesus, as divine, only seemed to suffer. SEE ALSO REFERENCES EXTERNAL LINKS Online translations of the Gospel of Luke:
Related articles:
''This article was originally based on text from Easton Bible Dictionary of 1897 and from M.G. Easton M.A., D.D., ''Illustrated Bible Dictionary'', Third Edition, published by Thomas Nelson, 1897.''
|
|
|