Luke 1:1–4 (New Living Translation)
Article 1: Doctor Luke’s Introduction to his Gospel
Welcome to Luke’s gospel. as we begin to progress through the 4 gospels as a combined study, it feels right to start with the purpose for writing the gospels in this way. Enjoy!
Introduction
Luke 1:1–4
1 Many people have set out to write accounts about the events that have been fulfilled among us.
2 They used the eyewitness reports circulating among us from the early disciples.
3 Having carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I also have decided to write an accurate account for you, most honourable Theophilus,
4 so you can be certain of the truth of everything you were taught.
Why do we know Luke is the author? We know Paul had a companion called Luke and he is mentioned in several of his letters. Paul writes of Philemon verse 24 along with Mark, Aristarchus and Demus
Philemon 1:23–24
23 Epaphras, my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, sends you his greetings.
24 So do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, my co-workers.
25 May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.
In the book of Colossians 4:14, Luke is referred to as the beloved physician and is again included with Demus. At the time of writing the book of Two Timothy, all but Luke had left Paul and in chapter 4:11 he asks timothy to bring Mark back to him
Colossians 4:14
14 Luke, the beloved doctor, sends his greetings, and so does Demas.
2 Timothy 4:11
11 Only Luke is with me. Bring Mark with you when you come, for he will be helpful to me in my ministry.
Paul was in Rome awaiting execution and Timothy was in Ephesus. Of these various companions, Aristarchus was a travelling companion. There were a few others who were visitors and road fellows. So we know that Luke was with Paul in Rome when he was awaiting execution. We also know that whoever wrote the Book of Acts included himself in certain parts of the account. These passages have come to be known as the ‘we sections’ because the author joins in the story using ‘we’ to involve himself in the events. If we carefully compare the times Paul mentions Luke’s companionship in his letters with the ‘we’ sections in the Book of Acts, we can deduce that the only person never mentioned by name in a ‘we’ section, who also accompanied Paul to Rome was actually Luke. And of course that explains why Luke is never named in Acts even though he was such a close companion to Paul. whenever he and Paul were together it was just ‘we’. And if Luke wrote Acts, then he certainly wrote the gospel of Luke before that.
What about Paul’s description of Luke the beloved physician? Was Paul literally talking about that? Was Luke a doctor of some kind? Well many people think so based on Paul’s words and on Luke’s use of certain terms that might be considered technical. When he describes illnesses such as seizures. We certainly recognise his language to be precise and well written. In fact he opens his gospel with a very fine greek word ‘ApeDaepa’ meaning ‘in as much’. It’s the only time this word is used in the new testament, but it does occur fairly often in the classic literature including Aristotle. This alerts us that Luke was very confident in his use of classic Greek. Probably a doctor, or at least a well educated man who was careful with thoughts and words, just the sort of man who would want to do his research and want to present it clear and accurate treatment of his subject matter.
His account gives clear details to Jesus’ life on earth. Names, places, Dates, Luke is going to be as careful as he can to detail the accounts of Jesus properly. Why? He tells us in verse Luke 1:4. So that we can have certainty concerning the things you have been taught. Luke knew that the good news of Jesus had been spread widely and there could have been all kinds of mis-information mixed in with the truth. People such as Theophilus might have been unsure what he had heard. And uncertainty causes people to dither in their faith. Luke wants to dispel those doubts by writing a clear, careful account gathered from as many qualified sources as he can. Eyewitness interviews, whatever written documents were in circulation, long conversations with his friend Paul. All these would be gathered and collated and written up the way an ordinary journalist might produce a piece about the invention of the mobile phone. It was recent history for Luke in about the same way. No more than 30 years had passed, plenty of eyewitnesses were still alive and any relevant documents were still fresh and original, so Luke’s research would have been very up to date, very reliable and of course the Holy Spirit would have been guiding him into truth as he wrote. But that isn’t the authors expressed method. He wants his writing to be taken seriously as a work of thoughtful history, not so much the product of dreams and visions and mysterious revelations, this wasn’t the angle Luke chose to approach his audience with and suited his Greek nature.
Both feet firmly on the ground is Luke’s preferred style. He starts out with some fairly specific details about the birth of John the Baptist. Now just listen to the precision he uses.
In the days of Herod, King of Judea there was a priest named Zechariah of the division of Abijah, and he had a wife from the daughters of Aaron and her name was Elizabeth. And they were both righteous before God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and statutes of the Lord. but they had no child. Elizabeth was barren and both were advanced in years.
Now bear in mind if someone wanted to fact check his story, Luke gives all the necessary information. The temple was still there when Luke wrote, and it would be a simple thing to ask around to even review the records of who was in the priesthood and when. Zachariah and Elizabeth would have been known to people still alive.
The way Luke recounts events has the marks of an eyewitness. But not the old priest and his wife, they probably would have died sometime before. Someone who would have been quite young when these things happened to be alive and tell the details to Luke. And someone who knew the family. So to be fair we get a lot of behind closed doors information in the telling. Mary the mother of Jesus perhaps? Or James the half brother of Jesus? He would have known the family events clearly. Whoever it was, they gave us an intimate insight into the lives of John and Jesus both.
One final encouragement was to whom Luke wrote it to, Theophilus, his name literally translates in Greek as ‘one who loves God’ suggesting this is to encourage and reassure followers of Christ as well as people open to understanding the life and events of Jesus. This is the same with how the Book of Acts begins also (In essence, Luke part 2). We have many theories about who Theophilus was. Was it a name? Title? Or an open letter to those who love God in general? All we know now is this message went far beyond deliverance to a single man but is now a book of evidence collated with 65 great books giving us the all the critical information to help us make a decision on Jesus’ existence and claims.
From Jesus to the eye-witnesses, to the journalists that recorded their testimonies, to the authors and scholars who produced numerous copies for the sheer value of the document. All done because the life and testimony of Jesus Christ on earth is nothing like we’ve seen or will ever see again from a man.
Textual Criticism
The more manuscripts you have, and the earlier they are, the more you can be sure what the original said (this process is called textual criticism).
Herodotus and Thucydides were both written in the 5th century BC, the earliest copies we have are 900 AD, so there’s a 1300 year gap and we only have 8 copies of each, yet no classical scholar would doubt their authenticity. Livy’s Roman history, 900 year gap, we have 20 copies.
Caesar’s Gallic war, 950 year gap 9–010 copies. Tacitus 1000 year gap, 20 copies. Then we come to the New testament. Written between 40–100 AD, earliest manuscript 130 AD, 5,309+ Greek manuscripts, 10,000 Latin, 9,300 others. Totally unique amongst ancient pro’s writings.
One of the greatest textual critics F.J.A. Hort said this;
‘In the variety and fullness on the evidence in which it rests the texts of the new testament stands absolutely and unapproachably alone amongst ancient pros and writings. And no secular historian would disagree with that.’
Takeaway’s from this study
- We have a book of collated eyewitnesses
- -Luke’s audience would be to the sceptical, the Greeks and many of us today in the western world.
- -There is more evidence and data for Jesus than any other historical figure of the more ancient world.
Now that you’re happy with the introduction, why not read on further into the gospels with this information at the forefront of your mind.
