The Gospel According to Luke

 

Rex Banks

 

 

Lesson 8

 

Authorship

 

(1)          External and internal evidence lead to the conclusion that the writer of the third Gospel and the book of Acts was the Luke named by Paul in three of his letters (Col 4:14; 2 Tim 4:11; Phile 24).  Among other things, we learn from these references that Luke was not “from the circumcision” (Col 4:11) and his own words lend support to this fact.

 

·        For example, speaking of those who “were living in Jerusalem” Luke says that “in their own language” the field purchased with Judas’ blood money  “was called Hakeldama, that is, Field of Blood” (Acts 1:19).  This suggests that Aramaic was not Luke’s language.  

 

·        The author’s Hellenistic education is apparent which suggests that he was not Palestinian Jew and therefore not an apostle.

 

(2)          We also learn from Paul that Luke was a “physician.”

 

(3)          Interestingly, in every reference to Luke, he is named in connection with Mark the writer of our second Gospel and “It seems highly probable that in writing his Gospel Luke made use of Mark...” (Carson et al).  It is clear from the method of composition (Lk 1:1-3) that the writer of the third Gospel was not an eyewitness to the events that he narrated.

 

(4)          The book of Acts is a companion volume to this Gospel, both being addressed to one Theophilus (Lk 1:1; Acts 1:1-2).  In Acts, the writer refers to “the first account” which he composed (the third Gospel) linking the two volumes.  The ending of the Gospel and the beginning of Acts dovetail perfectly.  The Gospel of Luke closes with Christ’s promise that the Holy Spirit would come upon the apostles in Jerusalem (Lk 24:44-49) while Acts opens with Christ’s instructions to the apostles not to leave Jerusalem until that promise had been realized (Acts 1:1-5, cf 12).  The literary style and vocabulary of both are strikingly similar. The Catholic Encyclopaedia has:

 

“The style and arrangement of both are so much alike that the supposition that one was written by a forger in imitation of the other is absolutely excluded.  The required power of literary analysis was then unknown, and, if it were possible, we know of no writer of that age who had the wonderful skill necessary to produce such an imitation.”

 

The reference to Herod Antipas in Acts 4:27 may be significant since only the third Gospel records that Jesus appeared before Herod (Lk 23:7-12).  Thus there is good reason to suppose that evidence supporting Lukan authorship of one volume also supports Lukan authorship of the other. 

 

(5)          The failure of the writer of Acts to mention Luke as a companion of Paul also suggests that Luke is the author of these volumes since the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and John also fail to name the author.  William Hendriksen (New Testament Commentary on Luke) points out that Titus “another worker and (at times) fellow-traveller (of Paul)...is never mentioned in the book of Acts,” but Hendriksen adds that Luke’s being a medical doctor (Col 4:14) lends support to the view that he, rather than Titus, is the author of Acts.

 

(6)          “(The) ancients universally agree that Luke wrote the third Gospel” (International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia).  Irenaeus wrote that “Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him” (Against Heresies 3:1:1).  Justin Martyr who died in about 165 AD alludes to the “memoirs of the apostles” which the early church ranked with the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament, and it is evident from Justin’s writings that these “memoirs” included numerous facts unique to Luke.  Tertullian (Against Marcion 4.2.2), Clement of Alexandria (Paedagogus 2.1.15 and Stromata 5.12.82) and a succession of writers testify to the fact that Luke wrote the Gospel which bears his name.  About the middle of the second century the heretic Marcion affirmed Lukan authorship and later that same century Luke is named as author in what is often called the Anti-Marcionite prologue.  The Muratorian canon (ca 170) has the following:

 

“The third book of the gospel, that according to Luke.  This Luke, the physician, after the ascension of Christ, when Paul had taken him with him as studied in the law, wrote it down in his own name from opinion.  The Lord, however, he did not see in the flesh either, and thus, as he was able to follow up, so he begins to speak even at the nativity of John.”

 

(7)          In fact “at no time were any doubts raised regarding this attribution to Luke, and certainly no alternatives were mooted” (Donald Guthrie, Donald New Testament Introduction).  Eusebius has:

 

“But Luke, who was of Antiochian parentage and a physician by profession,  and who was especially intimate with Paul and well acquainted with the rest of the apostles, has left us, in two inspired books, proofs of that spiritual healing art which he learned from them.  One of these books is the Gospel, which he testifies that he wrote as those who were from the beginning eye witnesses and ministers of the word delivered unto him, all of whom, as he says, he followed accurately from the first.  The other book is the Acts of the Apostles which he composed not from the accounts of others, but from what he had seen himself.  And they say that Paul meant to refer to Luke’s Gospel wherever, as if speaking of some gospel of his own, he used the words, “according to my Gospel” (Church History 3:4:7, 8).

 

(8)          Internal evidence reveals the writer of the third Gospel and Acts was a companion of Paul.  Paul is accompanied by Silas on his second missionary journey (Acts 15:40) and they are joined by Timothy (Acts 16:1-4) before being divinely directed into Macedonia (Acts 16:9).  Upon arriving at Troas:

 

“(They) were joined by a fourth companion...(who) was the author of Acts...  His joining the others is indicated in the most unobtrusive manner - by sudden switch from the third person to the first person plural, from ‘they’ to ‘we’.  There are three sections of Acts in which the story is told in the first person plural and, interestingly enough, each of the three is largely concerned with a journey by sea (F. F. Bruce, Paul Apostle of the Heart Set free).

 

(9)          Commenting upon these “we” sections Tenney has:

 

“The first generally accepted reference begins with Acts 16:10 at Paul’s departure from Troas on his second missionary journey.  The writer accompanied him from Troas to Philippi, where the references to the first person plural cease with the discussion of Paul’s imprisonment (16:17; 19-34).  Probably the writer was present at Philippi but was not arrested.  The “we sections” reappear at Paul’s return to Macedonia as recorded in Acts 20:6 ff.  From this point the “we sections” remain throughout the book, although the writer does not seem to be in evidence during the imprisonment of Paul in Caesarea.  Nevertheless, he accompanied Paul on the voyage to Rome (27:1-2 ff.) and stayed with him until the end of the story.”

 

(10)      Evidently Luke is a Christian when the “we” passages begin since there is no record of his conversion, and likely he was involved in the work of preaching already (“God called us to preach” – Acts 16:10).  It seems likely that Luke was left behind at Philippi and perhaps his influence is seen in the fact that the church in that city later helps support Paul (Phil 4:15-16).  Apparently he and Paul are united when the latter returns to Macedonia (Acts 20:6 ff) and some have suggested that he was one of the bearers of the second letter to the Corinthians, “the brother whose fame in the things of the gospel has spread through all the churches ...” (2 Cor 8:18).

 

(11)      The final “we” passage locates the writer of Acts in Rome at the time of Paul’s imprisonment, and from Paul’s own letters we learn that Luke was with him during his first imprisonment when Colossians and Philemon, two of the so-called “prison epistles” were written (Col 4:14; Phile 24).  However he was not with Paul when another of the “prison epistles,” Philippians, was written (Phil 2:20).

 

(12)      The idea that the language of Luke-Acts is that of a physician has been much debated over recent years.  Evidently W. K. Hobart in his The Medical Language of St Luke published in 1882 attempted to prove that the language of Luke-Acts is that of a physician, while H. J. Cadbury (The Style and Literary Method of Luke) later called this thesis “an immense fallacy.” Cadbury argued that the style of Luke-Acts is simply that of an educated man. Many today take the mediating position that the language of Luke-Acts is consistent with the idea that the writer had a medical interest, and they illustrate this by comparing certain parallel passages in Matthew, Mark and Luke, such as the following:

 

·        Matthew and Mark speak of Peter’s mother-in-law as having a fever, whereas Luke speaks of a “high” fever (Matt 8:14; Mk 1:30; Lk 4:38).

 

·        Matthew and Mark speak of a “leper” (Matt. 8:2; Mk 1:40) but Luke notes that the man was “full of leprosy” (Lk 5:12).

 

·        Mark tells us that the woman with an issue of blood “had endured much at the hands of many physicians, and had spent all that she had and was not helped at all, but rather had grown worse” (Mk 5:26) but Luke simply says that she “could not be healed by anyone” (Lk 8:43) bringing out the fact that her condition was beyond the medicine of the day.

 

·        Luke alone notes that it is the right hand that is withered (Lk 6:6 cf Matt 12:10; Mk 3:1) and the right ear of the high priest’s servant which is cut off (Lk 22:50; cf Matt 26:51; Mk 14:47).

 

We might add that the author of Luke “has the physician’s interest in the sick and afflicted as shown in the large number of miracles of healing narrated “(International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia).

 

(13)      As a physician, Luke was an educated man, and Greek scholars tell us that the writer of the third Gospel was well educated, possessed literary ability, exhibits a rich vocabulary and has a good command of Koine Greek.  Early tradition has it that Luke was a Greek and this may be supported by the fact that in Acts 1:19 Aramaic is described as “their (Jerusalem dwellers) language.”  Eusebius (Church History 3: 4) records a tradition that Luke was from the city of Antioch and certainly he shows an interest in Antioch connections (eg Acts 11:19-27; 13:1; 14:26; 15:22; 18:22).  The author of Acts clearly had a good knowledge of the eastern Mediterranean, a fact which has led some to suggest that he may have worked as a ship’s doctor at some time.  Tenney says that “the twenty-seventh chapter of Acts gives the best account of ancient shipping that has come down from antiquity.”

 

(14)      When Paul wrote 2nd Timothy during his second imprisonment at Rome, Luke was his companion at Rome (2 Tim 4:11).  Likely Paul’s imprisonment lasted from about 65-67 AD and we have no reliable information about Luke’s activities after this time.  Among various traditions which have been preserved is the following:

 

“Luke is a Syrian of Antioch, a physician by profession.  Having been a disciple of the apostles and later having accompanied Paul until his martyrdom, he served the Lord without distraction, unmarried, childless, and he fell asleep at the age of eighty-four in Boeotia, full of the Holy Spirit” (Anti-Marcionite Prologue).

 

Other early tradition states that he died at the age of seventy-four in Bithynia ( Boeotia?), and that he preached in Dalmatia, Gallia (which may be Galatia), Italy, and Macedonia.  In his De Viris Illustribus (On Illustrious Men), Jerome says that Luke was “a physician of Antioch…not unskilled in the Greek language.”  He adds:

 

“Some suppose that whenever Paul in his epistle says ‘according to my gospel’ he means the book of Luke and that Luke not only was taught the gospel history by the apostle Paul who was not with the Lord in the flesh, but also by other apostles. This he too at the beginning of his work declares, saying ‘Even as they delivered unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word.’ So he wrote the gospel as he had heard it, but composed the Acts of the Apostles as he himself had seen.  He was buried at Constantinople to which city, in the twentieth year of Constantius, his bones together with the remains of Andrew the apostle were transferred.” 

 

Composition:  Date, Place and Destination

 

(1)          Clearly Luke’s Gospel is dated earlier than the book of Acts, and as we shall see in our discussion of Acts, this later work contains no reference to events later than 62 AD.  For example, nothing in Acts suggests that the Neronian persecution of Christians following the great fire of Rome in 64 AD had begun. It is likely then that the book of Acts was written not long after 62 AD.  If this is the case, Luke’s Gospel must have been written earlier than this date.  Since Luke-Acts are companion volumes, it is likely both were composed at about the same time.  Thus a date about 60-62 AD for the third Gospel would seem reasonable.  Some suggest that Luke may have written this Gospel while Paul was in prison at Caesarea (Acts 23:23 ff).

 

(2)          On the other hand, the following statement is found in the Muratorian canon:

 

“Moreover the Acts of the Apostles are included in one book.  Luke addressed them to the most excellent Theophilus, because the several events took place when he was present; he makes this plain by the omission of the passion of Peter and of the journey of Paul when he left Rome for Spain.”

 

This suggests that the reason Luke did not provide an account of Paul’s activities after his release was that he was not an eyewitness of these events.  If this is the case, our argument that Luke pre-dates Acts does not hold water. 

F. F. Bruce argues:

 

“Again, whether Paul’s execution was or was not an incident in the Neronian persecution, the fact that it is not mentioned in Acts is not a decisive argument for the dating of the book:  Luke’s goal has been reached when he has brought Paul to Rome and left him preaching the gospel freely there” (The Book of Acts).

 

Bruce continues:

 

“One consideration, admittedly subjective, is the perspective from which the work has been composed.  The relations between Peter, Paul, and James of Jerusalem are presented in a way which would be more natural if all three of them had died and the author had been able to view their lasting achievements in a more satisfactory proportion than would have been so easily attained if they had still been alive.”

 

However the simplest explanation for Luke’s failure to refer to events later than 62 AD in the book of Acts is that this document was written about this time.

 

(3)          According to the Anti-Marcionite prologue, this Gospel was composed “in the regions around Achaia.”  In view of Paul’s work in this region, this is not unlikely.  John Gill has:

 

“(According) to the titles prefixed to the Syriac and Persic versions, he wrote it in Alexandria:  the former of these runs thus:  ‘the Gospel of Luke, the Evangelist, which he spake and published in Greek in Alexandria.’  And the latter thus:  ‘the Gospel of Luke, which he wrote in the Greek tongue in Alexandria of Egypt’” (Exposition of the Entire Bible). 

 

(4)          The recipient of Luke-Acts is one Theophilus (Lk. 1:3; Acts 1:1) but clearly it was intended for a wider readership.  The name means something like “god-lover” “god-beloved” or “friend of God” and perhaps he was Luke’s literary patron or publisher.  Luke speaks of the things which Theophilus had been “taught” and from the use of this word (katechethes) some have concluded that Theophilus was a Christian.  However, while this man had doubtless received some instructions in the faith, the use of this term does not prove that he was a Christian.

 

“(William) Ramsay holds that ‘most excellent’ was a title like ‘Your Excellency’ and shows that he held office, perhaps a Knight.  So of Felix (Act 23:26) and Festus (Act 26:25).  The adjective does not occur in the dedication in Act 1:1”

(A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures).

 

However, while the term “most excellent” may suggest that Theophilus (“lover of God”) was an official or an aristocrat, this is not certain.

 

 

Purpose, Theme and Characteristics

 

Luke introduces his Gospel by explaining his purpose in writing:

 

 “Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word have handed them down to us, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; so that you might know the exact truth about the things you have been taught” (Lk 1:1-4).

 

Several important points are delineated in this important opening statement:

 

·        Other accounts were in existence when Luke wrote (v 1) and his statement here need not be taken to mean that they were all inaccurate.  By evaluating and combining these accounts, Luke obtains valuable material for his Gospel.

 

·        Luke speaks of “the things accomplished (tōn peplērōphorēmenōn) among us.” The word peplērōphorēmenōn is from plērophoreo and “When used of things it has the notion of completing or finishing (2 Tim 4:5, 17)” (A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures).  “And if ‘fulfilled’ is the right translation, it seems to indicate that these events were neither random nor unexpected, but took place in fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy” (John R. W. Stott, The Message of Acts).

 

·        The things fulfilled “among us” were then “handed down to us” by those who were contemporary eyewitnesses “from the first.”  Luke excludes himself from this group.

 

·        Luke engaged in personal research.  Dr Luke also consulted eyewitnesses (having had plenty of opportunity to do so – Lk 1:2).  He “carefully investigated everything from the beginning” (Lk 1:3 - NIV) meaning that his historical research is accurate (and of course guided by the Holy Spirit).  He set forth his account “in consecutive order” (NASB) or wrote “an orderly account,” (KJV).  This does not mean that Luke is strictly chronological (although for the most part he is) but rather that there is a plan, purpose, clarity and orderliness to his account.

 

·        Luke wrote in order that Theophilus “might know the exact truth” about the things he had been taught concerning Christ and ultimately so that all, in every age, would know the truth that sets one free (Jn 8:31).  

 

“Thus this preface shows the supreme purpose of Luke was to confirm the belief of Theophilus…and to deepen his conviction of the truth of the gospel story. Surely such an introduction must remind every reader that our Christian faith is based upon an impregnable foundation of historical fact” (Charles R. Erdman, The Gospel of Luke).

 

 

Luke’s Portrait of Jesus

 

If Matthew pictures Jesus as the promised Messiah of Jewish scripture and Mark pictures Him as the faithful suffering servant of God, Luke tells us “in more detail than in any other Gospel” about “the perfect humanity of Jesus” (Zondervan). Thus:

 

“Christ is depicted not so much as the Messiah of the OT as the Redeemer of the whole world…  It is the universal Gospel of the Saviour of all men” (ibid).

 

Significantly “St. Luke alone, in his short resume of the Baptist’s preaching, dwells upon that peculiar feature of Isaiah upon which that great forerunner evidently laid great stress, ‘All flesh shall see the salvation of God’” (H. D. M. Spence Pulpit Commentary).

 

Luke pictures Jesus as the ideal Son of Man who shared our sorrows and bore our sins.  The third gospel places much emphasis upon the perfect humanity of Christ. He is the universal Christ.  Many are of the opinion that Luke’s hand can be seen in the book of Hebrews, where Christ is presented as a sympathetic High Priest who is able to sympathize with our human weaknesses, (Heb 4:15) and certainly in Luke’s Gospel more than any other, Jesus’ deep sympathy for the disadvantaged, the outcasts and the vulnerable is evident.  The Greeks had an interest in the concept of the perfect man, and Luke presents Jesus as the embodiment of this perfection.  In keeping with this portrait of Jesus we note the following:

 

·        While Matthew traces Christ’s genealogy back to Abraham and stresses His Jewish origins, Luke traces His roots all the way back to Adam, drawing attention to His humanity (Lk 3:23-28).  It is Jesus as a member of the human race, a son of Adam (rather than Jesus the Jewish Messiah, a son of Abraham and David - Matt 1:1) which is the focus of Luke’s Gospel.  Luke cites Isaiah’s “And all flesh (mankind) shall see the salvation of God” (3:4-6, esp. 6) and shows Christ’s interest in Samaritans and mankind in general (the angel speaks of peace “among men” not simply among Jews (2:14).     

 

·        In the first two chapters, Luke gives us the fullest account of Jesus’ birth, childhood, domestic and social life contained in the Gospels.  In these chapters Luke draws attention to His childhood, His submission to His parents and growth as a human being.  Again this is consistent with the emphasis upon Jesus’ shared humanity, and also with his interest in vulnerable groups like children.  On three occasions (7:12; 8:42; 9:38) Jesus is said to perform miracles upon an only child.

 

·        Only Luke tells us that Jesus commended members of a despised race, the Samaritans (10:30-37; 17:11-19).  We recall that in the parable designed to answer the question “who is my neighbour” (10:29), it is the Good Samaritan (a member of a race despised by the Jews) who exemplifies neighbourliness.  The teaching of this parable is broad and universal.  Luke also records that the leper who returned to thank Christ was a Samaritan (Lk 17:16).

 

·        Luke often calls our attention to Jesus’ concern for women.  For example, the widow of Nain (7:11-15) and Mary called Magdalene (8:2-3).  He demonstrates His willingness to engage them in conversation (10:38-42). Much attention is given to Mary and Elizabeth in chapters 1 and 2 while only in this Gospel is mention made of Anna the prophetess (2:36-38) and the woman who anointed Jesus’ feet (7:36 ff).  Luke alone records Jesus’ parable of the persistent widow (Lk18:1-8). 

 

·        In fact Jesus, the sympathetic High Priest is the friend of all outcasts (Lk 15:1-2; 17:11-19).  Luke alone records Jesus’ statement that we should do kindnesses to those who cannot return them (Lk 14:12-14), and he alone records the pledge of Zacchaeus, a tax collector, to make fourfold restitution and to give half his goods to the poor (Lk 19:18).  Again, tax collectors were a hated group.  Jesus’ great sympathy is brought out in the beautiful parables of the son who came home (15:11-32), the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) and the Pharisees and the publican (18:9-14).  Shepherds too were held in low esteem and Luke records that they are among the first to know of Jesus (2:8 ff).  In Luke, the first beatitude reads “Blessed are you who are poor” (6:20) and Jesus’ host is told to “invite the poor, the crippled, the lame and the blind” (14:13).

 

·        It is in keeping with Luke’s purpose to record Jesus’ application of Isaiah 61 to Himself:  “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor, He has sent Me to proclaim release to the captives, and recovery of sight to the blind, to set free those who are downtrodden, to proclaim the favourable year of the Lord” (4:18-19). Indeed “the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost” (19:10).  Jesus then is man’s compassionate redeemer (1:68; 2:38).

 

 

Audience

 

“If Mark’s is the Gospel for the Romans and Matthew’s for the Jews, the Gospel of Luke is for the Gentile world.  He shows the sympathy of Jesus for the poor and the outcast.  Luke understands women and children and so is the universal Gospel of mankind in all phases and conditions.  It is often called the Gospel of womanhood, of infancy, of prayer, of praise” (A.T. Robertson Word Pictures).

 

Several pieces of evidence support the view that Luke is writing initially for a Gentile audience.  As we have seen, Christ’s genealogy is traced back to Adam rather than to Abraham (chapter 3), emphasising His humanity rather than His Jewishness (cp with Matthew).  Luke often explains Jewish places (Lk 4:31; 8:26; 21:37; 23:51; 24:13), which suggests that his audience lacks familiarity with Palestine, while he uses Roman emperors to date Jesus’ birth and John’s preaching.  Also noticeable is that fact that little is said about Jesus fulfilling prophecies of the Jewish scripture and usually reference to prophecy is from the lips of Jesus rather than from Luke directly. In Luke’s “Sermon on the Plain” (6:17-49), there is no emphasis on the Old Testament law, a noticeable contrast with Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount (chapters 5-7).  There are various other indications that Luke “comes to the interpretation of Jesus from a world-standpoint and does not have to overcome the Pharisaic limitations incident to one reared in Palestine...  He...stands outside the pale of Judaism and can see more clearly the world-relations and world destiny of the new movement” (International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia).

 

 

Other features

 

(1)          Chapters 1 and 2 of this Gospel (excluding the introduction – Lk 1:1-4) have a pronounced Semitic flavour, possibly because Luke has preserved the tone of his source materials and is emphasizing the connection between the Old Testament and the New Testament (eg John the Baptist is pictured as a successor to the Old Testament prophets.)  This Semitic influence is particularly evident in four joyful “songs” preserved by Luke in these two chapters:

 

·        The Magnificat - Mary’s hymn of praise (1:46-56) - “My soul exalts the Lord…”

 

·        Benedictus - Zechariah’s prophecy (1:67-80) - “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel...”

 

·        Glory in Excelsius - The heavenly host (2:14) - “Glory to the Lord in the highest...”

 

·        Song of Simeon - Simeon’s song (2:29-32) - “my eyes have seen Thy salvation...”

 

Perhaps in these chapters Luke is emphasising the Jewish roots of Christianity. Also, it is likely that Luke is here making use of early Semitic source material.  

 

(2)          Luke’s Gospel is the most literary of the four.  Hendriksen describes Luke as “a highly cultured author, writing flawless and elegant Greek” and Walter L. Liefeld tells us that the “introduction to Luke is a long, carefully constructed sentence in the tradition of the finest historical works in Greek literature” (The Expositor's Bible Commentary).  Robert M. Grant says:

“The preface marks a higher level of literary culture than almost anything else in the New Testament (with the exception of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in antiquity sometimes ascribed to the same author).  It differs from ordinary prefaces because it does not state who the author is; it resembles them in its statements about (1) the occasion of the work, (2) its reliance on trustworthy materials, and (3) its insistence upon the competence of the author.  It is thus evident that the author intends to write a history” (A Historical Introduction to the New Testament).

 

It is likely that the style of the introduction signals that Luke is writing for the entire Greek speaking world.  Moreover, Luke anchors the events of Christ’s life firmly in the events of the time, emphasising the historicity of Jesus.  For example:

 

·        The announcement of John’s birth took place in “the days of Herod, king of Judea” (1:5).

 

·        The census which brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem was in the days of Caesar Augustus at the time when “Quirinius was governor of Syria”

(2:1-2).

 

·        Some six chronological items tell us when it was that the word of the Lord came to John, namely “(1) in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, (2) when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea and (3) Herod was the tetrarch of Galilee, (4) and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and (5) Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene, in the (6) high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas...”

 

We will say something about Luke’s trustworthiness as an historian when we look at the book of Acts.  Luke’s account is firmly fixed in history and although the Gospels are not intended to be biographies of Jesus, this comes closest.  Luke is stressing the fact that he is describing real history, and perhaps he is attempting to answer critics who have dismissed the stories of Jesus as myth and legend.

 

(3)          “Luke’s Gospel is the longest book in the New Testament, and it includes a good deal of material not found elsewhere” (Carson et al).  In this context it is interesting that of the 15 Gospel accounts of Jesus praying, 11 are found in this Gospel.  Jesus prays at His baptism (3:21), after healing the leper (5:16), just prior to choosing his disciples (6:12) and challenging them with the question: “Who do the multitudes say that I am?” (9:18).  He also prays at the transfiguration (9:29), just before teaching the disciples about prayer (11:10) and when suffering at the hands of His executioners (23:34).  Luke records some teaching on prayer which is not to be found elsewhere.  Responding to the disciples request for instruction on prayer (“Lord, teach us to pray just as John also taught his disciples” – 11:1), Jesus tells the parable of the Friend at Midnight (11:5-13) which stresses the need for persistence in prayer.  Also unique to Luke are the parables of the Persevering Widow and the Self Righteous Pharisee (18:1-8; 9-14) which emphasise the need for perseverance and humility in prayer.  Jesus, Luke’s ideal man, depends upon His Father and communes often with Him.  Of the large number of parables recorded in this book, some 17 are unique to this account.

(4)          Luke’s Gospel is “also the Gospel of the Holy Spirit” (Zondervan).  It has more references to the Holy Spirit than Matthew and Mark together.  Luke draws our attention to the involvement of the Holy Spirit in the lives of John the Baptist (1:15), Mary (1:35), Elizabeth (1:41), Zacharias (1:67), Simeon (2:25-26) and Jesus Himself (4:1). Tenney points out:

 

“The whole life of Jesus was lived by the Spirit.  He was conceived by the Spirit, (1:35) baptized by the Spirit (3:22) tested by the Spirit (4:1), empowered by the Spirit for His ministry (4:14, 18), cheered by the Spirit, (10:21).”

 

Moreover,

 

“He taught that the Father gives the Spirit to those who ask (11:13), and the very end of the gospel includes the promise that the disciples would be ‘clothed with power from on high’ (24:49) which surely refers to the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost” (Carson et al).

 

Later we will see that the book of Acts explains more fully the activity of the Spirit in the early church.

 

 

Outline

 

Earlier we noted that “Matthew, Mark and Luke structure the ministry of Jesus according to a general geographical sequence:  ministry in Galilee, withdrawal to the North (with Peter’s confession as a climax and point of transition), ministry in Judea and Perea while Jesus is on his way to Jerusalem (less clear in Luke), and final ministry in Jerusalem” (Carson et al, see our The Testaments).

 

We concluded our survey of Mark with a detailed outline of that Gospel because it is evident that in keeping with their own plan and purpose, Matthew and Luke make use of Mark.  According to Grant, “in general (Luke’s) use of Mark can be summarized thus:

 

 

 

John the Baptist and Jesus Introduced - Chapter 1:1 to Chapter 2:52

 

 

1:1-4      Dedicatory prefaces

 

Luke introduces his purpose for writing and anchors the events of Christ’s life firmly in history.

 

1:5 -2:40            Jesus and John: birth and childhood

 

Unlike Matthew and Mark, Luke presents an extensive birth narrative, devoting about 100 verses to the birth of Jesus and John.  More than 30 verses are devoted to Jesus’ eighth day, fortieth day and visit to Jerusalem at age twelve.  Four joyful “songs” preserved by Luke punctuate this section.

 

 

Preparation for ministry - Chapter 3:1 to Chapter 4:13

 

 

3:1-20    John the Baptist

 

The chronological note relating to John’s ministry (3:1-2) is typically Lukan, since as we have seen, Luke anchors the events of Christ’s life firmly in the events of the time, emphasising the historicity of Jesus.  Only Luke records the questions of various groups and John’s response (3:10-14).

 

 

3:20-21  Jesus’ Baptism

 

 

3:23-38  Jesus’ genealogy

 

While Matthew traces Christ’s genealogy back to Abraham and stresses His Jewish origins, Luke traces His roots all the way back to Adam drawing attention to His humanity.

 

 

4:1-13    Jesus’ temptation

 

Ministry in Galilee - Chapter 4:14 to Chapter 9:50

 

 

4:14-15  Jesus’ ministry begins

 

“And Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit” (v 14). It is likely there was an interval of about a year between Lk 4:13 and 4:14, during which the events related in John 1:19-4:42 took place.

 

 

4:16-30  Jesus’ rejection at Nazareth

 

For some reason Luke gives an account of Jesus’ rejection at the beginning of his account of the Galilean ministry, whereas Mark and Matthew place it at a later date.

 

4:31-37  The healing of the man with an unclean spirit

 

From this point, Luke’s account of the Galilean ministry tends to parallel Mark’s account at various points (but see Grant’s comment above).  Luke’s record of the initial phase of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee ends at 6:16 and proceeds as follows:  the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law (4:38-41); preaching to other towns (4:42-44); a miraculous catch of fish and Simon’s call (5:1-11 - unique to Luke); a  leper healed (5:12-16); a paralytic healed (5:17-26); the call of Levi (5:27-32); the fasting question (5:33-39); Sabbath controversies (6:1-11); the twelve chosen (6:12-16).

 

“The choice of the twelve apostles marks a new and important period in the public ministry of our Lord” (Erdman) and introduces a section which continues through to 8:56.  Jesus’ Sermon on the Plain follows the selection of the twelve in Luke’s account (6:17-49).  This great sermon is probably identical to Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5, 6, 7), although much material of interest to the Jews is omitted and four “woes” are added (vv 24-26).  Luke’s record continues as follows:  a Centurion’s faith rewarded (7:11-17); the raising of the widow’s son at Nain (7:11-17 - unique to Luke); John the Baptist’s doubts answered (7:18-35); Jesus anointed by a sinful woman at the home of Simon the Pharisee (7:36-50 - unique to Luke and not to be confused with another incident cf Matt 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; John 12:1-8); Jesus’ company including ministering women (8:1-3 - unique to Luke); the parable of the sower (8:1-15) and the lamp (8:16-18); Jesus’ identification of His true family (8:19-21); the calming of the storm (8:22-25); the healing of a demon possessed man in the country of the Gerasenes (8:26-39); two miracles of healing (Jairus daughter and the woman with a haemorrhage - 8:40-56).

 

 

9:1-50    Close of the Galilean ministry

 

This section closes out Jesus’ Galilean ministry and begins with an account of the sending out of the twelve and a report about King Herod’s perplexity (9:1-9).  Luke’s account of the feeding of the 5,000 (recorded by all four Gospels) follows (9:10-17). This brings us to the climax of Jesus’ Galilean ministry (9:18-50) which begins with Peter’s confession of Christ and Jesus’ first clear prediction of His impending death (9:18-27).  This is followed by the transfiguration (9:28-56); the account of the demoniac boy (9:37-45); Jesus’ second prediction of His death (9:44) and His teaching about true greatness (9:46-50).

 

 

 

The Central Section - Chapter 9:51 to Chapter 18:14

 

Much of the material in this section is found in other contexts in Matthew and Mark, but these Gospel accounts contain no counterpart to this section of Luke.  From chapter 4 onwards, Luke parallels Mark to a great extent, and this is also the case for some of the closing material of Luke’s Gospel (Lk 18:15 ff).  However, this parallel is not evident in the Central Section, and what’s more in this section, Luke frequently departs from Matthew as well.

 

Lk 9:51 states that “When the days were approaching for (Jesus’) ascension, He was determined to go to Jerusalem” but this statement is not followed by a sequential account of a direct journey from North (Galilee) to South (Jerusalem).  There are various indications that Jesus is moving towards Jerusalem, including the following: “(But the Samaritans) did not receive Him, because He was travelling toward Jerusalem” (9:52); “Now as they were travelling along, He entered a village; and a woman named Martha welcomed Him into her home” (in Bethany, close to Jerusalem) (10:38); “And He was passing through from one city and village to another, teaching, and proceeding on His way to Jerusalem” (13:22); “While He was on the way to Jerusalem, He was passing between Samaria and Galilee” (Lk 17:11). Most commentators take one of the following positions:

 

·        Jesus made several trips from North to South during the final year of His ministry.  Some who take this position argue that Lk 9:51 corresponds to Jn 7:2, that Lk 13:22 corresponds to Jn 11:17 and that Lk 17:11 corresponds to Jn 12:1.

 

·        Luke describes one continuous journey from Galilee to Jerusalem, and Jesus’ itinerary takes Him from Capernaum to Jerusalem by way of Perea and Jericho. 

 

Although Luke’s indefiniteness as to time and place makes certainty impossible, it is likely the second view is correct.  Jesus’ journey from Galilee to Jerusalem may have been circuitous but His mind is set upon Jerusalem and impending events in that city.

 

Among the chief characteristics of this section are the following:

 

·        It is rich in parables, containing 21 of the 27 parables found in Luke’s Gospel and 16 of the 18 parables which are unique to Luke (eg the parable of the Good Samaritan and the parable of the Prodigal Son).

·        It contains narratives and sayings not found elsewhere, such as the account of the cleansing of the ten lepers.

 

·        Much of the Lord’s teaching in this section is directed to the disciples.

 

·        There are a number of warnings to the wealthy, the complacent and religious leaders (eg 11:37-54).  

 

 

 

The Last Stages of the Journey - Chapter 18:15 to Chapter 19:27

 

From Luke 18:15 this Gospel begins to run parallel with Mark again.  Luke tells us about Jesus and the little children (18:15-17), the Lord’s encounter with the rich young ruler (18:18-30), His third passion prediction (18:31-34), the healing of a blind beggar at Jericho (18:35-43), the encounter with Zacchaeus the tax collector (19:1-10 - unique to Luke) and the parable of the ten minas (19:11-27).

 

 

The Final Section - Chapter 19:28 to Chapter 24:53

 

The final section of Luke’s Gospel records the final controversies, the betrayal of Jesus, His trial, death, resurrection and ascension.  Passion Week covers Lk 19:28-25:56 and chapter 24 gives an account of Jesus’ resurrection and ascension.

 

 

19:28-21:38       Climax of Jesus’ ministry

 

Following the account of Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem on the Sunday of passion Week (19:28-44), Luke describes His cleansing of the Temple (19:45-48) on the Monday (without providing any chronological note).  Jesus’ teaching in the Temple area follows and includes the following:  His response to a question about His authority (20:1-8); the parable of the tenants (20:9-19); Jesus’ teaching on payment of taxes (20:20-26); His response to the Sadducees’ question about marriage and the resurrection (20:27-40); Jesus’ own question about “David’s son” (20:41-47); His teaching on giving inspired by the widow’s offering (21:1-4) and his warning about  Jerusalem’s impending destruction  (21:5-38).

 

 

22:1-23:56         Death and burial

 

Earlier we noted that in keeping with their own plan and purpose, Matthew and Luke make use of Mark.  Here, Luke chapters 22 and 23 parallel Mark chapters 14 and 15 where there are corresponding sections.  Luke here records: the plot to kill Jesus (22:1-6); the preparation for the Passover (7-13); the account of  the Last Supper (14-23); the disciples’ dispute about greatness (24-30); prediction of Peter’s denial (31-34); teaching about a new situation to be confronted (35-38); Jesus’ prayer on the Mount of Olives (22:39-46); His betrayal (22:47-53); Peter’s threefold denial (54-62); the mocking of Jesus (22:63-65); trial before Jewish leaders (22:66-71); trial before Pilate and Herod and release of Barabbas (23:1-25); Jesus’ crucifixion and the request of the penitent thief (26-43); Jesus death (44-49) and burial (50-56).

 

 

Chapter 24        Jesus’ Resurrection and ascension

 

Terrified women and an empty tomb (24:1-12); Jesus’ journey to Emmaus with Cleopas and a companion (24:13-35); His appearance to the disciples (24:36-49).  (Some find two appearances here, the first in vv 36-43 and the second in vv 44-49); the ascension of Jesus (24:50-53).