Gospel of Luke

The Gospel of Luke is called "the most beautiful book ever written."[1] It is the first historian's account of the life of Jesus, as written in perfect Greek.[2] Luke did not claim to be an eyewitness, but instead one who has "carefully investigated everything from the beginning" (Luke 1:3 ) who wanted to "write an orderly account" so that the Greek man Theophilus (or the entire world, as the name means "loved by God") would "know the certainty of the things" he had been taught. (Luke 1:3-4) The author Luke was a Gentile, as confirmed by Paul at Colossians 4:11,14. The Gospel of Luke is the 3rd and longest Gospel (indeed, the longest book in the entire New Testament), placed after Matthew and Mark and before the Gospel of John. Papyrus 4 and Papyrus 75 are two early surviving scrolls of this Gospel. Luke implies the existence of Gospels before his in Luke 1:1-3 : "Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us ... it seemed good to me ... to write an orderly account."

Unique to the Gospel of Luke are:

* The beautiful, emotion-inducing parables of the prodigal son, the good Samaritan, and the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31 );
* The most controversial parable in the Bible: the Parable of the Dishonest Manager, Luke 16:1-13 , and the parable of the fig tree;
* The encounter with disciples on the road to Emmaus, whose "eyes were kept from recognizing him";[3]
* The comparison trap highlighted by the Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector, Luke 18:9-14 ;
* The promise of paradise to one crucified alongside Jesus;
* this Gospel and the Gospel of John praise the Samaritans the most; and
* Details about origins and birth of Jesus.

The witnesses to Jesus on the road to Emmaus were not any of the Apostles or Mark, and thus only the historian (Luke) could describe that encounter.

Luke was probably inspired by the Epistles to the Hebrews, which is perhaps the best-written Greek work in all of history, and which some of Luke's writings (especially parts of the Acts of the Apostles) appear to imitate in style and word choice. Luke is considered one of the synoptic gospels and Luke is generally considered to have borrowed from Mark as one of his sources, as did Matthew. It is unknown if Matthew or Luke borrowed from each other or which came first; some material is common to Matthew and Luke but not found in Mark.

## Contents

* 1 Authorship
* 2 Place of Writing
* 3 Date
* 4 See also
* 5 References

## Authorship[edit]

This tenth-century Egyptian codex was donated to Pope Eugenius IV by the Coptic delegates at the Council of Ferrara-Florence. Translated from a Coptic original, it is one of the earliest Arabic versions of any part of the New Testament, none of which can be dated before the late eighth or ninth centuries.

The Gospel of Luke does not name its author, but as a companion volume to the book of Acts, it can be inferred by the use of "we" when describing part of Paul's journeys that the author traveled with Paul and Luke, the doctor, becomes the most likely candidate. The extremely sophisticated Greek of Luke also argues for a man who was very educated as does his attention to detail and the medical language in use matches that of other ancient Greek doctors. The ancient church father Irenaeus ascribed the work to Luke as does the Muratorian Canon. It is also mentioned by Clemente of Alexandria.

## Place of Writing[edit]

Based on the descriptions of places in Palestine, it is generally assumed that the reader was unfamiliar with that land. It's not known where Luke was written, but it is assumed it is outside of Palestine and to an audience that is non-Jewish.

## Date[edit]

The Gospel of Luke is generally believed to have been written in the A.D. 70's or 80's, but it is also possible it was written in the late 50's or early 60's based upon the abrupt ending in Acts. Columbia University researchers estimate a date of authorship of A.D. 85 (plus or minus five or ten years), when Roman Emperor Domitian reigned.[4]

The arguments for an earlier date include the following:

* Why wouldn't Luke have continued the history in Acts if he had written it later?
* Why wouldn't he have mentioned the martyrdom of Paul?
* Why is there no mention of the fall of Jerusalem (which took place in 70 A.D.)?

## See also[edit]

* Luke and the Census
* Gospel of Luke (Translated)

## References[edit]

1. ↑ See, e.g., NRSV Study Bible at 1502.
2. ↑ The Gospel of Luke is the finest Greek among the Gospels, while the Epistle to the Hebrews is the finest Greek in all of literature.
3. ↑ Luke 24:13-35.
4. ↑ https://www.college.columbia.edu/core/node/1754#:~:text=The Gospel According to Luke,middle of the third century.

v • d • e

Books of the New Testament

The Gospel|

According to Matthew • According to Mark • According to Luke • According to John

History|

Acts of the Apostles

Epistles|

Romans • I Corinthians • II Corinthians • Galatians • Ephesians • Phillipians • Colossians • I Thessalonians • II Thessalonians • I Timothy • II Timothy • Titus • Philemon • Hebrews • James • I Peter • II Peter • I John • II John • III John • Jude

Prophecy|

The Revelation to John