Choose just one of the two options below to complete this assignment. Class lesson material can be used in addition to the recommended sources. Include at least one historical factor and at least one reference to each Gospel studied.
There are three pieces of evidence to consider: These all not only affirm authorship of the gospel by Luke, but Lukan authorship for the book of Acts, too. Thus the external evidence is both unanimous and early.
The tradition could hardly be stronger. Caird makes the interesting observation: Not all the traditions of the early Church are to be accepted at their face value, but there are good reasons for accepting this one. In this respect the literary conventions of the first century were stricter than ours, which allow an author to hide behind a pen-name.
Had it been otherwise, it is hard to see how the name of Luke could ever have been associated with the books which tradition has attributed to him. Luke can scarcely be described as a prominent figure in the annals of first-century Christianity.
Studies done on the singular readings of D by G. But in particular, the anti-Semitic strain of D is found almost exclusively in Luke-Acts. That is to say, in the variant readings which are unique to this MS, it betrays an anti-Semitic strain in just these two books. What is to account for this? Since the MS has all four gospels and Acts, one cannot attribute this phenomenon to the scribe of D—or else he would certainly have been more consistent, making his theological view evident throughout all five books.
Nor can we attribute this to Luke himself, for the Western text is decidedly inferior and secondary to the Alexandrian, in spite of its antiquity.
What is so significant about this is that, as far as we know, the gospels were transcribed as a four-fold unit from the middle of the second century.
Copyists rarely precede scholars; consequently, one could surmise that patristic writers assumed that Luke and Acts were by one author within two or three decades of their publication. Internal Evidence There are three pieces of internal evidence which corroborate with the external evidence: Unity of Authorship of Luke and Acts 8 There are five arguments which Guthrie uses to show common authorship: It may safely be concluded that the evidence is very strong for linking the two books as the work of one man, a conclusion which few modern scholars would dispute.
This architectonic pattern which has Gospel and Acts correspond in content and in sequence at many points is due to deliberate editorial activity by the author of Luke-Acts. On this supposition, this particular companion 1 first joins Paul at Philippi [sic: It would also mean that the author could not be any of those companions of Paul who are mentioned by name in these sections Silas, Timothy, Sopater, Aristarchus, Secundus, Gaius, Tychicus, Trophimus.
Indirect Evidence in Support of Lukan Authorship There are four main pieces of indirect evidence which support Lukan authorship. There is a definite probability that the author of Luke-Acts was one of them.
Hobart wrote his celebrated The Medical Language of St. This, however, was challenged by H. Further, when one compares Mark 5: In sum, the internal evidence certainly has nothing against Lukan authorship, though it clearly falls short of proof. This is all the more reason to accept Lukan authorship, for this is the unanimous testimony from the fathers: Since the same source adds other, extremely doubtful information, all of the above is suspect as well.
Arguments against Lukan Authorship There are principally three arguments against Lukan authorship.A)”The Gospel was written to prove to non-believers that Jesus Christ is the Son of God” Examine this claim regarding the purpose of Luke’s Gospel.
Thank you for visiting M & A Collectables where you will find a truly diverse selection of collectables with an emphasis on WW1 Military memorabilia including medals, plaques, badges and insignia together with many other interesting and unusual items..
Every effort is made to photograph and describe items correctly but in the event of dissatisfaction, would advise that we have a full money.
Summary. The Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts are closely related. Written by the same author and for the same purpose, both were addressed to a Christian named Theophilus and were designed for the purpose of presenting to him a complete and well authenticated narrative of the early history of the Christian movement.
The Gospel of Luke was written to Theophilus, meaning "the one who loves God." Historians are not sure who this Theophilus (mentioned in Luke ) was, although most likely, he was a Roman with an intense interest in the newly forming Christian religion.
Pamela Abbott and Claire Wallace Pamela Abbott Director of the Centre for Equality and Diversity at Glasgow Caledonian University.
35 Unlike Matthew who used Mark as the narrative framework for his gospel. 36 See the purpose of Acts. 37 Due to the length of the scroll. 38 Guthrie, 39 Caird, Luke, Caird goes on to give a decent discussion on Luke’s accuracy as a historian ().