those delightful nuggets of rhetorical and theological truths that the author has artfully woven into the narrative. As we invest time and energy into the meaning of the text, may we also sit with prayerful hearts ready to receive the instruction and convictions of the Holy Spirit. Welcome aboard this journey through the Gospel of Luke.
1. P75, dated to 200 CE.
2. See Clement of Alexandria (second century) Strom. 5.12; Irenaeus (second century) Haer. 3.1.1; 3.14.1; Tertullian (second/third century) Marc. 4.2.2; 4.2.5; 4.5.3; Eusebius (third/fourth century) Hist. eccl. 3.4.6; Jerome (fourth/fifth century) Vir. ill. 7.1.
3. The Prologue to Luke within the Anti-Marcionite Prologues is dated to the second half of the second century (Koester 1992: 335).
4. Hagner 2012: 246; Edwards 2015: 6.
5. Marshall 1978: 35; Edwards 2015: 12–13.
6. Marshall 1978: 34–35; Edwards 2015: 11–12.
7. Carroll 2012: 4.
8. In the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, the verb euangelizō is found in contexts that speak of God’s salvation, e.g., Pss 11:1; 95:2; Isa 49:2; 52:7; Joel 3:5.
9. E.g., Matt 4:23; Mark 1:14; Rom 1:1; Rev 14:6. This term is used in Acts (15:7; 20:24) but not in Luke.
10. Green 1997: 2–6; Carroll 2012: 5–6.
11. E.g., Mark 1:14—3:19//Luke 4:14—6:16; Mark 11:27—13:32//Luke 20:1—21:33.
12. With the majority of NT scholars, I subscribe to both Markan priority and the four-document hypothesis to account for the literary relationship between the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). First, Mark is the earliest of the four canonical Gospels. Second, both Matthew and Luke used Mark and Q as their sources. Q, a hypothetical source, contains the sayings of Jesus common to both Matthew and Luke. Third, all remaining materials found only in Matthew is attributed to the M source, and those found only in Luke, to the L source. In short, these four documents (Mark, Q, M, and L), together explain how Matthew, Mark, and Luke can have overlapping materials but are not identical in order and detail.
13. E.g., 4:33–35; 5:17–26, 29–32; 7:11–15, 36–50; 17:11–19; 18:15–17, 35–43.
14. Even so, the name places in these stories, if plotted out on a map, show a rather meandering itinerary. The point is not to track Jesus’ geographical progress from town to town but to show a deliberate movement toward the climax of his mission.
15. E.g., Acts 9:2; 18:25–26; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22.
Luke 1
Prologue (1:1–4)
Prologues appear in a wide range of ancient Greco-Roman writings, from histories and biographies to rhetorical and scientific treatises. Generally they identify the author and the person to whom the work is dedicated, vouch for the importance of the subject matter, evaluate prior work of a similar nature that might warrant comparison or critique, and comment on the methodology that support the research and composition.16
The first four verses of Luke’s Gospel contain the classic components of a prologue. These verses comprise a single, elegant Greek sentence, its vocabulary and structure indicating a highly educated author. Luke is quick to admit that his project is not an original idea (1:1a). Yet even as he aligns himself with his predecessors he also distinguishes his work from theirs. It is not as though he found terrible fault with others’ narratives about Jesus. Rather, he gleans from available written sources, adds other traditions to which he has access, and creates an integrated piece to deepen his audience’s understanding of Jesus’ story.
Without mentioning Jesus by name just yet, Luke highlights the significance of his subject matter as pertaining to “events that have been fulfilled (peplērophorēmenōn) among us” (1:1b). The passive voice and perfect tense of the participle peplērophorēmenōn indicate that these events constitute a culmination of a plan or a promise that has its beginning far back in time. The passive here signifies a divine passive; God is bringing to fruition the plan that he has promised and put in motion. The perfect tense denotes a past event with ongoing present effects. The historical events that Luke is about to narrate belong to a larger framework, as their effects continue beyond the narrative time to the present.
Luke is not an eyewitness, but having obtained his materials from eyewitnesses, he meets the standard of credibility expected of an ancient historian.17 His sources were there from the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, and, after Jesus’ departure have since become “servants of the word” (1:2). “The word” refers to the message of salvation embodied in the life and mission of Jesus (Acts 4:4; 8:4). At the time of writing, some eyewitnesses might still be alive to recall and verify the sayings and deeds of Jesus. But even if some traditions came to him as second- or third-hand transmission, they could still be traced back to original eyewitnesses and thus deemed trustworthy.
Since the Jesus traditions were highly valued and used in teaching in the early church, maintaining accuracy in transmission was a high priority. A conscientious historian, Luke verifies his sources by “investigating everything carefully from the very first” (1:3a). Although the adverb anōthen can mean “for a long time” or “from the very first,” the latter translation is preferred. “From the very first” echoes verse 2 where it describes the eyewitnesses as “from the beginning.”
All this preparatory work culminates in an “orderly (kathexēs) account” for Theophilus to “know the certainty18 concerning the things about which [he has] been instructed” (1:4). Normally, kathexēs (“orderly”) implies a sequential arrangement, putting one thing after the other, as linearity is necessitated by a narrative genre. Having received some traditions in snippets and others in a more organized form, Luke would not have all the temporal information to lay out in exact chronological order when Jesus said and did all these things. His notion of an orderly account must be interpreted realistically as an order that makes the best sense in view of his ultimate goal. Luke’s aim is to assure his readers that what they have been taught is eminently trustworthy. Surely Luke’s checking for the veracity of these historical events is an essential part of the work of a careful historian, but as a writer he also has the prerogative to tell stories in a way that serves his theological agenda. Luke wants his readers to subscribe to his interpretation of Jesus’ significance in light of God’s overarching plan of salvation. The orderliness of the narrative serves his persuasive intention.
Theophilus, which means “friend of God,” was a common name
