THE BIBLE NOTEBOOK Verse By Verse Bible Studies © 2005 Johnny L. Sanders IT’S THE GOSPEL According to Luke by Johnny L. Sanders, D. Min. Copyright© 2005 Johnny L. Sanders All Rights Reserved DEDICATION To John and Mark I love you, my sons (I never get tired of saying it) INTRODUCTION TO THE THIRD GOSPEL 2 GOSPEL. The word “Gospel” is commonly defined today as “good news” - and that it is! However, according to some accounts, in pre-New Testament times it was used to denote the reward given to the bearer of good news. In the New Testament it denotes the announcement of, and the recording of good news. There is a difference between an event and the account of the event. To Luke, the Gospel is, first and foremost, what God did through Jesus Christ, and then the continuation of what He did through His church (see the Book of Acts). The Gospel According to Luke and the Book of Acts form a unit and need to be studied together for maximum benefit. It should be remembered that this is not the Gospel of Luke - it is the Gospel of Jesus Christ, according to Luke. AUTHORSHIP. All evidence points to the fact that Luke, the Gentile physician and trusted friend and co-worker of Paul, was the author of both the Gospel According to Luke and the Book of Acts. Scholarship and tradition both support this claim. Luke wrote about one-fourth of all the Scripture in the New Testament, and the book that bears his name has been ranked by many among the most beautiful books ever written. The Gospel According to Luke and The Book of Acts compliment each other, each providing information that will help us in our study of the other. In the preface to Luke, he addresses his work to Theophilus: In as much as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, 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 may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught (Luke 1:1-4, emphasis added). In the preface to Acts, he writes, “The first account I composed, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach, until the day when He was taken up to heaven, after He had by the Holy Spirit given orders to the apostles whom He had chosen” (Acts 1:1-2, emphasis added). It is not stated that Luke is the author of either work, but he vocabulary is similar, the internal evidence is compelling, and external evidence supportive. We know that the same person wrote both books, and based on the “we” sections of Acts, it may be reasonably inferred that Luke is the author of Acts. If that is true, then he is the author of the Gospel identified with his name. In a study of authorship, both internal and external evidence considered. INTERNAL EVIDENCE. 1. Medical terminology (Luke’s interest in sickness, suffering, disease). 2. The author was not a personal witness. 3. The author used other sources (vs. 2) - may have known Mary and some of the apostles. 3 4. He relied upon oral tradition (common Christian tradition). 5. He knew the work of other authors - inspired (Matthew, Mark) and others (Q, L). EXTERNAL EVIDENCE. 1. Early tradition - second century scholars stated that Luke wrote the third Gospel. a. Irenaeus, A.D. 185, named Luke as the author. b Tertullian, A.D. 200, mentioned Luke as the author of the Acts of the Apostles (remember that the same man wrote both this Gospel and Acts). c. Eusibius, A.D. 325, says that Luke of Antioch, a physician and companion of Paul wrote the Gospel. 2. The “we” sections in Acts provide evidence that Luke was the author of Acts (and, consequently, of Luke as well. a. Acts 16:10-17. b. 20:5-15. c. 21:1-8. d. 27:1-28. 3. The Pauline Epistles support the claim. a. In Philemon 24, Luke is included in the salutation. b. In Colossians 4:14, reference is made to “Luke the beloved physician.” c. In 2 Timothy 4:11 Paul says, “Only Luke is with me.” 4. Eusebius (A.D.300) claimed that Luke’s contact with Christianity Antioch (c. 46), but it is possible that became a part of the missionary team in Troas since the first “we” section places him first with Paul, Silas, and Timothy at Troas ( Acts. 16:10ff). Luke was Paul’s companion and physician during the latter’s two year imprisonment in Caesarea and it seems logical that this afforded him an opportunity to thoroughly research the life of Christ. He could have interviewed family members, Apostles and other disciples, and studied written accounts of the life and teachings of the Savior during this time. He was familiar with Mark and other sources. Some scholars believe Luke actually wrote the Gospel in Antioch. Some think he concluded it in Greece. ILLUSTRATION. A number of years ago I stopped by a health club in Greenville, Mississippi that I had often visited on my way from Louisiana to visit my parents in Sledge, Mississippi. On this particular day, as I walked into the work-out area on my way to the dressing room, I discovered that a very heated argument was going on ahead of me - between me and the door the dressing room. One contestant in the debate, a head of the history department at a state university, was standing there with a rather smug expression on his face. There was no missing the fact that the spokesman for the opposing group was very agitated. This man, an acquaintance of a number of years, was a muscular young man with an outstanding personality and a lot of friends and 4 it seemed obvious that these friends were looking to him to defend their position. He had done some lay-preaching and they deferred to him in this debate. As I approached, mildly curious but thankful that I was only a spectator and not a participant in the “discussion,” my friend glanced my way, and without a break in his argument, said, “Here’s a preacher. Let’s ask him.” I love to hear that! It was during the hostage crisis in Iran, and the professor had made the statement, “You can’t blame the Muslims for their attitude toward Christianity, there is no way they can know Jesus ever lived. Can you name any historian from the period who ever mentioned Christ?” The response I had heard threw more heat on the subject than light - “I had rather take the Word of God for it than a bunch of (expletive) heathens!” With “Ask him! Ask him!” still ringing in my ears the history professor turned to me and with all the gloating enthusiasm he could muster demanded, “Can you name any ancient historian who ever mentioned the name of Christ?” I said, “Yes.” “Name them!,” he demanded. “Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.” “They were not historians. They were gospel writers. Can you name any historians who every mentioned Christ?” I said, “Yes.” “Name them!,” he demanded. He was enjoying it. I said, “Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.” Again he emphasized, “They were not historians, they were gospel writers. Can you name any historians?” Again I said, “Yes - Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.” He continued to argue that they were not historians, they were gospel writers, and I stressed that I was not about to compromise on that issue. But to give him something to think about, I did mention either Suetonius (c. 69-140) or Tacitus (55?-after 117), both of whom mentioned trouble in Rome involving the followers of one Christus. At the time, there is little doubt that the kind of trouble they described had to do with followers of Christ. I might have also mentioned Josephus as well. The point I was stressing, however, was that I refuse to give one inch of ground on my position that the Gospel writers did, in fact, provide credible evidence that Jesus Christ was a real Person, and that the accounts should be accepted as historical accounts. What I should have said - I thought of it after I left - was that no true Muslim really doubts that Jesus lived. In fact, they accept Him as a great prophet - like their prophet Mohammed! Following that discussion, I spent months studying the Book of Acts and as I studied the Scripture and read commentaries, I became more convinced than ever of the credibility of Luke as a historian. His account of the fateful voyage from Caesarea to Rome is still the best description available to us about shipping on the Mediterranean Sea in that period. Modern research has proved the integrity of Luke as a historian. But the Christian begins a study of something the lost person does not possess - a spiritual discernment that makes us aware of the fact that Luke was only the human instrument, the Holy Spirit the divine Author of this Gospel account. DESTINATION. The Gospel is addressed to the “most excellent Theophilus” (1:3); Acts simply to Theophilus. The word means “God lover” or lover of God. And for that reason many have 5 held that it is simply addressed to all lovers of God.