It is AD 59.[1] Luke the beloved physician (Col. 4:14) writes a gospel to Theophilus, a man connected to the community of Christ with questions about what he had been taught concerning the central message of Christianity.[2]
The third Gospel begins:
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught (Lk. 1:1-4).[3]
What Theophilus receives is the gospel message explicated through a compilation of testimonials from eyewitnesses who experienced Jesus Christ up close and personal. No stone was left unturned. Luke’s “investigation was comprehensive (’from the beginning’), accurate (‘carefully’), and well organized (‘orderly’).”[4]
Skeptics oft interject, “Evangelist, you are aware that history is written by the winners? This Gospel of Luke is just tales about Jesus made up by the Church to advance their agenda and promote their policies. Who really knows what the Jesus actually taught, if ever there were such a man? All this is just propaganda nonsense.”
Not so fast. The trustworthiness of the evangelist’s reporting ought never to be dismissed so quickly. Every historiographer has a bias or opinion about what is reported. True enough. But such never precludes the delivering of a reliable report.
Yet, the most skewed reports from biased reporters can still convey a grain of truth. Even the wildest conspiracy theories about Elvis Presley still being alive with all the alleged sightings still have a grain of truth — namely the man from Tupelo, Mississippi who had an unparalleled career as a rock-n-roll musician and Hollywood actor is an actual person as opposed to anything fiction.[5]
Some reports are cluttered with bias, but that hardly precludes one from examining the evidence and discovering the truth about events as they actually unfolded.
Yes, Luke had a bias as a member of the Christian community. The evangelist was convinced that the good news of Jesus Christ the Savior and Son of the Most High corresponded to reality. Nonetheless, this hardly precludes the truthfulness of the testimonial. The author sought to “write an orderly account.” He had a concern to carefully narrate the reliable historical facts. Neither “a dispassionate historian,” nor “an inferior historian,” Luke “writes history from an interpretive standpoint, showing that God’s saving purposes have been fulfilled in Christ.”[6]
The historical reliability of the Gospel of Luke is certain. E.P. Sanders, who is hardly a theological conservative, contends “most scholars accept the following ‘almost indisputable’ historical facts: Jesus was a Galilean, was baptized by John, called twelve disciples, ‘preached and healed’ in Israel, engaged in controversy about the temple, and was crucified by the Romans; then, after his death, his followers ‘continued an identifiable movement,’ which came under persecution.”[7]
Two decades prior to Luke putting quill to parchment upon that momentous Sunday several women discovered the tomb where the crucified Lord had been placed was empty and they subsequently witnessed the resurrected Lord. Soon after that, Jesus’ followers formulated this creed: “Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve” (1 Cor. 15:3-5). This very creed is believed to date “from three to eight years after Jesus’ crucifixion,”[8] or perhaps even earlier, like within months after Jesus’ death.[9] Christians affirmed the creed, passed it on to the next generation of converts, who in turn passed it on to the next generation, and so forth. This practice of handing down what had been received typically used by Jewish teachers of that day was called traditioning.[10] The creed which expresses the central message of Christianity was developed very soon after the first Easter, which precludes legendary corruption.
Read through the Gospel of Luke and it is easy to see all the elements of the early Christian creed explicated from the testimonials of the eyewitnesses along with the teachings and works of Jesus. The message of the evangelist is thus set upon a solid historical footing.
Even the good news that Luke wrote has been faithfully preserved and transmitted to us. There are over five thousand extant ancient copies of the New Testament, which far more excessive when compared to the extant ancient manuscripts of Homer, Aristotle, and Herodotus, and the great numbers of surviving New Testament manuscripts testify to the accuracy of its transmission.[11] There are variant readings among surviving New Testament manuscripts, the Gospel of Luke included,[12] but the variants neither alter nor distort the central message of Christ death and resurrection. In fact, “the overwhelming majority of the textual variants are so insignificant that they aren’t even noticeable in translations,”[13] and “the science of textual criticism can almost always recover the original reading of the text.”[14] What we read today is pretty much what Luke wrote back then.
“This Gospel was written ‘for Theophilus,’” writes Ambrose of Milan, “which simply means ‘for God’s beloved one.’ My friend if you love God, this Gospel is written for you. If, then, it is written for you, accept this gift from the Evangelist. Preserve with care, in the very depths of your heart, this sacred pledge given to you by a friend” (Commentary on Luke, 1.12).[15]
Like a cynical old man griping about the miseries of a broken world rediscovering a forgotten childhood memory of the circus. His heart quickens and overflows with joy in recalling the Big Top, flying acrobatics, amazing magicians, exotic animals, colored balloons and cotton candy. Yet, he discards those memories as all the stuff that little boys daydream about which is all too good to be true. He continues to sulk. Then one day he takes notices to a flyer tacked upon a wall: “CIRCUS: Now in Your Town.” Could the dream too good to be true really be true?” He goes and finds it is true. The circus extravaganza is real. So great is his joy of the circus that he gets all his family and friends to experiences the greatest show on earth.
The good news of Jesus Christ is often referred to as the greatest story ever told. I believe it. It is not a story in the sense of fiction. Rather, it is that story that is almost too good to be true which turns out to actually be true. Angels announce good tidings of great joy of the Savior. We have received a pearl of great price and a hidden treasure. The good news of Jesus Christ can never be kept a secret, a privatized belief, but something worth sharing with others.
— WGN
[1] AD 59 is the of composition for the Gospel of Luke. The prologues to Luke and the Acts of the Apostles indicate the latter is a subsequent composition to the former (cf. Lk. 1:1-3 and Acts 1:1-3). Key historical markers specifically mentioned in Acts include: the martyrdom of James the brother of John (Acts 12:1-2), Claudius’ expulsion of the Jews from Rome (Acts 18:1-4), and the proconsul of Gallio (Acts 18:12-17). Acts closes with Paul under house arrest in Rome (Acts 28:28-31). Key events in the first century Christian movement unmentioned in Acts include the martyrdoms of James the brother of Jesus (Josephus, Antiquities 20.201), Simon Peter, and Paul of Tarsus. Neither is there any mention of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70. It is perplexing to think Luke would leave the martyrdoms and the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple if those events were hindsight. Taken together, Acts best fits a composition no later than AD 62. Luke then would have a composition no later than AD 60. What Acts is silent about makes post AD 70 compositions unlikely. For discussion, see John A.T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1976, 2000).
[2] The Muratorian Fragment contains a list of New Testament books compiled in the end of the second century, which attributes the authorship of the third Gospel to Luke, a physician, who after the ascension of Christ accompanied Paul, and composed his work on the basis of reports, though the author never knew Christ in the flesh. A translation and discussion on the Muratorian Fragment can be found in F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 158ff. Irenaeus also attest to Luke authoring a Gospel (Against Heresies 3.14.1). The New Testament comports with the tradition of Lukan authorship of the third Gospel. Both Luke and Acts are addressed to Theophilus. Acts is identified as the second correspondence to Theophilus, which indicates a common author. The “we” sections in Acts identify the narrator as a companion of Paul. Paul names Luke the physician as a companion (2 Tim. 4:11; Col. 4:14). Lukan authorship of the third Gospel is then a solid deduction.
[3] All Scripture cited from The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), unless noted.
[4] Thomas R. Schreiner, The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary, ed. Gary M. Burge and Andrew E. Hill (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2012), 1061.
[5] Though the cumulative evidence (e.g., eyewitness testimonials, physician statements, and autopsy reports) demonstrates the passing of Elvis Presley on August 16, 1977 to be an indisputable historical fact.
[6] Schreiner, 1061.
[7] Paul Copan, “True for You But Not for Me:” Overcoming Objections to Christian Faith (Bloomington, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 1998, 2009), 154.
[8] Gary R. Habermas, The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ (Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Company, 1996), 124.
[9] Michael R. Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach (Downers Grove, InterVaristy Press, 2010), 234.
[10] Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 1 Co 15:3.
[11] See Clay Jones, “The Bibliographical Test Updated, Christian Research Journal, 35, 3 [2012]: https://www.equip.org/articles/the-bibliographical-test-updated/
[12] Modern English translations of the Bible typically note variant readings found among the manuscripts. Cf. also Bruce Metzger, A Textual Commentary of the Greek New Testament, second edition(Germany: United Bible Societies, 1994).
[13] Timothy Paul Jones, Conspiracies and the Cross: How to Intelligently Counter the Ten Most Popular Theories that Attack the Gospel of Jesus (Lake Mary, FL: Front Line, 2008), 74.
[14] Ibid., 78.
[15] Cited from Commentary of Saint Ambrose on the Gospel according to Saint Luke, trans. Ide Ni Riain(Dublin, Ireland: Haleyon Press, 2001), accessed at http://library.mibckerala.org/lms_frame/eBook/NT%20COMMENTARIES/Commentary%20on%20LUKE%20by%20Saint%20Ambrose.pdf
Love Truth Blog 