Luke was a companion of the apostle Paul. He is the recognised author of both Luke and Acts and so at the point when he joins Paul on his missionary journeys, we can see a switch from the third person (he/they) to the first person, plural (we) as Luke describes the acts of the apostles. Luke was a physician and shows particular interest in healing. We could treat Luke-Acts as one volume, it is bookended by events in Rome concerning the emperor and at the centre of it is the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus.
2.1 Read Luke 1:1-4
Luke tells us that there have been numerous accounts from eyewitnesses and that he has taken time to investigate the claims in order to produce his own account. This introduces us to a couple of themes. First, that there is a claimed trustworthiness to the Gospels. First hand witness accounts should be treated at face value and if investigated during the lifetime of other witnesses there is opportunity to challenge or confirm their claims.
Secondly, Luke makes it clear that he is not himself an eyewitness but rather relies on hearing the reports of those who were. This introduces us to the question of source criticism. When you place the three synoptic Gospels side by side, you discover significant overlap between them. Significant portions of the text are so similar that it is unlikely that this is due purely to the authors writing about the same things, however, there are enough difference between the accounts for us to also assume that it isn’t a simple matter of cut and paste. This has led to the conclusion that the Gospel writers relied on written sources, at least two and possibly four. Remember that in the 20th century, the dominant view seemed to be that the final Gospels were written much later. So, it is assumed that there was one source that Mark’s Gospel relies upon almost exclusively. There are possible sources that only the final authors of Matthew and Luke respectively had access to. Finally, it was assumed that there was a source common to at least Matthew and Luke.
The final source became known as Q. This does not exist as an actual physical document but rather, we are simply dealing with a compilation of Jesus’ sayings identified as common to the two. I am personally sceptical that such a single document existed. However, I have no problem with the idea that the Gospel writers would have been using both written and oral sources. Indeed, they would have had access to what each of them was writing as well as having face to face conversations with one another.
It is worth noting that until the 20th century and the development of modern citation methods, there was a different attitude towards how you used sources from others. For Luke to take Marks work and include it within his own (see also the relationship between Jude and Peter’s epistles) would not have counted as plagiarism. There was no attempt to pass the work off as your own and the original source would have been known and obvious. [1]
Luke describes what he has written as an orderly or accurate account. The emphasis is not on this being ordered chronologically. Indeed, whilst we can work out a rough chronology, it becomes clear that none of the Gospels attempt to do this. Rather, the content is structured in line with the purpose and message of the Gospel.[2]
Luke writes to someone called Theophilus, possible a mentor and benefactor but his name which may have been a nickname means “one who loves God”. So Luke writes for those who love and want to know God. His aim is that this orderly account will help Theophilus to have confidence in the truth claims of the Christian message and by implication, confidence or assurance in his own faith.
2.2 What does a Gospel do?
Gospels have at times been compared to modern biographies but that may not be the helpful comparison. There may be similarities perhaps with the memoirs of political leaders, see for example those by Tony Blair, George Bush and Margaret Thatcher. Such accounts do not give the same level of attention to each stage in the subject’s life. Rather, there may be a couple of chapters giving an overview of the person’s background but the vast majority focuses on their time in office.
The Gospels give most of their attention to the Jesus’ three years of public ministry and out of those three years, most attention focuses on the last few weeks, days and hours of his earthly ministry. Mark, from the halfway point is in effect taking us on the final journey to Jerusalem and the Cross.
Each Gospel begins with some form of short prologue announcing its intent, Matthew beginning with a genealogy which offers an echo of the structure of Genesis, the Torah and other Old Testament books such as 1 and 2 Chronicles. Luke’s prologue is a letter of introduction to Theophilus. All of the Gospels then take us to the beginning of Jesus ministry, his baptism in the Jordan and calling of the Disciples.
Each account then describe some of Jesus miracles and introduce us to his teaching including dialogues with opponents such as the Pharisees and Sadducees. Then the focus narrows in on the journey to Jerusalem, through Jericho, the triumphant entry and final week leading up to the last supper. Each Gospel gives significant attention to the events of Good Friday. Mark concludes with a short account of the resurrection whilst Matthew, Luke and John all offer extended accounts of Easter Sunday and the following weeks leading to the ascension of Jesus.
We can identify the structure of Luke’s Gospel as follows:
- 1:1-4 Introduction and Prologue
- 1:5-2:52 Birth and Infancy including visit to Jerusalem aged 12.
- 3:1-6:49 Jesus’ mission including calling of disciples and setting out of teaching in the Sermon on the ount/plain
- 7:1-9:50 Early ministry, especially around Galilee
- 9:51 -20:27 Journey to the Cross, the road to Jerusalem through Jericho.
- 20:38 -22:66 the last week up until the Last Supper/Passover Meal.
- 22:66 – 24:53 Death and Resurrection of Jesus (including the trial)
2.3 Teaching and Preaching the Gospels
I remember at Theological College, that during Old Testament and New Testament studies, we as students would often impatiently ask the lecturer, “This is all very interesting but how do we preach it?” Some of you will be responsible for preaching or teaching in other situations such as with children and teens or in small groups. It is good to have in mind that goal of being able to teach God’s Word to others. However, I am mindful of the advice given to us by one of the lecturers. He encouraged us to slow down and not always be in a rush to get to our own sermon preparation. I would give the same advice here. Slow down and get the big picture of what is going on in the Gospels.
This means that we start by thinking about what the Gospels say, making sure we have read them accurately, not just glossing the text with our own expectations often filtered by what we have seen elsewhere or picked up form tradition. This means taking each Gospel on its own terms. WE want to know what Luke or Mark say and understand their specific choices not being tempted to leap o Matthew’s version and vice versa, even if it seems that another Gospel’s version preaches more easily.
When we know what the passage says, we can then move to thinking about what it means, working on interpretation. It is from there that we begin to apply the text thinking about what it has to say to the whole church and from there thinking about how God is speaking to us personally. It is only at that point, where we have dwelt on hearing God and obeying ourselves that we can move to preaching.
Now, the Gospels are primarily narrative though they include significant portions of teaching material from Jesus and to a greater or lesser extent commentary from the writers. This can create a challenge because you may have heard it said that we should not use descriptive Bible narratives to make prescriptive commandments. Well, it is certainly true that we need to be careful. We cannot assume that description of specific events is meant to be normative. Specifically when it comes to the Gospels, we do well to avoid a shallow “What Would Jesus Do?” approach to application. We need to recognise that there was a uniqueness to his ministry.
However, the Gospels are written and structured with material selected in order to make intentional points. We are meant to learn from them and not just out of intellectual curiosity. The Gospels will teach us about how to live as God’s people. This requires a judicious reading. First of all, it will involve looking at any overt explanations given, telling us what to do with the relevant Bible passages. Secondly, it will mean asking questions about how and why the material is selected and how it has been ordered. Look out for themes that build and link together. Thirdly, having foiund out what each Bible passage says on its own merits, we do want to pay attention to context and read the Gospels canonically. This means considering how the passage in front of us relates to other parts of Scripture. Again, sometimes, especially with Natthew, we are shown how this fulfils Old Testament Scripture but not always. So we will have to look carefully for the clues. Then we might also begin to se links between Gospel narratives and propositional material in the epistles.
[1] For an introduction to source criticism and Q see Stein, “The Synoptic Problem, Pages 784-792 in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (Ed. Green, McKnight & Howard Marshall, Downers Grove, IL.: IVP, 1992) 317-312.
[2] “the word can denote the use of an ordering principle that sets the parts in logical relationship to a coherently understood whole (ie. an ordering according to the sense of the whole) and this seems to suit best Luke’s use here.” Nolland, Luke 1-9:20 (WBC 35. Nashville, TN.: Thomas Nelson, 2000), 10.
Faithroots 