Table of Contents

- PUBLICATION DETAILS

- ABBREVIATIONS

- PREFACE

- INTRODUCTION

- LUKE THE WRITER

- Luke’s historical synchronisms

- Luke’s Shape, or Structure

- Luke’s geographical-demographic interest

- LUKE'S THEOLOGY

- The Messianic Age has dawned

- The relentless will of God

- The Messianic Age – the Age of the Spirit

- Healing and Salvation

- Salvation to previously excluded groups

- The Proclamation of the Word

- Signs, Wonders and Reactions

- Prayer

- Financial and social implications

- A Synthesis in Discipleship

- THE PURPOSE OF LUKE-ACTS

- THE STRUCTURE OF LUKE-ACTS

- The Journey Motif

- LUKE THE HISTORIAN

- Greco-Roman historical norms

- Jewish historical norms

- The Gospels

- DATE

- Scholarly worldview and context

- Two focal points

- Conclusion

- AUTHORSHIP

- Luke and Acts are by the same author

- The companion of Paul

- Who was this companion?

- Early church tradition

- Conclusion

- SOURCES

- Mark

- Q

- Proto-Luke & L

- A Hebrew infancy source

- An Aramaic source behind Acts 1-12

- The Speeches in Acts

- How did Luke gather his sources

- The Infancy Narrative

- FOOTNOTES

- SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

- BIBLIOGRAPHY

PUBLICATION DETAILS

The Mission of the Kingdom: The Theology of Luke-Acts

Derek Morphew Publications

84 Starke Road, Bergvliet, 7945, South Africa

www.derekmorphew.org

Email: derekmmin@gmail.com

Copyright © Derek J Morphew 2011

ISBN: 978-0-9869723-9-3

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner.

ABBREVIATIONS

Abbreviation

Journal or publication

Bib

Biblica

BJRL

Bulletin of the John Rylands Library

BS

Bibliotheca Sacra

CBQ

Catholic Biblical Quarterly

CQR

Church Quarterly Review

ET

Expository Times

Int

Interpretation

JAAR

Journal of American Academic Religion

JBL

Journal of Biblical Literature

JQR

Jewish Quarterly Review

JTS

Journal of Theological Studies

NTS

New Testament Studies

NIDNTT

New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology

NIGTC

New International Greek Testament Commentary

ZNTW

Zeitschrift für Neutestamentliche Wisenschaft

SLA

Studies in Luke Acts, edited Keck & Martyn

ST

Studia Theologica

VBI

Vineyard Bible Institute Course, ePublication

SE

Studia Evangelica

PREFACE

This volume is part of a larger series on kingdom theology. It assumes knowledge of my primary work on this subject, Breakthrough, Discovering the Kingdom. A brief introduction to that subject and how it leads to the subject matter of this volume will be helpful at this point.

By kingdom theology I refer to an approach to the primary message and mission of Jesus as enacted, inaugurated eschatology. This in turn forms part of the rediscovery of Jesus in the last century and this century that places him in the context of Second Temple Judaism. It can truly be said that since the discovery and translation of the literature of that period, Jesus research has been able to place Jesus in his historical context in a manner that was not possible in previous centuries. This rediscovery of Jesus is of major significance, since the way we see Jesus affects everything: the way we see God, salvation, mission, the Christian life, and the church.

A brief summary of enacted, inaugurated eschatology will suffice at this point. The simplest way to summarize it is through this diagram:

The world into which Jesus came preaching the kingdom had expectations that had grown through the centuries. These expectations were based on the coming of the kingdom in the Exodus event, the conquest of the Promised Land and the Davidic Monarchy. They were further shaped by the loss of the kingdom in the exile and the prophetic promises of Isaiah and Daniel in particular. A day would come when God would again intervene for Israel, in a final, overwhelming moment, which would terminate history as we know it and begin life at a totally new level in the Messianic age, or the age to come. The Day of Judgment would be the event that would terminate this age (the end) and usher in the coming age. From the prophetic language regarding this “end”, we derive the word “eschatology” (Greek eschatos means “end”). The prophets spoke of the Day of the Lord, the last days, or that day.

Jesus came announcing that such a day had dawned with his arrival. Yet the way he announced and taught about the kingdom had a sense of mystery. He spoke of it as being:

- near,

- present,

- delayed, and

- future.

The only way we can bring all of this together is to understand that something mysterious, unexpected (especially to the prophets of Israel) and miraculous occurred in Jesus and the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost. The power of the future age broke through, from the future, into the present, setting up an altogether new dimension. Before this age has finally ended, the future age has already begun. The result is an “already” and “not yet” dimension, where the coming of the kingdom in Jesus and Pentecost is “already”, but in the final sense, the coming of the kingdom is “not yet”. The mysterious breakthrough of the kingdom was particularly manifest in the ministry of Jesus, as he announced it, taught about it and demonstrated it, in the cross, resurrection and ascension, and the outpouring of Pentecost. All these are demonstrations of the future breaking into the present.

Between the coming of the kingdom in Jesus (“already”) and the final coming of the kingdom in Jesus (“not yet” – at his Second Coming) is the time we now live in as Christians and the church in the world. Around us is a world that lives in one dimension, in this present age, while we experience Jesus and the life in the Spirit in a new dimension, the life of the coming age, or eternal life lived now.

From this definition of the nature of the kingdom, we have developed a set of initial implications:

1. The end has come in Jesus, therefore Jesus is God.

2. The last days begin with Jesus and Pentecost, and continue till the very end, so the whole period, from the first to the Second Coming, is the last days.

3. Every revival is a fresh in-breaking of the kingdom.

4. Every part or aspect of the kingdom is available every time it breaks through.

5. The veil torn when Jesus died shows that the separation of the present age and age to come has been torn, or opened up.

6. Therefore the powers and presence of the future age are continually available. We live in a dimension where it is always near, present, delayed and future.

7. Church history bears witness to the increasing in-breaking of the kingdom as we approach the end of the end.

8. This is the framework for understanding world missions.

9. This is the framework for understanding the Christian life, in the “already” and “not yet”, making us “already … not yet” people.

10. This is the framework for understanding healing, why it occurs, yet does not always occur.

11. This is the framework for understanding the church in the world.

INTRODUCTION

The normal procedure, for biblical books, is to deal with subjects like: who the author is, the date of writing, the intended audience and the historical context first, before an analysis or commentary on the text itself. This volume will invert the traditional approach. We will first examine the contents and theology of Luke and then, having done so, deal with the critical issues.

I will therefore operate with certain assumptions on these issues which will be defended in more detail later. Here are the assumptions.

1. The author of both volumes, Luke and Acts, was the companion of Paul, Luke the physician, whose appearance in the narrative of Acts is signified by the “we” sections (where the author changes from “they” language to “we” language).

2. Luke wrote Acts somewhere near the time of Paul’s trial in Rome, namely AD 62. This is the most likely date for Acts. Luke must have been written some time before Acts.

The approach to Luke-Acts, also to be defended later, takes place within the context of recent scholarship. Broadly speaking, there have been three era’s in Lucan studies.[1]

1. The period when the popular approach to the Gospels was source criticism viewed Luke primarily as an historian.

2. The period when the popular approach to the Gospels was redaction (or editorial) criticism (1950 onwards) viewed Luke primarily as a theologian.[2]

3. The most recent approach (1990’s onwards) has been to view Luke in terms of narrative.[3] This approach is not overly concerned with issues of sources, historicity or authorship, but looks at the text itself and analysis its shape and content.[4]

The method adopted here is a systems approach,[5] namely one that uses all the various tools available to get to the text. It will follow Marshall who argues cogently that one cannot choose between Luke the historian and Luke the theologian, because he is simultaneously historian and theologian.[6] This assumption is based in turn upon an approach to the historical method which rejects the somewhat naive 19th century view of history and is more in touch with recent methods of writing history (historiography), which in turn is based on an approach to knowledge in general (epistemology) known as critical realism.[7]

To return to Luke, those who engaged in source criticism found their ideal object of study in Luke-Acts, since Luke is the only New Testament writer who openly tells us that he used sources (Luke 1.1-4). Most scholars are fairly confident that Luke used Mark. Somewhat more speculative is the idea that he shared a common source with Matthew, now lost, usually called Q (the German Quelle means source), a document, or perhaps a tradition, that concentrated more on the teaching of Jesus. Then Luke has special sources all of his own, behind his infancy narrative, in his journey narrative, behind some of the special elements in his passion narrative, and in the resurrection stories. Then perhaps he had a particular source for the first part of Acts, after which he turns up in the story himself. The questions scholars ask about such sources indicate a real interest in historicity. Which of these sources are older, which are later? How reliable are the sources? How does Luke use them? In such a context a writer who uses the technical language of first century historians should be carefully assessed.

Behind all such questions is the thought that we can get back, via Luke the historian, to what actually happened, crucially, to Jesus and his message, mission and life. Clearly Luke wants us to believe that this is a sound expectation, because he writes to Theophilus so that he can know “the certainly” about the events that took place (1:4). We will return to these issues.

Those who engage in redaction criticism normally (but not always) do so from the assumption that Luke cannot be trusted as an historian. This in turn is part of a wider story about the first and second quests for the historical Jesus, both of which have gone down in history as having failed. Nevertheless, a whole set of assumptions developed based on the idea that we can never get anywhere near the historical Jesus. All we have is the rather creative witness of the early church, now mediated to us through the equally creative role of New Testament writers, who are primarily theologians, not historians. They do not primarily gather source documents and piece them together. They are theologians in their own right. We should therefore investigate how they edited the tradition they received, how they “spun” the story for their own audience, time and priorities. We can therefore talk about the evolution of theology, not about history.[8]

Here again a host of assumptions were involved: a dualist (Kantian) dichotomy between history and theology and the role of existentialist philosophy, leading to the theory that Luke has “historicized” the original message of the kingdom. We will return to these issues.

For the moment the significance lies in the fact that this approach has actually provided a good harvest. Those who were fixated on sources tended to divide the gospels (and Acts) into bits and pieces. Now scholars began to rediscover the integrity of the whole. Many helpful insights have been made by redaction critics, particularly in Lucan studies, which we will certainly follow. Particularly helpful are the various key Lucan themes and priorities that really do help to explain the text.

However, all such approaches have one major weakness. They divide between the tradition received (sources and traditions Luke received, the “many” who went before him and the many “eye-witnesses” he relied on—1:1-2) and the edited result (Luke’s “take” on things, Luke’s theology). Luke would have been appalled at such an either/or! Clearly he wants us to believe that he has faithfully passed on what he received (historicity). Clearly he also offered the best he had by way of intellect and training (editorial theology). Further, there may be many elements that he has taken over from Mark for instance, which are key to his understanding, but they will be lost if we only have an eye for his editorial activity. [9]

With a narrative approach one does not loose the author in the search for sources and thereby fragment the contents (source criticism); neither does one loose the source content in the originality of the author (redaction criticism). One simply allows the text as it is to tell its story. [10] Narrative interpretation often assumes elements of structuralism.[11] The weakness of a narrative approach is that it may or may not take issues of historicity seriously: the particular limitation of post-modernist interpretations.

Another approach with similar virtues, but without the avoidance of historical verification is the canonical. Its starting point is that biblical books, as they stand, are accepted as authoritative biblical text. [12]

A systems approach chooses to make use of every kind of critical tool. It will grapple with the serious work of historical criticism (including source criticism), it will use the results of redaction criticism, and it will approximate quite closely to narrative and canonical approaches, but only in so far as they build on the results of every other critical tool.

The value of narrative and canonical readings of Luke-Acts relates to the way these two books are unparalleled in the New Testament for their scope. This is truly the big picture portion of the New Testament! This will become clearer as we progress, but it is already evident when we consider the candidates for Luke’s major purpose. Here are some of the now standard themes.

- Luke emphasizes the kingship of Jesus (kingdom, Messianic language).[13]

- Luke emphasizes the divine purpose in history (salvation-history)[14] and the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations.[15]

- Luke has a special interest in salvation, or the saving activity of God.[16]

- Luke has a special interest in the work of the Holy Spirit and in signs and wonders.[17]

- Luke has a special focus on the word of God: its announcement, its “good news” dimension and its spread.[18]

- Luke’s central plot is the rejection of God’s agents by God’s people in connection with God’s sanctuaries.[19]

- Luke has a special interest in previous outcasts in Jewish society: the Gentiles, the Samaritans, sinners, the poor, the sick and women. Linked to this is a focus on financial stewardship.

- Luke emphasizes praise and prayer and the human reaction of wonder.[20]

Almost all New Testament scholars will agree that the primary message of Jesus was the kingdom of God. While Marshall has made a really good case for salvation as Luke’s primary theme, and despite his balanced approach to “historian and theologian” he nevertheless bases his argument on what is special in Luke-Acts as distinct from his sources.[21] But what if Luke really knew that the message of the kingdom was the starting point, because it was Jesus’ message, and his use of the save/saviour/salvation word group is just his special tweaking of the primary message? It is not a good methodology to rely only on Luke the editor, instead of Luke the follower of existing tradition and Luke the editor. If Jesus himself was the primary innovator of the message[22] and if his message was primarily on the kingdom, then we should assume that it is the place to start with all three synoptic gospels.

All this is to say that we will not be confined to any one of these approaches. We will not neglect the themes Luke took over from his sources (e.g. kingdom) just because they are not redactional, or ignore features of Luke-Acts that relate to his serious claim to be writing history. We will make use of the fruits of redaction criticism and we will build on the fruits of narrative approaches.

LUKE THE WRITER

When we first meet Luke, he is the historian (Luke 1:1-4). The critical issues on Luke the historian will come later. Here our aim is to give an impression of how he thought.

He tells us two things in his prologue (amongst others).

1. He wants Theophilus to know the “certainty” about the story because he has “carefully investigated everything” (Greek akribeia— accurate). Is there any way we can verify that Luke is in fact given to precise and responsible research? Does this man have an accurate mind?

2. He has written an “orderly account.” Are there signs of definite structure? Does Luke write with a literary plan? Can he construct a cohesive historical narrative?

There are in fact two quite remarkable features which can serve as a “way in” to Luke-Acts, answering the questions just posed.

Luke’s historical synchronisms

These relate to the accurate frame of mind.

When we date something today we use the Western dating system that goes back, inaccurately, to the birth of Jesus. I am writing this in May 2007. Ancient historians had no such calendar, so they used historical synchronisms, making a number of simultaneous links to publicly known data. A modern parallel would be something like this:

Seven years after the attack on the World Trade Centre, towards the end of the second Presidency of George W Bush, a month after Kofi Annan retired and was replaced by Bun-Ki-Moon as United Nations General Secretary, this event occurred …

What would this tell you about the author? Well, you could check on whether the end of 2007 was seven years after 9/11, you could check on when Bun-Ki-Moon replaced Annan, but you could also deduce that the author is aware of significant global political events. For ancient historians, ones skill was partly demonstrated by the synchronisms one chose. Here are three key Lucan ones.

- In the time of Herod king of Judea there was a priest named Zechariah, who belonged to the priestly division of Abijah; his wife Elizabeth was also a descendant of Aaron (1:5).

- In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria (2:1-2).

- In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar--when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene--during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the desert (3:1-2).

There are a number of features here.

- Luke shows knowledge of the reign or rule of various officials in the Roman system, including puppet kings.

- Luke uses the particular titles attached to these officials.

- Luke links Roman officials to Jewish priestly officials.

- Luke makes use of particular edicts.

This feature is but the beginning of a habit that has enabled historians to examine him very carefully. Such officials, the exact title they held and the status of the city or province they governed kept changing in the Roman Empire. One could be right about an official’s title and position for one year, but be wrong a year later. A now famous change of opinion was when the great archaeologist, Sir William Ramsay began literally, to unearth proof of Luke’s accuracy.[23] Having begun with the conviction that Luke wrote in the second century, he was driven to conclude that Luke wrote in the first century. The list of moments when Luke can be tested is quite impressive.[24]

Text

Title

Luke 3:1

Pilate: Governor

Luke 3:1,19

Herod Antipas, Philip, Lysanias: Tetrarchs

Acts 13:7

Proconsul Sergius Paulus

16:11-12, 19-20, 22, 35

Philippi, a Roman colony, officials are Trategoi

17:6-9

Politarchs of Thessalonica

18:12

Proconsuls of Achaia & Asia

19:24

Silver image of Artemis

19:31

Asiarchs of the Province

19:35

Ephesus: Town clerk

19:35

Ephesus: ‘warden of the temple of Artemis’

28:7

The ‘first man’ of Malta

28:16

The stratopedarch of Rome

In each case, Luke has been found to be accurate. F.F. Bruce draws this conclusion:

Now, all these evidences of accuracy are not accidental. A man whose accuracy can be demonstrated in matters where we are able to test it is likely to be accurate even where the means for testing him are not available. Accuracy is a habit of mind … Luke’s record entitles him to be regarded as a writer of habitual accuracy.[25]

Luke’s Shape, or Structure

This relates to the “orderly account.”

If one examines the structure of Luke-Acts as a whole, one finds that he delights in arranging his material to show parallels and comparisons. The opening section is the infancy narrative. Here we find a deliberate parallel between the birth stories of John and Jesus.

John

Jesus

1:5-13

Angel Gabriel announces child to be born

1:26-33

Angel Gabriel announces child to be born

1:18

Zechariah’s question

1:34

Mary’s question

1:19-25

Angelic pronouncement

1:25-37

Angelic pronouncement

1:39-45

Bridge text, links two narratives

1:46-56

Mary’s prophetic song

1:67-79

Zechariah’s prophetic song

1:57-66

Birth of John: fulfillment

2:1-7

Birth of Jesus: fulfillment

2:8-51

Extra narrative about Jesus

1:80

And the child grew and became strong in spirit; and he lived in the desert until he appeared publicly to Israel.

2:52

And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men.

If you examine the similarities and parallels you will see that Luke is telling us that God worked in very similar ways with both John and Jesus, but due to the different roles they would play, the story of Jesus is qualitatively different. When you know the parallel structure, you tend to compare each section with its balancing section, and then you see the contrasts within the parallels.

We can then follow this tendency to structure his narrative into parallel pieces on a much grander scale. He introduces Acts by saying: “In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach” (1.1). This tells us that he regards Acts as the second volume of the continued activity of Jesus. There are then two volumes almost equal in length, both about the story of Jesus.

Both of these volumes are characterized by a grand journey. In volume I, the story goes from Galilee to Jerusalem. We will find later that Luke has greatly increased the journey section in the life of Jesus, compared to Mark and Matthew. In volume II, the story goes from Jerusalem to Rome (italics below). In the first volume the story of the central figure, Jesus, ends with a series of trials. The same is true of the second volume, where Paul’s story ends with a series of trials.

The Story of Jesus: The kingdom spreads

Volume I

Volume II

Jesus

Galilee to Jerusalem

Jesus in Peter and Paul

Jerusalem to Rome

Jesus

Trial before Sanhedrin

Paul

Trial before Sanhedrin

Jesus

Trial before Pilate

Paul

Trial before Felix

Jesus

Trial before Herod

Paul

Trial before Festus

Jesus

Death and Resurrection

Paul

Trial before Agrippa

Paul

Awaiting trial before Caesar

Acts ends abruptly

Peter Davids has constructed this outline, which illustrates the parallel structure from a different angle.[26]

Luke and Acts in Parallel

Item

Luke

Acts

Beginning

Birth, anointing of Jesus

Baptism, filling of disciples

Inaugural Proclamation

Jesus’ Nazareth sermon

Peter’s Pentecost sermon

Confirmatory signs

Casting out demons and healing sick in Capernaum

Healing lame man at Beautiful gate

Success

Widespread popular acclaim

Widespread popular acclaim

Opposition

Pharisees, leaders of the Jews

Sanhedrin, Jews of the dispersion

Travel

Itinerant ministry in Galilee, Judea

Missionary journeys of Peter and Paul

Arrest and Trial

Threefold trial: before Sanhedrin, Pilate, Herod

Threefold trial: before Felix, Festus and Agrippa

Consummation

The Cross

Rome

Then, when one examines Acts, you find two almost equal halves, one where Peter is the central figure (1-12) and one where Paul is the central figure (13-28). Closer examination shows detailed parallels between them.

Peter

Paul

3:2 f

Peter heals lame man

14:8 f

Paul heals lame man

5:15

Peter’s shadow heals people

19:11-12

Paul’s kerchiefs heal people

5:16

Peter conducts exorcisms

16:16-18

Paul conducts exorcisms

8:18f

Peter confronts the sorcerer

13:6-12

Paul confronts the sorcerer

9:36f

Peter raises the dead

20:10-12

Paul raises the dead

10:9f

Peter was the first to reach Gentiles, as the result of a vision

22:17-21

Paul was commissioned to reach the Gentiles as the result of a vision.

All these are signs of a carefully constructed narrative.

Luke is also the most comprehensive New Testament writer. He is the only one to begin the story of the kingdom from its dawn in the infancy story (2:7-8), through its building climax in the story of Jesus, to its arrival in the capital city of the empire. He further deliberately connects the story of the kingdom with the prophetic expectation in the Old Testament. He tells the story of Jesus and of the early church, as one connected historical record. His milestones include birth, childhood, baptism, ministry, journey to Jerusalem, trial, crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, Pentecost, and world mission.

Luke’s geographical-demographic interest

We have already alluded to the journey motif. We must now show how consciously Luke shows the relentless geographical spread of the kingdom. Luke writes what we can call a travel narrative of the kingdom. The kingdom travels and expands. It takes territory in the real world of political governors, leaders and kings, in real historical time, and over well known geographical maps.

We have noted the historical synchronisms. Now we must add that they in turn are part of a focus on real time. The kingdom progresses in time.

Progress through time

1:15

In the time of Herod, King of Judea …

1:26

In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee

2:1

In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world

2:42

When he was twelve years old …

3:1

In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar

The kingdom progresses geographically. However, this theme does not stand alone. It is interwoven with the idea of numbers. Luke really does number counting! The kingdom spreads through territory and as it goes it draws in more and more people. It grows in demographic-geographical dimensions. Notice that place names are highlighted in italics and number language is underlined. Actual numbers are in bold.

You are about to read one of many tables that cite texts in Luke-Acts at some length. As reader you are strongly urged not to skip these sections. They are in many ways the meat of this work. My intention is to help the reader see, with your own eyes, Luke's central themes. To discover the same amount of information in any other way, you would have to read the full text of Luke and Acts repeatedly, underlining as you go. These tables do this work for you. It will be worth the effort to read them.

Demographic-geographical enlargement

Luke 4:14

Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside

5:17

One day as he was teaching, Pharisees and teachers of the law, who had come from every village of Galilee and from Judea and Jerusalem, were sitting there. And the power of the Lord was present for him to heal the sick

6:12-16

Jesus chooses 12 disciples

6:17-18

He went down with them and stood on a level place. A large crowd of his disciples was there and a great number of people from all over Judea, from Jerusalem, and from the coast of Tyre and Sidon, who had come to hear him and to be healed of their diseases

9:1-17

12 disciples feed 5000 people

9:51

As the time approached for him to be taken up to heaven, Jesus resolutely set out for Jerusalem

10:1-12

Jesus commissions 70(2)

11:29

As the crowds increased

12:1

Meanwhile, when a crowd of many thousands had gathered, so that they were trampling on one another, Jesus began to speak …

13:22

Then Jesus went through the towns and villages, teaching as he made his way to Jerusalem

14:25

Large crowds were travelling with Jesus …

17:11

Now on his way to Jerusalem, Jesus travelled along the border between Samaria and Galilee

17:11-19

Jesus heals 10 lepers

18:35; 19:1

As Jesus approached Jericho … Jesus entered Jericho and was passing through.

19:28

After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem

19:41

As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it

24:45f

… repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Acts 1:8

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.

1:15, 23-26

120 in the upper room, with 11+1 new disciple = 12

2:14

Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven

2:41

3000 were added

2:47

And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

4:4

But many who heard the message believed, and the number of men grew to about 5000.

5:14

Nevertheless, more and more men and women believed in the Lord and were added to their number.

5:16

Crowds gathered also from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing their sick and those tormented by evil spirits, and all of them were healed

6:7

So the word of God spread. The number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly, and a large number of priests became obedient to the faith.

8:1

On that day a great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria

8:5

Philip went down to a city in Samaria and proclaimed the Christ there

8:26-27

Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, "Go south to the road--the desert road--that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza." So he started out, and on his way he met an Ethiopian eunuch, an important official in charge of all the treasury of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians

11:19-21

Now those who had been scattered by the persecution in connection with Stephen travelled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch, telling the message only to Jews. Some of them, however, men from Cyprus and Cyrene, went to Antioch and began to speak to Greeks also, telling them the good news about the Lord Jesus. The Lord's hand was with them, and a great number of people believed and turned to the Lord

13:1-3

In the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers … the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them." So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off

13:4-12

Cyprus: the Proconsul is amazed

13:13-52, 44,49

Pisidian Antioch: On the next Sabbath almost the whole city gathered to hear the word of the Lord. When the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy and talked abusively against what Paul was saying…The word of the Lord spread through the whole region.

14:1

Iconium: There they spoke so effectively that a great number of Jews and Gentiles believed.

14:21

Lystra and Derba: They preached the good news in that city and won a large number of disciples.

16:12-38

Philippi: only the jailors household is converted.

17:4

Thessalonica: Some of the Jews were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a large number of God-fearing Greeks and not a few prominent women.

17:12

Berea: Many of the Jews believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men.

17:34

Athens: A few men became followers of Paul and believed.

18:7

Corinth: many of the Corinthians who heard him believed and were baptized …

19:19-20

Ephesus: A number who had practiced sorcery brought their scrolls together and burned them publicly. When they calculated the value of the scrolls, the total came to 50,000 drachmas. In this way the word of the Lord spread widely and grew in power.

28:30

Rome: For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him. Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ.

This all shows Luke’s state of mind. He was someone who counted numbers, noticed demographics, and had a keen eye for geographical expansion through travel.

The spread of the gospel is closely associated with Luke’s view of Christian initiation. New Christians enter the kingdom through a process of baptism and the laying on of hands, usually through the apostles. One can observe that each decisive step, geographically and in terms of people groups, is associated with a description of such initiation.[27]

These introductory remarks now enable us to look at his theological interests.

LUKE'S THEOLOGY

As noted in the introduction, we will not follow the typical redaction critical method of only looking at what is different in Luke compared to his sources or the Synoptic parallels. Luke may well have found some of the themes he found in the tradition were central to his own understanding and purpose, and may have wanted to pass them on faithfully. This is particularly likely with the primary message of Jesus: the kingdom of God.

What then is the shape of Luke’s theology? It will be helpful to write a definition that attempts to convey his whole message in one paragraph.

The new or messianic age has dawned, fulfilling OT expectations and inaugurating the relentless and determined will of God. Its focus is the messianic King, Jesus who, by the power of the Spirit, brings healing and salvation to all nations. This salvation includes previously excluded groups: sinners, the sick, Gentiles, Samaritans, the poor, women and children. It spreads through the proclamation of the word, healing and phenomena of power and revelation. Those who receive this salvation experience forgiveness of sins and respond with song, praise, prayer and wonder. The message has financial and social implications.

Every one of these statements reflects a theme in Luke-Acts. Before we examine them, it is important to reflect on the order or structure of these statements.

1. The new or messianic age has dawned, fulfilling Old Testament expectations and inaugurating the relentless and determined will of God.

2. Its focus is the messianic King, Jesus.

3. It comes through the power of the Holy Spirit.

4. Jesus the messiah brings healing and salvation.

5. It spreads to all nations.

6. This salvation includes previously excluded groups: sinners, the sick, Gentiles, Samaritans, the poor, women and children.

7. It spreads through the proclamation of the word.

8. It spreads through healing and phenomena of power and revelation.

9. Those who receive this salvation experience forgiveness of sins and respond with song, praise, prayer and wonder.

10. The message has financial and social implications.

First, the announcement of the new age mirrors the message of Jesus, who came announcing the in-breaking of the Kingdom of God. While Luke may not re-state Jesus kingdom message in exactly the same terms, the idea that the new era has dawned is the most fundamental structure of his work. Luke therefore attempts to remain true to the tradition he has received.

Second, Luke does provide an interpretive factor, namely that the arrival not only fulfills prophecy, but the twin aspects of expectation and fulfillment show that God is relentless in fulfilling his redemptive plan. But even here, though we can show this as a theme through Luke and Acts, it emerges for Luke out of a sense of determined purpose in Jesus himself.

The clear focus of the new age, and of the ministry of Jesus, is salvation. This may well be Luke’s key word. However, even here, Isaiah looms large as the background to both Jesus and Luke’s portrayal of Jesus, so we cannot exaggerate Luke’s originality.

The fact that the message spreads relentlessly to all nations, and by the power of the Spirit, is an aspect that most clearly reflects the hindsight of the end of the process.

Luke clearly has a special focus on previously rejected groups. But here again, he is merely giving structure and emphasis to the special characteristics of Jesus own ministry.

He does have a theology of the word, which runs through the gospel and Acts. Yet here again, it mirrors the relationship between kingdom announcement and demonstration in the ministry of Jesus.

Luke clearly has an interest in phenomena of the Spirit and the reactions of people to them.

In summary, the so-called unique features of Luke’s theology partly follow the tradition he received, and are partly a reflection of his own theological creativity. There is an easy blend between the two factors.

The Messianic Age has dawned

I believe this is more fundamental to Luke even than the theme of salvation.[28] It is not really possible to disconnect the first two statements of our summary.

1. The new or messianic age has dawned, fulfilling OT expectations and inaugurating the relentless and determined will of God.

2. Its focus is the messianic King, Jesus.

The kingdom of God has come, in the through Jesus Christ. To say “kingdom of God” is to say “the fulfillment of OT prophetic expectation.” To speak of expectation and fulfillment is to speak of a divine will or plan. Further, to speak of the new age of the kingdom incorporates the coming of salvation. These ideas are inextricably connected.

We must now notice the theme in Luke-Acts. The infancy narrative clearly announces the dawning of the new age.[29] The two expected figures of Elijah returning to introduce the Messiah, and the birth of the Messiah, are announced. References to Elijah and the son of David (underlined) make this clear. The note of fulfillment (in italics) is struck again and again, linked to the idea of the plan of God. Another notable feature is the repeated allusion to the language of Isaiah (“good news” and other terms). Salvation is not a theme on its own, but merely a part of the arrival of the messianic age.

The messianic age & kingship of Jesus showing God’s plan of salvation

Luke 1:17,19

And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous--to make ready a people prepared for the Lord … Gabriel tell you this good news.

1:32-33

He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end.

1:45

Blessed is she who has believed that what the Lord has said to her will be accomplished.

1:68-69, 71, 72-73, 77-79

Praise be to the Lord, the God of Israel, because he has come and has redeemed his people. He has raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David … salvation from our enemies … to remember his holy covenant, the oath he swore to our father Abraham …to give his people the knowledge of salvation through the forgiveness of their sins, because of the tender mercy of our God, by which the rising sun will come to us from heaven to shine on those living in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the path of peace.

2:10-11

But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord"

2:30-32

Simeon says: “For my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared in the sight of all people, a light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to your people Israel.”

3:3-6

John begins his ministry, fulfilling Isaiah’s word and announcing the new era.

3:16

One more powerful than I will come …

3:22

The messianic anointing comes on Jesus, confirming his Sonship.

The main body of the gospel shows the same note of the messianic age. The language of fulfillment is used repeatedly (italics), and the decisive use of “today”, or what people are “now” seeing, or it being the time of God’s coming, all strike the same note. This theme is completely interwoven with the idea that the king, or messiah is present (underlined), just as the presence of the kingdom is announced, namely the good news (bold). The “tenses” of kingdom language is indicated by [square brackets.]

The messianic age & kingship of Jesus showing God’s plan of salvation

4:16-20

And he stood up to read. The scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written: "The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor." Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him, and he began by saying to them, "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing."

4:41, 43

The demons “knew he was the Christ” … Jesus preached the good news of the kingdom of God to other towns.

5:38

New wine for new wineskins

7:16-17

“A great prophet has appeared among us,” they said. “God has come to help his people.”

7:20, 22-23

Are you the one to come? … "Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor. Blessed is the man who does not fall away on account of me."

7:26

John is more than a prophet.

8:1

After this, Jesus traveled about from one town and village to another, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God.

9:1-2

The 12 called to announce the kingdom of God.

9:27

I tell you the truth, some who are standing here [will not taste death before] they see the kingdom of God.

9:30-31

Two men, Moses and Elijah, appeared in glorious splendor, talking with Jesus. They spoke about his departure, which he was about to bring to fulfillment at Jerusalem.

10:1,8

The 70(2) appointed, told to announce, “the kingdom of God [is near.]”

10:9, 11

Heal the sick who are there and tell them, `The kingdom of God [is near] you ...' “Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God [is near.]”

10:23-24

Following statements about Korazin, Bethsaida, Tyre and Sidon: Then he turned to his disciples and said privately, "Blessed are the eyes that see what you see. For I tell you that many prophets and kings wanted to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it."

11:20

But if I drive out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God [has come to/upon you.]

11:31

One greater than Solomon [is here]. One greater than Jonah [is here.]

16:16

The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it.

17:21

Once, having been asked by the Pharisees [when the kingdom of God would come,] Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, `Here it is,' or `There it is,' because the kingdom of God [is in the midst] of you."

19:9

Jesus said to him (Zaccheus), "Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost."

19:37-40

When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen: "Blessed is the king who comes in the name of the Lord!" "Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!" Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Jesus, "Teacher, rebuke your disciples!" "I tell you," he replied, "if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out."

19:44

Saying of Jerusalem: “you did not recognize the time of God's coming to you.”

22:16

And he said to them, "I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God."

22:29-30

And I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred one on me, so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

23:2-3

And they began to accuse him, saying, "We have found this man subverting our nation. He opposes payment of taxes to Caesar and claims to be Christ, a king." So Pilate asked Jesus, "Are you the king of the Jews?" "Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied.

24:44

He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."

There are of course all sorts of details in the parables, the healings, and the symbolic acts of Jesus that say the same thing, but our purpose here is simply to show, in the most obvious texts, how this theme operates. Statements about John or John in relation to Jesus, or about one greater than Solomon indicate the age of fulfilment with equal vigour. All of this language falls under the category of eschatology. Each of these terms is laden with “last days” connotations, and the combination of a whole cluster of them places them even more obviously in an eschatological context.[30]

We can conclude that the new age of fulfilment dawns within the infancy narrative and then continues to come with even greater urgency in the ministry, passion and resurrection of Jesus. The new age has Jesus, the messiah, as its focus. As king (Luke likes this term) he continually announces the arrival of the kingdom. Most significantly, Jesus enters into his reign through his ascension. This is a particular Lucan emphasis.[31]

The book of Acts continues this theme, showing that it encompasses more than Luke following his gospel sources. As above, italics are used to indicate the idea of fulfilment and underlined words indicate the idea of kingship. The idea of kingship is closely interrelated with the titles of Lord and Christ, and sometimes the Righteous One. These titles are often associated with references to David, or things Davidic. That the Messianic age has dawned, or the kingdom of God is present, fulfilling Old Testament expectations, is the good news that is announced. A quick glance at the way these are all found in the same context will show how they all amount to the same central idea: the messianic age has dawned.

The messianic age & kingship of Jesus showing God’s plan of salvation

Acts 1:6

So when they met together, they asked him, "Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?"

1:16

"Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David concerning Judas …

2:16-17

No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: " `In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people…

2:23

This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.

2:30

But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ …

2:36

"Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."

3:6

Then Peter said, "Silver or gold I do not have, but what I have I give you. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk."

3:18

But this is how God fulfilled what he had foretold through all the prophets, saying that his Christ would suffer.

4:2

The apostles were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection of the dead.

4:27

your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed.

5:31

God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior that he might give repentance and forgiveness of sins to Israel.

5:42

Day after day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they never stopped teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the Christ.

7:52

They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him …

7:56

"I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God."

8:12

But when they believed Philip as he preached the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ …

8:35

Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.

9:17

"Brother Saul, the Lord--Jesus, who appeared to you on the road …

10:36-38

You know the message God sent to the people of Israel, telling the good news of peace through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all … how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him.

13:23

"From this man's descendants God has brought to Israel the Savior Jesus, as he promised.

13:32

"We tell you the good news: What God promised our fathers he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus.

15:7

… the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe.

15:11

We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved …

15:15, 18

“After this I will return and rebuild David's fallen tent …these things … that have been known for ages.”

15:26

... the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

17:7

They are all defying Caesar's decrees, saying that there is another king, one called Jesus.

18:5

… testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ.

18:28

… proving from the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.

19:4-5,8

John the Baptist … the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus … the name of the Lord Jesus … arguing persuasively about the kingdom of God.

19:17

The name of the Lord Jesus was held in high honor…

20:24-25, 35

…the task the Lord Jesus has given me--the task of testifying to the gospel of God's grace. Now I know that none of you among whom I have gone about preaching the kingdom will ever see me again …the words of the Lord Jesus …

21:13

… the name of the Lord Jesus …

22:8, 14

“Who are you, Lord?” I asked. “I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting,” … the Righteous One …

26:22

I am saying nothing beyond what the prophets and Moses said would happen-- that the Christ would suffer and, as the first to rise from the dead, would proclaim light to his own people and to the Gentiles.

28:23

From morning till evening he explained and declared to them the kingdom of God and tried to convince them about Jesus from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets.

28:31

Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ.

Luke’s primary message therefore is that an event has taken place, an event that is being gladly announced. This event fulfills Old Testament messianic expectations and is focused or personified in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. Where salvation is mentioned, it always falls within this context. While Marshall may be right that the sozo word group is Luke’s special focus, the context shows that it merely gives language to a larger idea.

There has been much debate on how Luke has handled the “tenses” of the kingdom. It is present, immanent or future? Hans Conzelmann is normally associated with the idea that Luke has “historicized” the message, removing all “immanent” or “near” language and replacing it with the language of history (past events).[32] Apart from the fact that so many scholars have not followed Conzelmann, the data shows that Luke has retained the “already and not yet” language of Jesus and the other Synoptic writers.[33] In the table we have shown [in brackets] that Luke includes language about the kingdom being both “near” and “present” [is here]. Studies that only look at places where the actual term “kingdom of God” appears miss the total context. Each time “kingdom of God” is linked to announcement, or good news, or proclamation, the sense conveyed is the presence, or arrival of the kingdom. What is special to Luke is the way the presence of the kingdom is now related to the Lordship, or exaltation of Jesus. While kingdom presence is the predominant note, Luke also has many texts that use the idea of nearness, delay and futurity.

- Near is found in a number of texts: “will be accomplished” (1:45); “will not taste death until”: (9:27); “which he was about to bring to fulfillment” (9:31) and “the kingdom is near” (10:1, 8-9).

- Future is found in a number of texts: “not eat it until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God (22:16); “And I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred one on me, so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom” (22:29-30) and in numerous ways in chapter 21, where the coming of Son of Man and future judgment, including judgment on Jerusalem, assumes a future event. This note is then continued in Acts 1.6, 7-8: “will you restore the kingdom at this time … it is not for you to know times or dates the Father has set.” Paul speaks of the “hope” of the future resurrection from the dead (23:6; 24:15). Yet this hope is based on the hope that has already been kindled in the resurrection of Jesus (which has taken place in Jesus—26:6). Similarly, disciples must yet go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God (14:22).

- The parable of the talents is told “because they thought the kingdom was going to appear at once.” Scholars like to dismiss the thought that Jesus actually spoke of the kingdom being delayed, either by attempting to relocate the point in time from which the parable is told (N.T. Wright) or viewing this as a later Lucan or early church editorial. However, there is no support for this in the text.[34] Evidently Luke thought Jesus had spoken of a delay.

There is one sense in which Conzelmann’s view can be entertained. For Jesus, the mystery of the kingdom lies in the way he speaks of its arrival. It is immanent, or near. Yet it is present, or manifest. Yet it will come within this generation. Then again, it includes final, apocalyptic elements that seem to await their fulfillment.[35] Luke, on the other hand, writes with post-resurrection and post-Pentecostal hindsight. The “already and not yet” reality is found in the primary events of the story of Jesus. His birth, ministry, death, resurrection and ascension and expected return are now the manner of the coming of the kingdom. If Jesus speaks of the kingdom, Luke speaks of the story of Jesus and is able to write a second volume of his story, as continued in the story of the church.

The relentless will of God

The arrival of the messianic era works its way relentlessly in history. Here again we can overemphasize what is unique to Luke. He seems to have two sources for this idea. The first is the fact that Mark uses “must”, or rather has Jesus use “must” as a repeated way of underlining a sense of destiny (Mark 8:31; 9:11-12; 13:7,10; 14:49). For instance, the Son of Man must suffer many things (8:31). Luke repeats these sayings (Luke 9:22; 21:9) but then adds more of his own. The second source is taken from the strong Old Testament colouring of his language, found in the infancy narrative and throughout Acts. Marshall concludes:

Luke’s idea of God is drawn from the Old Testament tradition … He is the God who exercises sovereign control over history, and He has a purpose which finds expression in salvation-history. The various events in salvation-history are all related to this plan of God. [36]

It will be worth looking at the theme.

The relentless and determined will of God

2:34

"This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel,

2:49

"Didn't you know I had to be in my Father's house?"

4:43

But he said, "I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God to the other towns also, because that is why I was sent."

9:22

"The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life."

17:24-25

For the Son of Man in his day will be like the lightning, which flashes and lights up the sky from one end to the other. But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation.

19:5

"Zacchaeus, come down immediately. I must stay at your house today."

21:9

When you hear of wars and revolutions, do not be frightened. These things must happen first, but the end will not come right away."

22:22

The Son of Man will go as it has been decreed, but woe to that man who betrays him."

24:6-7

He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: `The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.' "

24: 26-27

Did not the Christ have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?" And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.

24: 44-46

"This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."

Acts 1:16

"Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David concerning Judas.

2:23

This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge.

3:20-21

that he may send the Christ, who has been appointed for you--even Jesus. He must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets.

4:27-28

Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.

9:15-16

This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel. I will show him how much he must suffer for my name."

13:36

For when David had served God's purpose in his own generation, he fell asleep

17:2-3

As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead.

17:26

From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live.

17:31

For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed.

18:21

But as he left, he promised, "I will come back if it is God's will."

27:24

`Do not be afraid, Paul. You must stand trial before Caesar; and God has graciously given you the lives of all who sail with you.'

27:25

So keep up your courage, men, for I have faith in God that it will happen just as he told me.

The impression is quite obvious. If we consider the net result of all these statements they amount to Luke’s definition of the kingdom, or rule of God. It is interesting that Luke omits the explanatory phrase, “your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” found in Matthew (6:10) in the prayer of Jesus (11:2). Yet his stress on the way God’s will is executed through promise and fulfillment, or relentless will, may be his way of making the same point. God is having his way, or ruling!

While the source of this theme can be traced back to the life of Jesus, and to the expectation of the Old Testament, the context is Luke’s apologetic purpose to communicate into the growing Hellenistic form of Christianity. Luke was clearly aware of the role beliefs in providence had in Greek historiography. John Squires, discussing the historian’s task as understood in Greco-Roman antiquity, summarises Luke’s use like this:

It is the theme of providence which, as we have seen, draws all of these interests and aims together. Providence was a central theme in hellenistic historiography, a theme which was also central to the Hebrew scriptures, albeit in different terminology. Providence was a central aspect of philosophical discussion and theory, and it had an apologetic function in the less technical writings of hellenism. Providence in the histories had a religious application; it emphasized certain rituals at the expense of others. All of these elements are found in Luke-Acts in association with the theme of ‘the plan of God’, which provides us with a key to unlock some of the complexities of Luke-Acts.[37]

He believes one of Luke’s primary purposes was to translate the message into a new culture. He therefore had to communicate in the thought forms of that culture. He used it as a powerful apologetic tool, showing Jews that Christianity fulfilled its ancient expectations and showing Roman citizens that this was no novel religion.

The Messianic Age – the Age of the Spirit

It seems like we have moved to a new topic, but on a little reflection, we have clearly not moved far from the arrival of the new age. To say “messiah” is to say “anointed one”. This is the Jewish idea of kingship. Therefore, for the kingdom to come is for the Spirit to come. There are a whole cluster of expectations in Isaiah that are inextricably related.[38] If the intervention of the rule of God is personified in Jesus, it is executed by the power of the Holy Spirit. There is complete scholarly consensus that this is a major Lucan theme.

The work of the Spirit is probably the most comprehensive aspect of Luke’s theology because it spans the period from before the birth of John and Jesus to the later moments of Paul’s ministry. Its span is therefore greater than the story of Jesus. However, everything he says about the Spirit is linked to Jesus, or witnesses to Jesus. The Holy Spirit is indeed, to use his words, the “Spirit of Jesus.” The terms “Holy Spirit” and “Spirit of Jesus” are used synonymously in Acts 16:6-7.

A summary of the Spirit’s work includes the following:

- The Spirit begins to move through prophetic activity just prior to the births John and Jesus, creating the first announcement of the dawning of the new age (1:41, 67).

- The Spirit is involved in the conception of Jesus and empowers John from his mother’s womb (1:15, 35).

- The Spirit continues to speak prophetically through some who recognize Jesus as a child of messianic destiny (2:26-27, 36-38).

- The Spirit anoints Jesus at his baptism, to launch his ministry (3:22).

- Jesus’ inaugural address in Nazareth has him quoting a crucial messianic (i.e. Holy Spirit anointing) text (4:16-20).

- Jesus ministers in works of authority through the power of the Spirit and is a “charismatic” in the sense that he has “Holy Spirit” ecstatic experiences (10:21). There are a number of texts that do not speak explicitly of the Spirit, but of power, which in context for Luke means the Holy Spirit.

- After his resurrection Jesus tells the disciples to wait for the coming of the Spirit (24:49).

- The Spirit falls at Pentecost, effectively launching the ministry of the church. The arrival of the Spirit is eschatological and prophetic (Acts 2:1-4, 14-21).

- Jesus announces that the three-fold movement of world missions will be accomplished through the power of the Spirit (Acts 1:8).

- The apostles and disciples then minister in similar power phenomena through the book of Acts, showing that the same Spirit that was on Jesus is now on them (4:31; 6:5; 7:55; 8:39; 10:44-45; 13:2-4; 13:52).

- Each people group is accepted into the messianic community through receiving the Holy Spirit.

Once we have a sense of the panoramic view, we must consider some of Luke’s use of language.

Holy Spirit language in Luke

1

1:15,41,67; 4:1

Filled with the Spirit, or full of the Spirit

2

1:35; 2:25; 3:22; 4:18

The Holy Spirit coming on, descending on, is on

3

3:16

Immersed in the Spirit (baptized)

4

10:21

Full of joy through the Holy Spirit

5

1:15; 4:14

In the power of the Spirit

6

11:13

The Father will give the Spirit

7

2:26

Revealed by the Spirit

2:27

Moved by the Spirit

12:12

The Holy Spirit will teach

The similarity of language in Acts is striking.

Holy Spirit language in Acts

1

2:4; 4:8, 31; 6:3,5; 7:55; 9:17; 11:24; 13:9;

Filled with the Spirit, full of the Spirit

2

8:15; 10:44; 11:15; 19:6

The Spirit coming on

2

2:17,18

Holy Spirit poured out

3

11:16

Immersed in the Spirit

4

13:52

Full of joy through the Spirit

5

1:8

Receive power through the Spirit

6

2:38; 8:18: 10:45; 15:8

The gift of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit given

6

8:15,17; 10:47; 19:2

Receive the Spirit

7

4:25

Spoke by the Spirit

7

1:16; 28:25

The Holy Spirit spoke long ago, through the Fathers

10:38

Anointed by the Spirit

2:33

Given by the Father

5:32

The witness of the Spirit

8:39

Carried bodily by the Spirit

9:31

Encouraged by the Spirit

11:28

Predicted through the Spirit

13:4; 15:28; 16:16; 20:22

Guidance by the Spirit, sent, restrained, compelled

The use of numbers in the left column shows how Luke and Acts either have identical or almost identical language. Then Acts has a surplus of terms, but they mirror the kind of terms found in Luke.

The clustering of terms in some passages is instructive, because it shows Luke using subtle variations to speak of the same phenomenon. In 8:15-19 we have “receive”, “come on”, “receive”, “given” and “receive.” Then in 10:44-11:15 the terms “came on”, “gift”, “received”, “came on”, and “immersed in” (baptized with) are used in the same context. In 19:2-6 “receive” and “came on” are synonymous.

If we were to only consider these terms we may be left with the impression of the Holy Spirit as a force. However, the fact that the Holy Spirit can be lied to, (which is to lie to God—5:3-4), or can be described as the “Spirit of Jesus,” or of “God,” safeguards against this. Nevertheless, Luke’s language use is fundamentally that of the Old Testament tradition of the Spirit as the empowering presence of God. Many of his terms are found in the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament). The Spirit is always acting, dynamically. There are always results: people are begotten, filled, empowered, sent, they lead, are encouraged, or emboldened. They are full of joy. They prophecy, predict, speak, have wisdom, receive guidance and can confront evil. As we shall see, this theme is closely associated with another Lucan emphasis, namely phenomena of healing, revelation and power.

The language describing the contact between the human subject and the Spirit of God is striking. The Spirit fills, immerses, comes on, falls on, or moves. Such language is perhaps best connected to the statement in Acts 2:33, “Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear.” Luke is referring to an evident, manifest, observable affect of the Spirit’s presence, often resulting in prophetic phenomena.

There are two conclusions to be drawn from this.

1. Anyone who has lived through a time of revival, or a distinct “move” of the Spirit, or in fact who reads about the phenomena of revival, will immediately recognize that Luke is accurately describing what happens.[39] The early church was experiencing great power. It shows in Luke’s language. This is where the principle of inter-subjectivity between the interpreter and the text applies. Commentators whose lived experience is far removed from such phenomena can never enter sympathetically into Luke’s language.

2. “Baptism in the Spirit” in Luke is one of a cluster of terms referring to such observable prophetic phenomena. Rather than try to harmonize Luke’s and Paul’s language, we should allow for diversity of language. What Paul means by “baptism in the Spirit” and what Luke means is not necessarily the same thing. One of the most fundamental rules of biblical interpretation is to take words in their context, not only in the sentence, but in the narrative and the corpus of the writer.[40] Luke’s language must be taken in the context of his whole narrative.

In summary:

- Luke has described an event of fulfilment: the arrival of the expected and relentless will, or purpose, or kingdom of God.

- This event is messianic, or focused on Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah.

- It breaks into history through the dynamic power of the Holy Spirit.

What does this event accomplish? We are now ready to move to the next section. It accomplishes healing and salvation!

Healing and Salvation

Marshall has made a really strong case for the fact that salvation and its related terms are Luke’s favourite words, and are central to his theology. The point I have made above is that while this may be true, salvation in Luke-Acts, as in the expectation of Isaiah, is part of a larger cluster of ideas that are first about the coming of the new or Messianic age.

The key New Testament terms, used by Luke are as follows:

- Sozo, to save, rescue (Luke 6:9; 7:50; 8:12; 9:24, 56; 13:23; 17:33; 18:26, 42; 19:10; 23:35, 37, 39; Acts 2:21, 40, 47; 4:12; 11:14; 15:1, 11; 16:30, 31; 27:20, 31).

- Sozo to refer to healing or rescue from danger (Luke 6:9; 8:36, 48, 50; 17:19; 18:42, 50; Acts 4:9; 14:9; 27:20, 31).

- Soteria, or soterion, salvation, deliverance (Luke 1:69, 77; 2:30; 3:6; 19:9; Acts 4:12; ; 7:25; 13:26, 47; 16:17; 27:34; 28:28).

- Diasozo, bring safety, save, and rescue (Acts 27:43, 44; 28:1, 4; 27:34).

- Soter, saviour, deliverer, or soterios, saving, delivering (Luke 1:47; 2:11; Acts 5:31; 13:23).

These relate back to the Septuagint and its translation of key Hebrew terms, from which the name Jesus is derived. Isaiah is the source in particular.

- Salvation or safety, as yeshuah, or yesha (Isaiah 12:2, 3; 17:10; 25:9; 26:1; 33:2, 6; 45:8, 49:6, 8; 51:5,6, 8; 52:7, 10; 56: 1, 11; 59: 11, 17; 60: 18; 61:10; 62:1, 10).

- To save, or be saved, yasha (Isaiah 25:9; 30:15; 33:22; 35:4; 37:20, 35; 38:20; 43:12; 45:17, 20, 22; 46:7; 47:13,15; 49:25; 59:1; 63:1, 9; 64:5).

- Saviour, from yasha, (Isaiah 19:20; 43:3, 11; 45:15, 21; 49:26; 60:16; 63:8).

Another point to note is the use of medical terms to describe healing. While these fall short of proving that Luke was a doctor, if we can conclude that he was probably Luke the physician for other reasons, the use of these terms makes sense (Luke 4:38; 8:44; 11:46; 14:2; 18:25; 21:34, 18, 24; 22:51 Acts 3:7; 8:7; 10:11; 13:11).[41] Who he was may be part of his reason for preferring this word group.

The likely genesis of Luke’s usage can therefore be viewed as follows.

1. This was already a major part of Isaiah’s language, possibly his favourite term within the larger context of kingdom, or eschatological expectation.

2. New Testament research normally comes to the conclusion that Jesus was particularly influenced by the language of Isaiah.

3. The way Luke relates Jesus’ inaugural address sets the tone for the use of Isaiah language (Luke 4:16f).

4. Luke then takes this up as his favourite word group, which may have fitted into his professional training.

We need to notice some of the details. First, following our comments about Luke’s possible interest, we should note that salvation cannot be reduced to a purely spiritual or moral dimension.[42] English bible readers tend to loose sight of the fact that the same term is used for physical healing. Not only is salvation physical, but people react with wonder and amazement because they can see the salvation of God in front of their eyes.

Salvation as healing in Luke-Acts

4:40

When the sun was setting, the people brought to Jesus all who had various kinds of sickness, and laying his hands on each one, he healed them. Moreover, demons came out of many people,

5:15

Yet the news about him spread all the more, so that crowds of people came to hear him and to be healed of their sicknesses.

6:17-19

A large crowd of his disciples was there and a great number of people from all over Judea, from Jerusalem, and from the coast of Tyre and Sidon, who had come to hear him and to be healed of their diseases. Those troubled by evil spirits were cured, and the people all tried to touch him, because power was coming from him and healing them all.

7:7

That is why I did not even consider myself worthy to come to you. But say the word, and my servant will be healed.

8:47-50

In the presence of all the people, she told why she had touched him and how she had been instantly healed. Then he said to her, "Daughter, your faith has healed you. Go in peace." While Jesus was still speaking, someone came from the house of Jairus, the synagogue ruler. "Your daughter is dead," he said. "Don't bother the teacher any more." Hearing this, Jesus said to Jairus, "Don't be afraid; just believe, and she will be healed."

9:11

but the crowds learned about it and followed him. He welcomed them and spoke to them about the kingdom of God, and healed those who needed healing.

9:42

But Jesus rebuked the evil spirit, healed the boy and gave him back to his father.

14:2

So taking hold of the man, he healed him and sent him away.

17:15

One of them (the lepers), when he saw he was healed, came back, praising God in a loud voice.

18:42-43

Jesus said to him, "Receive your sight; your faith has healed you." Immediately he received his sight.

22:49-51

And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear. But Jesus answered, "No more of this!" And he touched the man's ear and healed him.

Acts 4:8-10, 22

Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them: "Rulers and elders of the people! If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a cripple and are asked how he was healed, then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed … miraculously healed

5:15-16

As a result, people brought the sick into the streets and laid them on beds and mats so that at least Peter's shadow might fall on some of them as he passed by. Crowds gathered also from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing their sick and those tormented by evil spirits, and all of them were healed.

8:6-8

When the crowds heard Philip and saw the miraculous signs he did, they all paid close attention to what he said. With shrieks, evil spirits came out of many, and many paralytics and cripples were healed. So there was great joy in that city.

14:9

Paul looked directly at him, saw that he had faith to be healed and called out, "Stand up on your feet!" At that, the man jumped up and began to walk.

28:8

His father was sick in bed, suffering from fever and dysentery. Paul went in to see him and, after prayer, placed his hands on him and healed him.

Then we can notice the theological context. We will place these in logical, rather than chronological order. The pivotal statement (19:9—along with Mark) relates to the destiny the Son of Man. Luke places this as the last incident in the journey narrative, that is, as the climax of the ministry of Jesus, just prior to the passion narrative. It therefore sums up his entire ministry. We immediately notice two characteristics. First, it occurs “today”, or in the “now” of eschatological fulfilment. Second, what happens to Zacchaeus relates to his whole life. He is forgiven, socially accepted and undergoes moral transformation.

To be saved (italics) has a wide range of ideas. A number of contexts show the eschatological nature of salvation (underlined). To be saved is to enter the kingdom and come through the final judgment and coming of the Son of Man. Salvation is Davidic or Messianic (bold). As Isaiah expected, it is now truly universal, to all mankind. It includes the forgiveness of sins, but this aspect, so dear to Protestants, is but one part of a much bigger story.

The theology of salvation in Luke

19:8-9

But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, "Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount." Jesus said to him, "Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost."

9:23-27

If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will save it. What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit his very self? If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.

17:30-33

It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. On that day no one who is on the roof of his house, with his goods inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. Remember Lot's wife! Whoever tries to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve (save) it.

13:22-24, 28-29

Then Jesus went through the towns and villages, teaching as he made his way to Jerusalem. Someone asked him, "Lord, are only a few people going to be saved?" He said to them, "Make every effort to enter through the narrow door …There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out. People will come from east and west and north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God.

18:25-26

Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Those who heard this asked, "Who then can be saved?"

2:11

Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord.

3:6

And all mankind will see God's salvation.

1:77

to give his people the knowledge of salvation through the forgiveness of their sins

Acts paints a very similar picture. Once again italics indicate the sozo word group, underlined indicates the eschatological context, and bold indicates messianic language. We notice, as in Luke, that salvation cannot be reduced to a spiritual dimension. It includes physical healing. The context of the defining statement in 10:10, 12, and 13 is striking. To be saved is to be healed and to be healed is to be saved. Salvation is from the coming eschatological judgment. The jailor is perhaps scared of both the moment (earthquake) and its ultimate counterpart. It is Davidic, or messianic. To be saved is to have eternal life (life of the future ages). This salvation now becomes universal, including the Gentiles, and is now available in a new way, through the grace of the messianic age.

The theology of salvation in Acts

4:10, 12, 13

that this man stands before you healed … Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved … they could see the man who had been healed

2:20-21, 40, 47

The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord. And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved … With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, "Save yourselves from this corrupt generation" … And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

16:26, 29-30

Suddenly there was such a violent earthquake … The jailer called for lights, rushed in and fell trembling before Paul and Silas. He then brought them out and asked, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" They replied, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved--you and your household."

5:31

God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Saviour that he might give repentance and forgiveness of sins to Israel.

13:22-23, 26

`I have found David son of Jesse a man after my own heart; he will do everything I want him to do.' "From this man's descendants God has brought to Israel the Saviour Jesus,(4:23)” as he promised … "Brothers, children of Abraham, and you God-fearing Gentiles, it is to us that this message of salvation has been sent.

13:46-47

Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles. For this is what the Lord has commanded us: " `I have made you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.'

11:13-14

Household of Cornelius: Send to Joppa for Simon who is called Peter. He will bring you a message through which you and all your household will be saved.'

15:1, 11

Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved … No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.

The initial comments about salvation as a sub-set of the coming kingdom are clearly verified.

Salvation to previously excluded groups

We should recall some earlier comments. There is little doubt that the ministry of Jesus was characterized by the way it included people who were rejected by the religious system and had amongst his followers those who would not normally associate with each other. His kingdom announcement invited those previously uninvited to the messianic banquet. Luke picks this up and follows the thread, quite deliberately.

Sinners

The point has been made that forgiveness is one part of a bigger kingdom event, which includes physical healing and deliverance from fear of the eschaton. However, Luke certainly does sharpen the arrow towards forgiveness (italics). Before we look at who are reached, we should pause to look a bit more at this vital aspect. Notice again that the context is the coming of the eschatological or messianic era (underlined). This future event has already occurred in the death and resurrection of Jesus, through whom the kingdom has come. That is why forgiveness can now be offered. As N.T. Wright points out so often, the first context is forgiveness for Israel in exile for her sin. The restoration under Ezra and Nehemiah and the kingdom later established under Herod did not really fulfil the promise of forgiveness. It therefore had to await a future, eschatological moment of true forgiveness, now universalized to include Gentiles, just as Isaiah expected. Similarly, Wright would point out that the repentance being called for would have been about what it meant to be true Israel.[43] Luke records how the early church took this Israel focused message and made it relevant to the Gentile world in the context of future world judgment.

Forgiveness of sins

Luke 1:77

to give his people the knowledge of salvation through the forgiveness of their sins

3:3

John came, “preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.”

5:20

When Jesus saw their faith, he said, "Friend, your sins are forgiven."

But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins. . . ." He said to the paralyzed man, "I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home."

7:49

Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven--for she loved much. But he who has been forgiven little loves little."

11:2-4

Father, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come. Give us each day our daily bread. Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who sins against us. And lead us not into temptation.

24:46-47

He told them, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Acts 2:38

Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.

5:31

God exalted him as Prince and Savior that he might give repentance and forgiveness of sins to Israel.

10:42-43

He is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.

13:38-39

Therefore, my brothers, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Through him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses.

26:17-18

… the Gentiles. I am sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.

Closely linked to forgiveness of sins is the fact that the kingdom is for the lost. Chapter 15 is a striking narrative, found only in Luke’s gospel. It includes the three parables of:

- The lost sheep (1-7)

- The lost coin (8-10) and

- The lost son (11-31).

We have already noted that Luke ends the ministry of Jesus and the journey to Jerusalem with the saying: “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost” (19:10).

Who then are those previously excluded? They are sinners who are lost. There are other groups who receive the fulfilment of the Old Testament eschatological hope.

The Gentiles

Along with sinners, a group already mentioned in the infancy narrative (2:32) is the Gentiles. They remain a theme right through to the end of Acts (26:17-18).

- Paul is specifically called to the Gentiles (Acts 19:15; 26:17, 23).

- When Peter is manipulated by the Holy Spirit to invite the household of Cornelius to receive the Gospel, Luke (and Peter) notes it as a moment when Gentiles are included (10:45; 11:18).

- Then in Paul’s ministry he continually addresses both the people of Israel and the Gentiles (13:16, 26). The fact that both Jews and Gentiles believed is noted (14:1-2). As the mission progresses, the way the Gentiles are responding is increasingly evident (14:27; 15:3; 21:19). The pivotal text here is 13:46-48, linked to 18:6.

Then Paul and Barnabas answered them boldly: “We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles. For this is what the Lord has commanded us: ‘I have made you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.’ ” When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honoured the word of the Lord; and all who were appointed for eternal life believed.

- Equally crucial is the near division of the church over the controversy this precipitated (chapter 15) and the way in which the rejection of the Jews “turned” the apostles towards the Gentiles.

- That this was central to Luke’s message is clear from the way he ends Acts (28: 28-31).

“Therefore I want you to know that God's salvation has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will listen!” For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him. Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ.

The territory covered in this section shows that two groups are the primary focus of those previously rejected. They are sinners and Gentiles. Both these categories are inherent in Isaiah’s eschatological expectations and are therefore of the essence of the kingdom. A further significant part of this expectation is good news to the poor.

The Poor

The pivotal reading of Isaiah in Luke’s inaugural sermon of Jesus (Luke 4:18-19) speaks to particular categories of people:

The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favour.

It is often noted that the ending of the quote from Isaiah about coming judgment (vengeance) is excluded. This is the time of grace. Judgment will surely come.

Equally crucial is Jesus’ teaching in the beatitudes (6:20-25). Compared to Matthew, Luke gives much more weight to the literal, material meaning of the language.

- Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.

- Blessed are you who hunger now, for you will be satisfied.

- But woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your comfort.

- Woe to you who are well fed now, for you will go hungry.

This is part of a larger “reversal” theme in Luke, first introduced in the song of Mary (1:52). There are a number of teachings about the rich/poor and the reversal of their state in the coming age: the parable of the rich fool (12.13-21) and the rich man and Lazarus (16.19-31). The fact that these sayings are within a wider context of the reversal of persecution/popularity and self righteousness/faith (16:14-15 and 6:22, 26) shows that Luke understood, or knew that Jesus understood, the Old Testament definition of the “poor” as those who are both materially poor and those who trust in God, or are dependent on him.

Then, when John’s disciples want Jesus to authenticate himself, his answer recalls language from Isaiah and pointedly ends with the poor as the climax of the statement.

Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor (7:22).

The saying about cleansing the cup has no mention of the poor in Matthew 25:26, but in 11:39-41 Luke has, “Now then, you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness. You foolish people! Did not the one who made the outside make the inside also? But give what is inside the dish to the poor, and everything will be clean for you.”

When Zacchaeus repents, he makes his confession in terms of giving back to the poor (19.8). Luke alone records Jesus saying about the poor widow, who gave more than any other (21:1-4). With Mathew he records the word to the rich young man, so sell all and give to the poor (18.18-25, Mt.19.16-23). However, he includes the command to sell possessions and give to the poor in the Sermon on the Mount, which Matthew lacks (12.32-34).

This theme continues in Acts. Clearly Luke wrote in a social context where real poverty was an issue.[44] Dorcas is praised for the way she gave to the poor (Acts 9.36), as is Cornelius (10.2, 4, 31), and Luke tells us of the special offering for the saints in Jerusalem during the famine (11:27-30; 24.7). Luke records the communality of the early church (2:44f; 4:32; 6:1-6) and there is the frightening story of Ananias and Sapphira (5:4).

A point worth discussing is what Luke understood by the release of the oppressed in 4:18-19. The Greek aphesis usually means forgiveness in the New Testament. However, in the Septuagint is normally refers to literal release from oppression, as found in the year of Jubilee.[45] The Old Testament meaning is probably retained here. Clearly there a social dimension retained in Luke’s idea of reversal. In the original context of Jesus in Judaism the Pharisees identified the “rich” with the “righteous.” Jesus message reverses this theology.

The three previously rejected groups discussed so far all fall within Old Testament expectation of the messianic age. However, the next group takes the focus of salvation into new territory.

Samaritans

John’s story of the Samaritan women is best known (John 4:7-9), but only Luke records the parable of the Good Samaritan (10:29-37). Only Luke tells of the one leper who returned to give thanks, who was a Samaritan (17:11-18).

Jesus strategy of world missions particularly includes Samaritans (Acts 1:8). Luke tells of how the Gospel went to them, as a new people group, just as Jesus had directed (8:1-14). The spread of the gospel includes specific mention of the Samaritans (9:31; 15:3). Their reception of the Spirit shows them entering the kingdom as a people group.

If one notices these categories of people and how Luke views them, the cumulative effect is clear: Luke wanted to stress how the kingdom included those previously rejected, or marginalized.

Women & Children

As with many of these themes, the focus itself goes back to Jesus (John 4:5-30; Matthew 15:22-28; Mark 5:25-34). However, Luke seems to have picked it up and included material not found in the other Gospels.

Women

He includes with Matthew that a group of women helped support Jesus financially, and travelled with him (8:1-3; Mt.27:55-56; Mk.15:40). He does not tell the story of anointing at Bethany (Mark 14:1-11; Matthew 26:6) but he does tell the story of the women who anointed Jesus feet with her hair (7:36-39). With Mark and Matthew he tells of how women were the first witnesses of the resurrection (24:1-12; Mark 16:1-10; Matthew 28:1-10).

Here is a list of the special stories about women in Luke.

- He raises the only son of the widow of Nain (7:11-17).

- The women who wiped his feet with her hair, and the way Jesus used her as a model of repentance and forgiveness in rebuke of Simon, the righteous Pharisee (7.36-50).

- The story of Mary and Martha, and how Mary was worthy to hear teaching (10:38-42).

- Jesus heals the women from a bent back, calling her a “daughter of Abraham” (13:10-17).

- In the parable of the lost coin, the woman represents God (15:8-10).

- The persistent woman illustrates prayer (18:1-8).

- Women of Jerusalem weep for Jesus and he has a special word for them (23:27-31).

The emphasis continues in Acts.

- Women are especially named as present in the upper room and Pentecost (Acts 1:12-14; 2:1-2, 14-47).

- More men and women believed (5:14; 8:12).

- The story of Lydia at Philippi (Ac.16:13-15).

- The prominent women who believed at Thessalonica (Ac.17:1-4, see also Ac.17:34) and at Corinth (Ac.18:2).

- Priscilla and Aquila are an interesting couple in various ways. Her name comes first, which reverses the social practice and may indicate her leading role. She instructed Apollos (Ac.18:2, 18-19, 24-26).

- Special mention is made of the daughters of Philip who prophesied (Ac.21:9).

- The early church seems to have had a special order of widows (6:1; 9:36-43).

- Women played an important role in hosting both Paul and home churches (12:12; 16:15).

Children

As with women, the focus on children is found in the other gospels as well, but Luke as found stories of his own to add, although the extra material is hardly striking.

- Jesus gives a special blessing to children (Mark 10:13-16) and they are brought to Jesus to pray for them (Luke 8:15-17; Matthew 19:13).

- Jesus says that welcoming children is like welcoming him (Matthew 18:2-6; Mark 9:36-37).

- Jesus raises a child from the dead, the daughter of Jairus the synagogue ruler (Luke 8:49-56; Mark 5:37-43).

- Jesus delivers a child from a demon (9:37-43).

- In Luke the infancy narrative records the prophecy about Elijah, who will turn the hearts of the Fathers to the children (1:17).

The Proclamation of the Word

A prominent aspect of the ministry of Jesus was the connection between the announcement and demonstration of the kingdom, attested in all three Synoptic Gospels.[46] The ministry of Jesus is continued through the 12 and the 70, with the same connection between word and deed (Luke 9:2; 10:9).[47] Luke therefore connects the word (italics) with the work (underlined) of Jesus, as is evident from the first three references below. The message God sent through Jesus (Acts 10:36) is that God anointed Jesus with power, to heal and do good (10:38). Speaking the word and proclaiming are closely connected. In the latter texts we notice that the spread of the word becomes a marker for Luke to denote the geographical spread of the kingdom (bold).

Speaking the word of God

24:19

"About Jesus of Nazareth," they replied. "He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people.

Acts 4:29-31

Now, Lord, consider their threats and enable your servants to speak your word with great boldness. Stretch out your hand to heal and perform miraculous signs and wonders through the name of your holy servant Jesus." After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly.

8:4-8

Those who had been scattered preached the word wherever they went. Philip went down to a city in Samaria and proclaimed the Christ there. When the crowds heard Philip and saw the miraculous signs he did, they all paid close attention to what he said. With shrieks, evil spirits came out of many, and many paralytics and cripples were healed. So there was great joy in that city.

1:2

Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word.

3:1

during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the desert.

5:1

One day as Jesus was standing by the Lake of Gennesaret, with the people crowding around him and listening to the word of God,

8:11

This is the meaning of the parable: The seed is the word of God.

6:2

It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables.

6:7

So the word of God spread. The number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly,

8:14

When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God

11:1

The apostles and the brothers throughout Judea heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God.

12:24

But the word of God continued to increase and spread – just before the Gentile mission begins.

13:5

When they arrived at Salamis, they proclaimed the word of God in the Jewish synagogues.

13:49

The word of the Lord spread through the whole region – Pisidian Antioch

19:10

This went on for two years, so that all the Jews and Greeks who lived in the province of Asia heard the word of the Lord.

General usage along the same lines is found in 13:44, 46, 48; 14:25; 15:35; 17:13; 18:11.

The word of God is declared, or told (eipon). Most uses of eipon denote ordinary human communication, but some have the added sense of declaring the word of God. So Jesus “speaks” parables and prophetic words are spoken.

Declaring

12:16; 15:3;

18:9; 19:11; 21:29

And he told them this parable …

Acts 1:16

the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David

2:16

No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel

4:25

You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David

To proclaim the kingdom is to speak (italics) the word. Laleo (to speak, declare, make an announcement, preach) and lego (cognate of logos, to say, speak, make an address, declare) operate in much the same way. Most times they denote simply, to hold human conversation, but often they carry the extra idea of speaking forth the word. It is that special kind of talking that happens when the word is spread. The Holy Spirit (underlined) is the one speaking. In fact revelatory experiences are normally described as such “talking” (see texts below table). They are placed in the same table below.

Speaking

1:70

as he said through his holy prophets of long ago

2:38

Coming up to them at that very moment, she gave thanks to God and spoke about the child to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem.

9:10-11

Then he took them with him and they withdrew by themselves to a town called Bethsaida, but the crowds learned about it and followed him. He welcomed them and spoke to them about the kingdom of God, and healed those who needed healing.

24:25

How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!

Acts 2:30-31

But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ,

4:20

For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.

19:8

Paul entered the synagogue and spoke boldly (parresia, boldness of speech) there for three months, arguing persuasively about the kingdom of God.

24:24

Several days later Felix came with his wife Drusilla, who was a Jewess. He sent for Paul and listened to him as he spoke about faith in Christ Jesus (dialogumenon, discourse)

We have God spoke (7:6); the angel spoke (7:38; 10:7); the voice (fone) spoke (10:15; 11:9); spoke in a vision (18:9); and the Holy Spirit spoke (28:25).

The word is the message. Again, to speak the word (logos or message, italics) is to demonstrate its power (underlined). When spoken it is a speech or ryma. We group these together in the table below.

The message

4:32

They were amazed at his teaching, because his message had authority.

Acts 2:41

Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.

4:4

But many who heard the message believed, and the number of men grew to about five thousand.

5:20

tell the people the full message of this new life.

11:14

He will bring you a message through which you and all your household will be saved.

13:26

Brothers, children of Abraham, and you God-fearing Gentiles, it is to us that this message of salvation has been sent.

14:3

speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to do miraculous signs and wonders.

15:7

Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe.

This sense in also found in Acts 11:19; 17:11.

The proclamation is the keryma, from kerusso, to proclaim, preach or announce. It carries a similar meaning to kataggelo, to announce or proclaim. Closely liked to this is euangelion (good news), from which we get euangelizo, to evangelise. We include these terms in the table below.

Proclaiming or announcing

4:18

to preach good news to the poor

8:1

After this, Jesus travelled about from one town and village to another, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God

9:60

Proclaim the kingdom of God

Acts 4:2

apostles were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection of the dead.

20:27

To proclaim the full will of God

26:23

That the Christ would suffer and, as the first to rise from the dead, would proclaim light to his own people and to the Gentiles."

5:42

Day after day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they never stopped teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the Christ.

17:3

This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ

Then we notice that to proclaim (italics) is linked to teaching the kingdom. To teach, or teaching, is part of the same context. The second volume is what Jesus continued to “do and teach” (Acts 1:1; see also Luke 4:31; Acts 4:18; 5:21, 28; 21:21).

In conclusion, the event that has occurred, fulfilling Old Testament expectation, namely the arrival of the new age, or the coming of the Kingdom, focused on Jesus, empowered by the Holy Spirit, spreads through this cluster of terms: proclamation, the word, the message, speaking, announcing and teaching. To speak kingdom words is to demonstrate, or do the kingdom.

This theme is closely connected with the next one.

Signs, Wonders and Reactions

One could describe these two themes separately, but this would create repetition, due to the fact that most of the reaction language (wonder, praise, prayer, joy) is in reaction to the announcement and demonstration of the kingdom in signs and wonders. Luke certainly has a theology of power, which is once more, merely a working out of what almost all Jesus scholars accept was a special characteristic of the ministry of Jesus.

Here we must note a deliberate progression.

1. Jesus comes announcing and demonstrating the kingdom.

2. He commissions the 12 and the 70 to do precisely the same and they find to their joy and surprise, that God indeed confirms their message with signs.

3. Luke then records how the apostles and members of the early church proclaim and demonstrate the word just as Jesus had done. There is a deliberate positive comparison between Jesus and the apostles, especially Peter. Many of the incidents in Peter’s life are modelled on what he had observed in the ministry of Jesus.

The implication is unavoidable. The church is to continue the model of Jesus ministry. It is impossible to reduce the message, word, proclamation, or announcement into purely spiritual or legal justification terms. The event of the kingdom includes forgiveness and justification by faith, but this is one aspect of the whole picture of the rule of God intervening, fulfilling all the Old Testament expectations of the messianic era, or the coming age.

While the focus of the event of the kingdom is healing, general revelatory experiences equally characterize this era. It is a prophetic era, including phenomena of angels, dreams, visions and prophetic words. The prophetic is no less a sign than healing. All such phenomena are once again, a cluster of interrelated ideas. Simply to create the list, or read it, is quite repetitive, but the lesson should not be lost.

The human reactions of wonder, praise and joy are seen to be appropriate to the enormity of the event itself (underlined). In fact, if such reactions were to cease, it would mean that the event of the kingdom had ceased to occur. The tone is set right from the infancy narrative (the first 9 listed below) and then follows with regularity. However, a noticeable feature is that reactions of wonder or praise are recorded on a ratio of about 1/5. If one examines the list, it becomes obvious that many signs are simply noted, with no reactions. Luke does not seem to want to make a rule out of such reactions, or go “over the top” with them. He seems to be quite restrained most of the time. The reaction language in the resurrection appearances is remarkably restrained, given what he is describing.

Prophetic or revelatory phenomena (bold) are particularly appropriate for the dawning of the new era as the time of announcement.

Prophetic and Power phenomena, and Reactions in Luke

1:11-12

Angelic appearance to Zechariah: When Zechariah saw him, he was startled and was gripped with fear.

1:15-17

Spirit filled from birth

1:26

Angelic appearance to Mary

1:35

Jesus conceived by the Holy Spirit

1:41, 44, 57

Elizabeth: babe leapt, Spirit filled … In a loud voice she exclaimed

1:63-65

He asked for a writing tablet, and to everyone's astonishment he wrote, "His name is John." Immediately his mouth was opened and his tongue was loosed, and he began to speak, praising God. The neighbours were all filled with awe, and throughout the hill country of Judea people were talking about all these things.

1:67

Zechariah prophesies, Spirit filled

2:9-15, 18

Angelic appearance to Shepherds: the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified … and all who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds said to them.

2:25-27, 33

Simeon prophesies: The child's father and mother marvelled at what was said about him.

2:36-38

Anna prophesies

3:11

Holy Spirit/dove descends on Jesus

4:1, 14

Jesus, full/power of the Spirit

4:18, 22

Isaiah, Messianic anointing fulfilled: All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips.

4:36-37

Power, orders spirit to leave: All the people were amazed and said to each other, "What is this teaching? …And the news about him spread throughout the surrounding area.

4:40

Heals all the sick in the village

5:1-11

The great catch of fish: For he and all his companions were astonished at the catch of fish they had taken.

5:12-15

Heals the leper

5:17

Power present to heal

5:18-26

Paralytic healed: Immediately he stood up in front of them, took what he had been lying on and went home praising God. Everyone was amazed and gave praise to God. They were filled with awe and said, "We have seen remarkable things today."

6:10-11

Shrivelled hand restored

6:18

Large crowed, healed, cured of spirits

6:19

Power coming from him, healing

7:1-10, 17

Centurion’s son healed: They were all filled with awe and praised God.

8:22-25

Calms the storm: In fear and amazement they asked one another, “Who is this?”

8:26-37

Cured ‘legion’ of demons: Then all the people of the region of the Gerasenes asked Jesus to leave them, because they were overcome with fear.

8:42-48

Woman healed of bleeding

8:46

Power has gone out of me

8:51-56

Jairus’s daughter raised to life: Her parents were astonished

9:6

Disciples: healed people everywhere

9:10-17

Feeds the 5000

9:28-38

Transfigured before 3 disciples

9:37-43

Healed demonized boy: And they were all amazed at the greatness of God.

10:17-21

The seventy-two returned with joy and said, "Lord, even the demons submit to us in your name." At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth …

11:14

Mute demon driven out: When the demon left, the man who had been mute spoke, and the crowd was amazed.

13:10-14

Crippled woman healed: and immediately she straightened up and praised God.

17:11-19

10 lepers healed: One of them, when he saw he was healed, came back, praising God in a loud voice. He threw himself at Jesus' feet and thanked him

18:35-43

Jericho, blind beggar healed: Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus, praising God. When all the people saw it, they also praised God.

22:51

Healed cut off ear

23:44-46

Eclipse of sun, earthquake

24: 5, 36-41

Resurrection and ascension: In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground … Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you." They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost … And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement …

24:52

The ascension: And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement …

If one follows the various themes in Luke-Acts it is difficult to find a note that is struck with more regularity than this one. The story continues in Acts with similar regularity.

Prophetic and Power phenomena and Reactions in Acts

1:5

You will be baptized with the Holy Spirit

1:8

You will receive power

2:1-3

Mighty wind, fire

2:4-5

All filled with the Holy Spirit: When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. Utterly amazed, they asked …

2:17-18

I will pour out my Spirit on all people

2:33

Jesus, from the Father, poured out the Holy Spirit

3:1-11

Peter says to the cripple ‘stand up and walk’: Then he went with them into the temple courts, walking and jumping, and praising God. When all the people saw him walking and praising God … they were filled with wonder and amazement at what had happened to him … While the beggar held on to Peter and John, all the people were astonished and came running to them in the place called Solomon's Colonnade.

4:7

By the power in the name of Jesus

4:8

Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit said …

4:30

They prayed for the power to do signs and wonders

4:31

The place was shaken, they were all filled with the Spirit

4:33

Apostles: testified with great power

5:1-11

A couple struck dead: Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.

5:16

The crowds, the sick, the demonized, all healed

5:19-20

Angelic intervention while in prison

6:8

Stephen: full of grace and power

6:5, 10

Stephen: full of the Holy Spirit

7:55, 59

Stephen: full of the Holy Spirit

8:6-8

Those with demonic spirits, the paralysed, and the cripples were healed: So there was great joy in that city.

8:15-18

Samaritans received the Holy Spirit

8:29

The Spirit told Philip

8:39

The Spirit took Philip away

9:1-18

Saul has a blinding revelation of Jesus

9:17

Saul, be filled with the Holy Spirit

9:31

Whole church encouraged by the Spirit

10:10-17

Peter in a trance/revelation

10:19

The Holy Spirit said to Peter …

10:44

The Holy Spirit came on all who heard

10:45

Gift of the Holy Spirit given to Gentiles: The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles.

11:12

Peter explains: the Spirit told me

11:24

Barnabas: full of the Holy Spirit

11:28

Agabus: foretold through the Holy Spirit

12:7-10

Prison: Angelic intervention

12:23

Herod’s death through angelic intervention

13:2

At Antioch the Holy Spirit said …

13:4

Sent on their way by the Holy Spirit

13:9

Paul, filled with the Spirit looked straight at Elymas he was … struck blind: When the proconsul saw what had happened, he believed, for he was amazed at the teaching about the Lord.

13:52

The disciples filled with joy and with the Spirit

14:8-9, 11

Paul said to a cripple, ‘stand up on your feet’: When the crowd saw what Paul had done, they shouted in the Lycaonian language, "The gods have come down to us in human form!"

16:6-7

They were forbidden by the Holy Spirit

16:9

Paul is led through a vision at night

16:18

At Philippi: an evil spirit driven out

16:26-34

Through an earthquake they are released from prison: The jailer called for lights, rushed in and fell trembling before Paul and Silas … he was filled with joy because he had come to believe in God--he and his whole family.

19:6

Paul laid his hands on them and they were filled with the Holy Spirit

19:11-12

Miracles through Paul, even his handkerchiefs cured illness

20:7-12

A young man is raised from the dead

20:22

Compelled by the Holy Spirit

20:23

In every city, the Holy Spirit warns

21:4

Through the Holy Spirit they urged Paul

21:11

The Holy Spirit says …

27:23-25

Through angelic appearance Paul is assured about a shipwreck

28:1-6

Paul is immune to snake bite

28:8-9

The Father of Publius is cured

There are a number of implications that follow from this rather overt theme in Luke-Acts.

1. Luke’s worldview is anything but rationalistic. He would not have made a good Sadducee, and he does not “fit” easily with modernism. He has what Charles Craft has described as a theology of power.[48] One cannot divide this worldview and select only the healing stories and reject the angelic appearances, or accept prophetic phenomena as some sort of valid experience while discounting the healings. The story is so interrelated and coherent that one has to take it or leave it, as is! This will inevitably create a division amongst his interpreters. Those whose worldview is at odds with Luke will tend to find reasons to distance him from the historical sources, because they frankly do not find what he says credible. One should factor this into arguments about the early or later dating of his writings. Those who share his worldview, readers of the history of revivals, evangelicals who value the tradition of the great awakenings, charismatic Catholics, and particularly Pentecostal, charismatic and empowered evangelicals, will tend to believe he wrote soon after the events, because they resonate with such reality. In fact, it is very difficult for any interpreter with a rationalistic worldview to relate well to Luke’s theology.

2. His portrayal of Jesus and the early church has implications for our definition of the Gospel. It does not sit well with Protestant reductions of the Gospel that wish to leave out power phenomena. As noted in the beginning of this section, Luke’s Jesus had a ministry of power, which he passed on to the 12 and the 70, and which he clearly expected his followers to emulate. Luke records that they did emulate Jesus, exactly. So we have to ask the question, what kind of Gospel do we represent today?

3. Luke-Acts is the text for what Wimber has called “power evangelism.” Again and again the spread of the gospel is credited to phenomena of power. To teach, proclaim, or spread the word is to demonstrate it. To demonstrate it is to cause reactions of amazement, joy, fear and astonishment. This is a major cause of the message spreading.

Prayer

“More than any of the other Evangelists Saint Luke brings before his readers the subject of Prayer; and that in two ways, (1) by the example of Christ, and (2) by direct instruction.”[49] Plummer lists seven occasions where only Luke records how Jesus prayed.

1. At his baptism (3:21)

2. Before his first confrontation with the Jewish hierarchy (5:16).

3. Before choosing the 12 (6:12).

4. Before the first prediction of the passion (9:18).

5. At the transfiguration (9:29).

6. Before teaching the kingdom prayer (11:1).

7. On the cross (23: 34, 47).

With the Synoptics he describes how Jesus prayed in Gethsemane (22:41; Matthew 26:37; Mark 14:35) and his retirement to prayer after the feeding of the 5000 (9:17; Matthew 14:23; Mark 6:46).

Only Luke tells of the following statements Jesus made about prayer.

1. He assured Peter that he had prayed for him (22:32, 40).

2. “Ask, and it shall be given to you” (11:9).

3. The parable of the friend at midnight (11:5-13).

4. The parable of the unrighteous judge (18:1-8).

5. The parable of the Pharisee and the sinner illustrates the difference between real and posturing prayer (18:11-13).

6. In Jesus teaching on watching in prayer, he adds “Be always on the watch, and pray that you may be able to escape all that is about to happen, and that you may be able to stand before the Son of Man” (21:36).

Here are statements about prayer in Acts.

Prayer in Acts

1:14

Before Pentecost: They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.

1:24-25

Then they prayed, "Lord, you know everyone's heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs."

2:42

The first converts: They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

3:1-2

One day Peter and John were going up to the temple at the time of prayer--at three in the afternoon. Now a man crippled from birth …

4:23-24, 31

On their release, Peter and John went back to their own people and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said to them. When they heard this, they raised their voices together in prayer to God. "Sovereign Lord," … After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly.

6:3-6

Brothers, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them and will give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the word … They chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit; also Philip, Procorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas from Antioch, a convert to Judaism. They presented these men to the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them.

7:59

While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit."

8:15

When they arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

8:22-24

Peter says to Simon: Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord. Perhaps he will forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. For I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin." Then Simon answered, "Pray to the Lord for me so that nothing you have said may happen to me."

9:40

Peter sent them all out of the room; then he got down on his knees and prayed. Turning toward the dead woman, he said, "Tabitha, get up." She opened her eyes, and seeing Peter she sat up.

10:9

About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray.

10:31

Cornelius, God has heard your prayer and remembered your gifts to the poor.

13:2-3

While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them." So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off.

14:23

Paul and Barnabas appointed elders for them in each church and, with prayer and fasting, committed them to the Lord, in whom they had put their trust.

20:36-37

When he had said this, he knelt down with all of them and prayed. They all wept as they embraced him and kissed him.

21:5-6

All the disciples and their wives and children accompanied us out of the city, and there on the beach we knelt to pray. After saying good-by to each other, we went aboard the ship, and they returned home.

28:8

His father was sick in bed, suffering from fever and dysentery. Paul went in to see him and, after prayer, placed his hands on him and healed him.

To state the obvious, the early church prayed as they waited for Pentecostal power, before important missions, to impart the Holy Spirit, before they chose leaders, for chosen leaders, in regular devotions, before asking for a healing or rising from the dead, when they said good buy, and as they died. They considered prayer to be a major priority for leaders.

Linked to this is the fact that, often through the laying on of hands, the Holy Spirit is prayed for as each significant people group is added. Prayer for and reception of the Spirit is the way in to the kingdom.

Financial and social implications

Luke was, in many ways, a kind of ancient equivalent to a modern sociologist. Of course, he did not have their contemporary discipline or worldview, but he certainly did have an eye for social groups, their behaviour, and particularly their interaction. We have already discovered that Luke has given focus to six categories of people as recipients of the messianic blessing: sinners, Gentiles, Samaritans, the poor, women and children. These groups begin as a focus in the Gospel.

We have noted that Luke also had an eye for numbers, historical chronology and geography. He could have constructed his text using any of these as his perspective. However, he has clearly structured Acts on people groups. This shows his criterion of selection. Three of these categories come into particular focus: Jews, Samaritans and Gentiles. The strategy Jesus lays out is as follows:

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth (1:8).

You may have noticed that I have changed the position of the commas in this text. Grammatically it reads better to have no commas before “and”, but we must read this text with the full story of Acts in mind. Basically Luke structures Acts as follows.

- Chapters 1-8 describe the spread of the kingdom to Jewish people (Jerusalem and Judea).

- Chapters 9-11 describe the spread of the kingdom beyond Judaism, amongst Samaritans and the beginnings of the gospel spreading to Gentiles.

- Chapters 12-28 describe the mission to the Gentiles in three apostolic journeys.

We will examine the structure of Acts in more detail below. Here we simply want to establish the fact that Acts is structured on people groups.

Once we notice this, we then find other groups that play a significant role.

Along with John and Matthew, Luke emphasizes the negative role of the Jewish authorities. He is most aware of the official Jewish religious system and he systematically shows how the early church evolves from being a sect within Judaism to a movement that grows amongst Gentiles.

He gives special emphasis to the Roman authorities. In fact one could argue that his purpose is to write an apologetic to a Roman official of high rank (Luke 1:1-4). He then has a deliberate apologetic task throughout Acts, showing the church as a benign religion within the empire, no longer tied to Judaism.

He then gives considerable coverage to a potential division within the early church, between Judaisers and champions of grace (Acts 15). The three key leaders, namely James, Peter and Paul are not viewed as individuals, but as representatives of two interest groups (Peter vacillates between the two, representing the way the church itself struggled to resolve the issue). This painful process is itself premised on the group issues of Judaism versus Christianity.

Clearly people groups are important to him, and how they inter-react.

He does more than present various groups and their interrelationship. Society is also about wealthy and poverty and the stewardship of money and resources. We have noted his theme of social reversal. The kingdom overturns worldly value systems. Woe to the rich. Blessings on the poor! This does not mean that Luke is against the rich. However, how people handle their wealth or possessions is the key issue.

Here is an inventory of this theme. Some of this overlaps with the focus on the poor, but this is a particular view of the data.

- The dawning of the new age means that he will fill the hungry with good things and send the rich away empty (1:53).

- Joseph and Mary did not make a wealthy person’s offering at the temple (1:24).

- The saying “Give, and it will be given to you” (6:38), follows the woes and blessings of the rich and the poor (6:20-26).

- Various wealthy women help support Jesus financially (8:2-3).

- The Pharisees are told to give to the poor (11:41). “Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone” (11:42).

- Luke alone includes the parable of the rich fool (12:31-21). He places this before the teaching shared with Matthew, about trusting God for provisions, like the ravens and the lilies, but then he adds a piece Matthew includes elsewhere:

Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also (12:33-34).

- The prominent Pharisee is told: “When you give a luncheon or dinner, do not invite your friends, your brothers or relatives, or your rich neighbours; if you do, they may invite you back and so you will be repaid. But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed. Although they cannot repay you, you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous” (14:12-13).

- Only Luke includes the parable of the manager and his use of possessions (16:1-13). It ends saying, “You cannot serve both God and Money.”

- Only Luke includes the story of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31), which seems to illustrate the beatitude.

- The story of the rich ruler describes how hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom (18:18-30).

- Only Luke includes the story of Zacchaeus, a very wealthy tax collector who gives back to the poor when he enters the kingdom (16:1-10).

- Jesus drives out those who were selling (making money) in the temple, a place that should have been dedicated to prayer (19:45-46).

- Only Luke includes the saying about the widows offering (21:1-4).

- Judas betrays Jesus for money (22:5). Matthew simply records that Judas got 30 coins. Luke says they “agreed to give him money.”

- The first Christian community is described as follows: “All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need” (Acts 2:44-45). A similar description is given later.

All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need (4:32-34).

This is told just before the terrifying story of the couple who lied about their offering and kept back some for themselves (5:1-11). Ask yourself this question. If you were a member of the early church, would you be likely to think carefully about your giving after a story like that?

- Peter does not have “silver and gold” but he has the name of Jesus (3:6).

- There is a dispute between Hebrew and Hellenist widows over resources of food. The apostles create a special group of leaders to resolve the problem (6:1-6). Is it coincidental that one of Luke’s customary statements about church growth follows this passage? (6:7).

- Dorcas is mentioned for her giving to the poor (9:36).

- Soon after Cornelius is mentioned as one who “gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly” (10:2). His prayers and gifts had been noticed by God (10:4).

- The church in Antioch sends a special offering to help the poorer church in Jerusalem during the famine (11:27-30).

- Paul takes an offering from churches that include many Gentiles to help the Jewish Christian community in Jerusalem (24:17).

Clearly Luke has taken over an existing emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. He includes material he shares with Matthew, but then has found significant material of his own to give further emphasis to the theme. He then uses this as a criterion of selection for the story of the early church, where he continues to strike the same note. It is up to later writers to debate the nature of early Christian communalism and whether Luke intended to suggest this as a permanent model. Whatever our conclusions, the story of Ananias and Sapphira, placed where it is, must strike us with a certain amount of fear over materialistic life styles.

One conclusion is obvious. For Luke, entering the kingdom involves a fundamental change of values about possessions. Christian discipleship must include a strong sense of stewardship about possessions and a call to give to the poor. Luke-Acts is an ideal text for the exposition of the letter of James.

As with many of Luke’s themes, we must notice their interrelation. We have focused on possessions and ethics in this section. However, it is closely related to people groups. It is also closely related to the presence of the Spirit and the messianic age. Schackenburg puts the themes together:

Clearly then, the Holy Ghost was a strong driving force. But above all he brought into being in the early church the awareness that a new stage had been reached in the history of salvation, in which God’s eschatological salvific acts are taking place. This frame of mind urged men to a revolutionary remodelling of the whole of life. The Spirit gave this band of believers in Christ the conviction that it was God’s new community of salvation, so compelling the development of a new communal life.[50]

A Synthesis in Discipleship

We have noted a number of times that Luke’s themes are interrelated. They tend to merge. One way of integrating a number of these themes is to place them all under the call to discipleship. Joel Green integrates a number of themes into discipleship:

- Christianity is called The Way, so the people in The Way are on a journey (Acts 9:1; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22)

- The journey is emulated by Jesus, who sets his face to Jerusalem. This is part of Luke showing the movement of the kingdom from Galilee to Jerusalem.

- To be with Jesus, as the 12, or 70, or the early church, therefore means to be on the journey as well. One enters through repentance and faith, responding to his call.

- This involves one in prayer and praise, as a witness of the signs and wonders of the kingdom. As a participant in the journey one is called to mission, faith, prayer and praise.

- To be with Jesus in the journey is to join oneself to a poor person, someone whose parents could not make an expensive offering, and who was supported financially by others during his ministry. This is not a journey into material prosperity! In fact Jesus is someone who makes uncomfortable challenges about materialism, possessions and power.

- All those who join in the journey are participating in the arrival of the messianic age and form a new, radical, egalitarian community, where possessions and love are shared at a new level, transcending previous divisions of wealth, ethnicity, and gender.[51]

One can see how each of these points can be derived from the themes we have already followed.

THE PURPOSE OF LUKE-ACTS

In one sense, to study Luke’s theology is to study his purpose. Most of what we have described above therefore describes his purpose.

However, we must now explore if, in addition to being an evangelist (someone with a message), Luke had a narrower purpose in mind, associated with the particular occasion of his writing.

This subject is related to the question of date. We will defend an earlier dating for both Luke and Acts below. One of the reasons is that there is so much that seems to be connected to the occasion of Paul’s trial. Or, stated somewhat differently, there is a strong apologetic purpose to show the church in a favourable light to Roman authorities, which is best explained by the occasion of Paul’s impending trial.

Rome had become quite sceptical about Oriental religions, even fearful of their harmful effects on the population. For Christian missionaries to work effectively with Roman citizens, it was necessary to stifle these fears and to make Christianity a religion that Romans could embrace without being considered traitors to their country. This Luke does by showing how Roman official after Roman official refuses to stand in the way of the new movement.[52]

Here are the key points in this theme.

- Neither Pontius Pilate nor Herod Antipas find substance in the charges against Jesus (Luke 23: 14f).

- The centurion at the cross pronounces Jesus a righteous man (23:47).

- The officials in Philippi end up apologizing to Paul for having imprisoned him, since he is a Roman citizen (16:38-39).

- Gallio, the provincial governor of Achaia, will not prohibit Christian preaching in Corinth (18:12-17).

- At Ephesus the town clerk declares Paul innocent (19:35-41).

- King Agrippa II and Festus, the procurator of Judea, after having heard Paul’s defence, conclude that he has done nothing wrong (26:31-32).

Almost as a thread within the same theme, the Jews are continually shown to be the reason for opposition to the gospel. They stir up trouble for the apostles and attempt to put them in a bad light to the Roman authorities (9:23; 12:3; 13:45-50; 14:2-5, 19; 16:20; 17:5, 13; 18:6, 12; 19:33; 20:3, 19; 21:27; 22:30; 23:12, 27; 24:5-9, 19; 25:7-15; 26:2-7, 21; 28:17-19). They conspire to have Paul killed and are motivated by jealousy. They start riots and accuse the apostles of causing them. Paul’s defence before Roman authorities is often a defence in response to charges brought against him by the Jews.

Yet even these obvious indications do not explain Luke’s purpose. Why does he devote seven chapters to Paul’s various trials (chapters 22-28, i.e. ¼ of Acts)? It may be argued that he wants to show the parallel between the way the Gospel ends in various trials, and the way Acts does. This, as we have noted, is part of his method. But can this explain it? We have also noted how he draws a deliberate parallel between Peter and Paul, showing that Paul can do everything Peter can do. This is also part of his purpose. But can this explain why he devotes a quarter of Acts to Paul and his trials?

As the story reaches its end, more and more is about Paul. A lot of detail is given about his shipwreck and how God spared him (chapter 27). Then, he ends his story abruptly, with Paul in prison, awaiting his trial.

A point that requires more technical data is the way in which Luke is influenced by Paul’s theology. As we shall see, he shows no signs of having read any of Paul’s letters, yet the linguistic and theological contacts between Luke and Paul have been noted by many.

The tone of the Gospel is Pauline … It advocates faith and repentance apart from the works of the Law, and tells abundantly of God’s grace and mercy and the work of the Holy Spirit. In the Pauline Epistles these topics and expressions are constant … Luke exhibits the spirit of Paul: and no doubt to a large extent he derived this spirit from the Apostle.[53]

When these items are added to the fact that Luke ends Acts before Paul is tried, and never speaks of his martyrdom, it all adds to the conclusion that he was not only closely associated with Paul, but wrote just prior to Paul’s trial. He was most concerned about how Roman officials, let alone Roman citizens, would view the gospel. One of his primary purposes then was to provide an apologetic for Christianity to Roman society, Roman trial officials, and to defend Paul.[54]

THE STRUCTURE OF LUKE-ACTS

We are now in a position to outline Luke’s structure. Outlines in commentaries are justifiably detailed, as they deal with each and every chapter and verse. The problem is that one can end up missing the big picture and be lost in the details. It is therefore important to view Luke’s outline in summary first. The two outlines below are designed to show the parallelism between Volume I and Volume II. In order to do that they include general sections (italics) which include sub-sections. You will notice that they each have:

1. A prologue

2. A story of birth by the Holy Spirit

3. The primary section on ministry

4. A journey narrative, and

5. A conclusion in multiple trials.

Here is a summarized outline of Luke.

Outline of Luke

Item

Reference

Subject

1

1:1-4

Prologue

2

1:5-2:52

The births of John and Jesus and the childhood of Jesus

3:1-19

John the Baptist witnesses to Jesus

3:21-4:13

The baptism/anointing, genealogy and temptation of Jesus

3

4:14-24:53

The ministry of Jesus

4:14-9:50

The ministry in Galilee

4

9:51-19:10

The journey from Galilee to Jerusalem

19:11-21:38

The ministry in Jerusalem

5

22:1-24:53

The trials, passion and resurrection of Jesus

Here is a summarized outline of Acts.

Outline of Acts

Item

Reference

Subject

1

1:1-11

Prologue

2

1:12-2:40

The birth of the church: Leaders and Pentecostal Anointing

3

2:42-28:31

The ministry of the Apostles

1.8-6.7

Ministry to mainstream Judaism: Jerusalem

6.8-9.31

Ministry beyond Judaism: Samaria and preparation for the Gentiles

4

9:32-28:31

The journey from Jerusalem to Rome

9.32-12.25

Ministry to the Gentiles: Syria

13.1-16.5

Ministry to the Gentiles: Asia

16.6-19.20

Ministry to the Gentiles: Europe

19.21-28.31

The Gentiles: Rome “the ends of the earth”

5

21:1-28:31

The trials of Paul (overlaps with the previous section)

The structure of Acts is revealed by the summary formulas that Luke uses at the end of each section.

Summaries in Acts

Item

Reference

Kingdom expansion & ending summaries

1

1.8-6.7

Mainstream Judaism: Jerusalem

6.7

“So the word of God spread. The number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly, and a large number of priests became obedient to the faith.”

2

6.8-9.31

Beyond Judaism: Samaria and preparation for the Gentiles

9.31

“Then the church throughout Judea, Galilee and Samaria enjoyed a time of peace. It was strengthened; and encouraged by the Holy Spirit, it grew in numbers living in fear of the Lord.”

3

9.32-12.25

The Gentiles: Syria

12.25

“But the word of God continued to increase and spread.”

4

13.1-16.5

The Gentiles: Asia

16.5

“So the churches were strengthened in the faith and grew daily in numbers.”

5

16.6-19.20

The Gentiles: Europe

19.20

“In this way the word of the Lord spread widely and grew in power.”

6

19.21-28.31

The Gentiles: Rome “the ends of the earth”

28.31

“Boldly and without hindrance he [Paul] preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ.”

The way Luke has expanded the journey section in Luke needs some explanation.

The Journey Motif

The journey motif is already found in Mark. Jesus ends his ministry to the Galilean crowds in Mark 9:30-50 and then begins his journey through trans-Jordan to Jerusalem (10:1f). Mark describes the journey and the sense of destiny through chapter 10. Jesus then stages his triumphal entry into Jerusalem (11:1 f). Only one chapter is given to the journey itself, a section of roughly 1100 words. Luke uses the whole section from 9:51-19:10 for the journey motif, a section of roughly 9000 words. This is about one third of the whole gospel. How does this work?

1. Luke has clearly not invented the theme, as Mark gives it prominence, if not in his word count, then in his language.

2. A lot of the material he shares with Matthew (i.e. Q) has been interspersed with Mark’s original material and added here. Since most of Q is teaching, a lot of teaching has been added to the journey, but there is no clear necessity for the teaching in question to be given on the journey.

3. The point seems to be less what Jesus does on the journey, than the fact that he is on a journey, or more specifically, that he has “set his face to Jerusalem.” This means it is not so much the journey that predominates, but the destination of the journey, his passion and resurrection. Jesus has a destiny and walks a long walk to fulfil that destiny!

4. Now that we know how Luke structures Acts, we can see that it suits his purpose to have two journey motifs. In fact the literal, geographical journeys are rather more complex than is obvious at first. If Jesus is the personification of the story, then the journey in Luke goes from Bethlehem (Judea) to Galilee and back to Judea. If Paul is rather more central to Acts than Peter, then the story goes from Jerusalem to Europe, back to Jerusalem and then to Rome. Both Jesus and Paul have a fateful journey to Jerusalem. We should not therefore get fixated on the actual journeys, but on the sense of destiny. As Jesus journeys towards Jerusalem he speaks repeatedly of his sense of destiny. As Paul travels towards Jerusalem, prophetic words and his own sense of guidance speak of his destiny.

5. Given Luke’s use of parallel structure, which includes journey/destiny, it becomes hardly credible that he knew of Paul’s martyrdom. It would have suited his purpose perfectly to show Paul sharing with Jesus a journey to Jerusalem, a series of trials, and his final death. It is no argument to say that he would not have wanted to parallel Paul to Jesus in death, since Jesus died as redeemer and Paul did not. If he understood Paul at all (and we have shown how his theology is Pauline in flavour) he would have known how Paul viewed his own life of persecution and suffering as a privileged parallel to Jesus, without being co-redemptive.[55]

LUKE THE HISTORIAN

We have already drawn attention to Luke’s state of mind, how he used historical synchronisms, introduces himself in the language normally used by Greco-Roman historians, and gives us ample opportunity to test his accuracy by his detailed use of titles and roles in various places. This does not mean that critical scholars are unanimous about his historical reliability.

The problem here is that views of Luke the historian are heavily weighted with assumptions and presuppositions, in the same way as the so-called “Quest for the Historical Jesus” is.[56] This is a large subject and goes beyond the purpose of this work.

Central to the discussion is exactly how did ancient Greco-Roman historians operate? Were they committed to research and accuracy, and if there is a spectrum of their methods (a veritable mixed bag), which ones is Luke closest to, the good ones or the bad ones?[57] Included in this is the subject of genre. What kind of literature is a gospel? Are gospel writers not intending to write theology, rather than history? As one reads current scholarship on Luke, one finds that some scholars (particularly classical scholars rather that New Testament scholars) are more aware of the wider context. Others seem to almost ignore the norms of Greco-Roman historians and construct literary theories about the evolution of New Testament theology, unrelated to external measurements. Another complicating factor is that accuracy in details, amongst ancient historians, can go along with a writer whose general narrative, or plot, is not accurate. For instance Josephus cannot be trusted in his sketch of his characters, but is often quite accurate in details. Is Luke accurate in both details and overall narrative, or only in details?

One of the most enlightening approaches I have found in recent literature is provided by Craig Keener. His work on Acts is still in preparation, so we will have to consult his extensive introduction to John, where he discusses the whole subject of ancient historiography and Gospel genre.[58] He has a comprehensive knowledge of the ancient literature.

The options found in the Jewish and Greco-Roman world include folk literature, memoirs, novels and drama, and biographies. Amongst biographies there are Greco-Roman biographies and histories and their Jewish counterparts.[59]

His introduces his analysis with this statement:

In more recent years scholars have been returning to the consensus that the Gospels represent biographies in the ancient sense of the term. We might compare them especially with philosopher’s bioi, which honoured founders of philosophic schools and continued their teachings. Like epistle, biography (the bios, or “life”) was one of the most common literary genres in antiquity; thus it is not surprising that much of the NT consists of these two genres.[60]

He adds, “Arguments concerning the biographical character of the Gospels have thus come full circle: The Gospels, long viewed as biographies until the early twentieth century, now again are widely viewed as biographies.” Joel Green comes to similar conclusions about Luke-Acts in particular.[61]

The norms they used were of course, not exactly the same as modern historical disciplines. The value of Keener’s work is that he gives numerous examples from the ancient sources to develop each of his points (which we will not include). Obviously each of these points is a generalization and Keener’s treatment weighs up the extent to which different authors did or did not adhere to these principles. Here are some of the characteristics.

Greco-Roman historical norms

1. They generally intended to be more historical than novelistic.

2. They did not feel the need to follow a chronological sequence, but felt free to arrange their material topically. Jewish interpreters did not see the biblical account of Moses at Sinai as being arranged chronologically.

3. They used characterization (describing the character of the person whose life they were narrating).

4. Biographies were essentially historical works. He quotes Aune: “Thus while the Evangelists clearly had an important theological agenda, the very fact that they chose to adapt Greco-Roman biographical conventions to tell the story of Jesus indicates that they were centrally concerned to communicate what they thought really happened.”[62]

5. There could be overlap between the genres of biography and history, as for instance with Luke-Acts.

6. To differing degrees they each had their own tendentious emphasis and would draw morals from their story. They could also write for apologetic and polemical reasons. Yet the emphasis of the document did not destroy their historical value. The better writers would use praise and blame, but would pursue truth and fairness, nevertheless.

7. When one’s source could not recall the substance of a speech, a biographer should not seek to reproduce it.

8. Ancient historians and biographers had important agendas, using history to shed light on their times. Thus the Gospel writers could have a purpose that was both historical and theological. In fact they conveyed theology through history. The impression is often given that the earliest church “experienced radical amnesia before our earliest record or that the disciples offered their lives to defend wilful deception”. This is to “stretch the bounds of historical credibility far more” than taking their historical claims seriously.[63]

9. History was supposed to be truthful. Those who promoted falsehood were harshly criticized. Historians would evaluate witnesses and critique those who got their facts wrong.

10. A well known method was expansion and condensing (much as I am summarizing Keener here). “That Matthew often abridges Markan accounts was no more problematic than the process of abridegment is today, and may have been welcomed.”[64]

11. “Inserting sayings from sayings-collections into narrative, or adding narratives to sayings, was considered a matter of arrangement, not a matter of fabrication.”[65]

12. They were conscious of the difference between ancient sources, far removed from the events, and more recent, firsthand or eyewitness sources. They tried to distinguish between accurate and inaccurate sources. They would evaluate probabilities through assessing inconsistencies and unlikelihood, as in ancient law courts. They would often cite various sources and choose better ones when they diverged.

13. Some historians are definitely more reliable than others, especially when writing about more recent history. Tacitus is one of the more reliable. Josephus has clearly tendentious tendencies, so that one cannot follow the way he whitewashes members of the aristocracy. However, when he is not writing for these purposes he gets even minor details right.

Jewish historical norms

The Gospels share more in common with Greco-Roman historians than with Palestinian Jewish literary conventions. They are more part of Diaspora, Hellenized Judaism. They show stylistic influence from the Septuagint. Matthew and John are closer to Jewish conventions than Mark and Luke.

1. Jewish texts are seldom biographical, in the way that the Gospels are. They are primarily legal, with incidental biographical material.

2. Midrashic or haggadic principles are sometimes at work in their compositions.

3. While the Gospels are closer to Greco-Roman “lives” Jewish historical habits are also relevant.

The Gospels

1. Early Christians were clearly interested in the life and character of Jesus from the beginning. One can contrast the way the Qumran writings tell us almost nothing about their founder, while the Gospels show the opposite tendency.

2. Following W. D. Davies, we have two options open to us: “The first alternative is to believe that for some time after his death and resurrection what Jesus did and said was neglected and so forgotten” and later generations “created their own sayings or borrowed material from Jewish and Hellenistic sources and ascribed them to Jesus.” Or, “The other alternative is to recognize that what Jesus actually taught was remembered by his followers and adapted by the churches as the need arose. On grounds of historical probability, the second alternative is more likely by far.” [66]

3. “To test the accuracy of the authors of the Synoptic Gospels one must test their use of sources. Evaluated by this criterion, they appear among the more accurate of ancient historians.” Luke used Mark and Q. “When one examines Luke’s use of these sources, one is repeatedly impressed with his restraint.” With Matthew, he edits his sources, “but this editing must be judged minimal by ancient standards …” “That the Gospel writers themselves saw such variation as within their permissible range may be suggested by Luke’s triple recounting of Paul’s conversion with differences in details each time, though the core of the story remains the same.” [67] Many have made similar conclusions to Keener. Clearly Luke has freely edited the form of his sources, but he has not changed the contents of the story. A comment made by F. C. Burkitt some time back is often quoted: “what concerns us here is not that Luke has changed so much but that he has invented so little.”[68] G. N. Stanton concludes that Luke’s alterations are stylistic and not theological.[69]

4. Even at the latest possible dating, the Gospels derive from a period close to the events, when the influence of eyewitnesses remained. Luke seems to have had direct access to eyewitness corroboration. His claims to investigation and his dependence on available eyewitnesses are especially likely if the “we” sections of Acts, which include a meeting with James the Lord’s brother in Jerusalem (Acts 21:17-18), indicate Luke was present. Bruce notices that prior to his own presence in the narrative Luke’s chronological references are minimal. After his appearance they suddenly increase. This would indicate that he did not fabricate such evidence.[70] Luke "fits the more reliable end of the spectrum: of ancient writers.[71]

5. Luke appeals to public knowledge (1:4). Such claims, where the readers had access to the same information, normally carried tremendous rhetorical weight.

It is noteworthy that classical scholars tend to endorse this positive view of Luke the historian. Some of the scholars who have a high view of Luke’s history are A. N. Sherwinwhite, Blaiklock,[72] Hemer[73] and van Elderen. [74] Sherwinwhite comments: “On matters of Hellenistic geography and politics, Roman Law and provincial administration, Luke can be demonstrated to be for the most part a reliable guide.”[75]

DATE

Since Acts is volume 2, it follows that an earlier dating of Acts will determine the still earlier dating of Luke and a later dating of Luke will determine a still later dating of Acts. Most date the two volume work in a same rough period. Of the three possible dates advocated by scholars, namely

1. AD 60-62

2. AD 80-85 and

3. The Second Century,

only 1 and 2 are reconcilable with Luke as author. In many ways settling the question of date tends to settle the question of authorship. We begin therefore with date.

Before examining the various arguments, some general comments on scholarly positions might be helpful.

Scholarly worldview and context

As a somewhat simple generalization, Continental and English speaking scholars operate in different worlds. If you read a host of commentaries, articles and specialist works on this subject written by Continental scholars you will wonder how anyone could ever consider dating Acts in AD 60-62. Scholars who defend an earlier date are hardly mentioned or simply dismissed. If one reads similar literature by English authors, one would find a spectrum of views, but quite a number that would defend the earlier date with some conviction.[76]

What is the explanation?

Worldview

Again, as a generalization, Continental scholars have been more influenced by trends in philosophy and certain trends in theology. Here are some influences.

1. Luther is more influential in Continental Protestant circles. This has led to a sharper focus on his particular approach to justification by faith, which in turn has been used by some to downplay the role of historical verification. We need “faith” not “facts”. This influence can also be problematic when the relation of Paul’s letters to Luke’s theology is being discussed.

2. After the Reformation Gnosticism experienced a revival, principally through the German Cabalist philosopher/theologian Jacob Boehme, who recycled Valentinian Gnosticism.[77] Boehme had wide influence, on Hegel and Schelling, on various Romanticists, later on Carl Jung, and also played a role in the origins of existentialism. Gnosticism is vehemently anti-history. Existentialism is similarly prejudiced against history. Existentialist theologians are therefore strangely fascinated by early Gnosticism and tend to over-read its influence on New Testament writers. The anti-historical nature of such Gnostic/existentialist thinking becomes apparent with theories about how Luke is supposed to have “historicised” the early preaching on the immediacy of the end.

3. The Enlightenment had a watershed influence on biblical studies. Various post-Enlightenment presuppositions and assumptions still play a crucial role: on historiography, on the way methodological doubt is used, on a prejudice against supernatural phenomena and more. Scholars in this mould will be quite confident that “dead men do not rise”, will confuse such assumptions with the scientific worldview and will use language like “legend” or “myth” (often poorly defined) to describe a large part of the New Testament.[78]

While such assumptions are more prevalent in Continental scholarship, they can be found anywhere in the English speaking world (in the “Jesus Seminar” in particular). However, there a good number of scholars in the English speaking world who seriously question these assumptions, [79] while only a few who do so will be found on the Continent.

Money

Again, as a generalization, much biblical scholarship is a case of “you get what you pay for.” The question is: who is paying? Most chairs of theology in reputable Universities go back, historically, to the church as the founding institution. The churches at the time were investing in “believing” and quality scholarship, or so they hoped. Again, particularly in Europe, the marriage of church and state means that such Universities are state funded. As the state became more secularized, so theology faculties have been either absorbed into liberal arts faculties, or governed by administrators with no faith commitment. The University is expected to hire scholars who share a politically correct worldview, which inevitably means that the Jesus of the New Testament is a very awkward object of study.

This trend is far advanced on the Continent, and is currently creating real stress amongst evangelical scholars in England as state control bites. In the USA, due to the clear separation of church and state, church theological colleges continue to thrive, and the process of secularization in theological faculties in state Universities is not as far advanced. One will even find scholars who can write from fairly conflicting positions depending on which publisher has “hired” them to write.

All this means that the so-called ethic of scholarly intellectual integrity and the virtue of the quest for the truth, no matter the consequences, is not the only game that is played. In the war of belief systems between the gospel and modernist and post-modernist worldviews, biblical scholarship continues to take place in a war zone. The conclusion is that every reader should be well equipped with a “hermeneutic of suspicion.” In each case one has to ask questions like this.

1. In what institution does this scholar work, in what continent/country? Who pays?

2. What scholarly consensus or peer group does this scholar value? Would this scholar face embarrassment and scorn with an altered position?

3. What spoken or unspoken assumptions does this scholar operate with, and how prejudicial is the influence of such assumptions?

Of course, we should hasten to say that generalizations are dangerous. There will always be notable exceptions. It is quite possible to find “believing” scholars in Continental state Universities, or in secular/humanist faculties elsewhere.

To return to the dating of Luke-Acts, the two general positions are almost exactly defined by two different scholarly peer groups, one generally high church or evangelical, the other secular/liberal. It so happens that scholars in the latter consensus are more numerous, not as a result of greater intellect, but for the reasons that have just been explained. Each student should therefore weigh up the “facts” presented, but realize that there are no such things as neutral facts. They are always offered with a certain “spin.”

Two focal points

Ones decision about the dating of Luke-Acts will come down to ones assessment of two focal points:

- The ending of Acts,

- The Lucan version of Jesus prophecy about the fall of Jerusalem.

Around these two foci are many subsidiary considerations. We will first describe the two major foci, and then examine the supportive arguments. [80]

The ending of Acts

For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him. Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ (28:30-31).

These events are dated in AD 59-61.[81] This is a truly odd end to Luke-Acts if Luke did not write Acts shortly after the two year period of Paul’s Roman imprisonment. The argument is cumulative, but persuasive.

1. Luke’s method has been to follow the lives of his two principle hero’s, Peter and Paul. In the first half, where Peter is the focus, Peter escapes various attempts on his life, while others are martyred. In the second half threats to Paul’s life are woven together with a series of trials, which end in his expected trial before Caesar, since Paul has appealed to Caesar. Some scholars see the whole purpose of Acts as a defence of Paul. This may be overstated, but it certainly is one of Luke’s major concerns. How could such an author fail to make any mention of the outcome of Paul’s trial, if he knew about it at the time of writing?[82]

2. For various reasons, many believe that Paul was released after this trial, continued his travels, and was finally martyred, along with Peter during the Neronian persecution in AD 64. Luke makes no mention of the Neronian persecution, but he clearly described the earlier persecution in Palestine. He makes no mention of the martyrdom of Paul and Peter.

3. Two of Luke’s themes are the importance of Jerusalem and the fulfilment of prophecy. His narrative flows to Jerusalem (Jesus) and from Jerusalem (the gospel mission), and then back to Jerusalem in Paul’s travels, then again from Jerusalem in Paul’s journey to Rome. His resurrection narrative makes no mention of Galilee, only of events around Jerusalem. His opening statement to Theophilus is about events that were “fulfilled” among us. Like Matthew, but in his own style, he continually shows how New Testament events fulfil Old Testament expectations. He records how the prophecy of Agabus prepares the church to mitigate the affects of the famine, again in Jerusalem. He records the prophecy of Jesus about the siege and fall of Jerusalem. He records the way Jesus predicted his trial, death and resurrection and then shows how his words were fulfilled. He does a similar thing with Jesus’ words about Peter’s denial and Judas’ apostasy. It really strains belief to suggest that such an author, had he known about the fall of Jerusalem, would have failed to mention it, as yet another fulfilment of prophecy.[83]

4. The fall of Jerusalem was preceded by the failed Jewish war of independence (AD 64-70), led by Bar Kochba, a Messianic figure. Luke mentions other failed Messianic figures, like Theudas and Judas the Galilean (5:36). Would he have made no mention of this more fateful Messianic pretender?

5. Luke records the martyrdom of James the disciple and of Stephen. He shows how James, Christ’s brother, played a key role in the church in Jerusalem. This James was martyred in AD 62 but Luke does not mention it.

If Luke knew of any of these events when he wrote, then his ending is fairly pathetic, especially for a writer of such skill. We will examine various counter arguments to these points, but the conclusion that fairly stares one in the face is that Luke ended Acts as he did because he wrote around the time of Paul’s trial.[84] It is no argument to say that he must have written later, because he can look back on the “two whole years”. Clearly Luke must have written after this two year period, but he could have written just months after the completion of this period, for instance once Paul’s waiting for trial in prison (the two years) had altered to the trial itself, which would have probably altered where Paul was placed in prison, his status and so on (awaiting trial prisoners often reside in a different context to in-trial prisoners).

Two considerations should be mentioned here.

- Arguments from silence are normally questionable. In a way, this is one big argument from Luke’s silence. A rejoinder is that there are arguments from silence and there are arguments from silence! This is not a typical argument from silence. It is an argument based on detailed knowledge we have of Luke’s key themes and points of interest up to this point. His theology and central themes would have driven him to mention these events, had he known about them.

- This focal point is the only one that can be anchored to the indisputable chronology of events and is tightly associated with Luke’s narrative to this point. By comparison, the opposing arguments tend to be weighed down with assumptions and speculative deductions. [85]

Christ’s prophecy of the fall of Jerusalem

If Luke was using Mark, then it is clear that he has edited and altered a key sentence. Apart from other points of difference, Luke’s text follows Mark quite closely, just as Matthew’s does. The verses before and after will show how closely he follows and the crucial changes he has made.

Mark 13

Luke 21

9-13

You must be on your guard. You will be handed over to the local councils and flogged in the synagogues. On account of me you will stand before governors and kings as witnesses to them. And the gospel must first be preached to all nations. Whenever you are arrested and brought to trial, do not worry beforehand about what to say. Just say what-ever is given you at the time, for it is not you speaking, but the Holy Spirit. Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved.

12-19

"But before all this, they will lay hands on you and persecute you. They will deliver you to synagogues and prisons, and you will be brought before kings and governors, and all on account of my name. This will result in your being witnesses to them. But make up your mind not to worry beforehand how you will defend yourselves. For I will give you words and wisdom that none of your adversaries will be able to resist or contradict. You will be betrayed even by parents, brothers, relatives and friends, and they will put some of you to death. All men will hate you because of me. But not a hair of your head will perish. By standing firm you will gain life.

Mark 13

Luke 21

14

"When you see ‘the abomination that causes desolation’ standing where it does not belong--let the reader understand--then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

20

"When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains,

15-23

Let no one on the roof of his house go down or enter the house to take anything out. Let no one in the field go back to get his cloak. How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! Pray that this will not take place in winter, because those will be days of distress unequalled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now--and never to be equalled again. If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive. But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them. At that time if anyone says to you, `Look, here is the Christ!' or, `Look, there he is!' do not believe it. For false Christ’s and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect--if that were possible. So be on your guard; I have told you everything ahead of time.

21-24

Let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. For this is the time of punishment in fulfilment of all that has been written. How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Important differences are in italics, but the crucial one is in bold italics. The argument in favour of a late date is that Luke’s alteration of the key text shows that he wrote after the fall of Jerusalem, and therefore adapted Christ’s words to suit what he knew. But if Luke is written after AD 70, then Acts must be still later. This is indeed a very possible explanation. Clearly both conclusions, the one from the ending of Acts, and this one, are contradictory. Both cannot be right. Scholarly arguments therefore revolve around which focal point can be cast in doubt. Which one has a possible or probably alternative explanation?

My view is that this argument is the one with a very possible alternative explanation, in fact, a probable alternative argument.

Significantly many of the scholars that date Luke post-70 date Mark before AD 70 to allow for his version to show no knowledge of the fall of Jerusalem. But here there is a problem of consistency. Many other scholars date Mark after AD 70 because they believe his language equally shows knowledge of the fall of Jerusalem. This rather weakens the case for Luke’s different words having any great meaning.

Assuming for the moment that we are dealing with those who date Mark before AD 70, two issues emerge.

- There are assumptions against the prophetic. The argument is based on the idea that Jesus could not have given such an accurate prophecy. Luke has made it look like a prophecy, after the event.

- Is there an alternative, simple explanation for the difference between Mark and Luke? If for instance, Jesus may have made both statements, or both uses of language mean essentially the same thing, or Luke’s language is an obvious Hellenzsation of the Jewish apocalyptic language of Mark, then the argument looses its force.

Prejudice against the prophetic

We have noted that many scholars operate with post-enlightenment assumptions against such phenomena. Is the argument then not really about the facts, but about assumptions?

There are three things we can say about such a prejudice.

1. F.F. Bruce mentions three ancient cases of known accurate predictions about similar events: Savonarola’s prediction about the capture of Rome in 1527, printed 30 years before, with more accurate details than Christ’s words about the fall of Jerusalem; prophecies of the Great Fire on London in 1666, also printed some years before, and predictions by Metternich in 1851 about the rise and fall of the German Empire in 1871-1918.

2. I write within the world community of the Vineyard and New Wine church networks, where there is a whole genre of literature on the prophetic, with multitudinous cases of accurate prediction (despite the fact that many prophetic words are fake).[86] To add personal reflection for a moment, apart from the odd occasion where I have discerned details of sickness or pain or human predicament in the context of ministry, I have on two occasions known about cases of sexual infidelity before any facts were evident. In one case my queries elicited heated denials at first, but I was so certain that I continued to probe until the truth came out. I have also found myself “repenting” of attitudes and thoughts en route to meetings where I knew the prophetic would be present. For those who move in such circles, this argument is unimpressive, to say the least.

3. The essence of the problem was brilliantly argued by Jack Deere in Surprised by the Power of the Spirit.[87] His context was cessationist theology that denied the possibility of gifts of the Spirit for today. He showed that while the proponents of this theology are convinced their position is based on scripture (and some of them like Warfield, were brilliant academics), the whole position is really an argument from lack of experience. The test case was the moment when he first attended a Wimber seminar and Wimber “read the mail” of someone he knew. His cessationist theology dissolved in that moment! Reading some biblical scholarship makes me want to “sentence” particular scholars to a few years as travel companions of well known healing evangelists and/or prophetic ministries. It would cure them.

Alternative explanations for Luke's language

There are in fact a number of alternative explanations.

Howard Marshall shows, following Earle E. Ellis, that Luke has three sections where he mentions apocalyptic sayings by Jesus, two of which are found in different contexts to Matthew (12:35-48—about the coming of the Son of Man as judge and 17:20-37—again about the Son of Man as judge, but with more parallels to the fall of Jerusalem). Then Luke quotes Jesus speaking about the desolation of the temple in 13:35 (saying of Jerusalem “Look, your house is left to your desolate”) and 19:42-45.[88] This text is significant because it is only found in the context of the triumphal entry in Luke. Matthew and Mark have no such saying at this point. It reads:

As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it and said, "If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace--but now it is hidden from your eyes. The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God's coming to you." Then he entered the temple area and began driving out those who were selling.

Notice the words I have highlighted.

While the Luke 19 passage is unparalleled, Luke 13:35 shares a similar saying with Matthew.

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! Look, your house is left to you desolate. I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, `Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.' " (Luke 13:34-35).

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing. Look, your house is left to you desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, `Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.' " (Matthew 23:37-38).

Notice that Luke can share the “house left desolate” phrase with Matthew, and then include a parallel siege phrase, as in Luke 21.

What can we conclude from these comparisons?

First, Matthew and Luke shared sayings (Q) about the destruction of Jerusalem that are not found in Mark. Second, perhaps Luke has twice inserted siege language where there was originally temple desecration language. Or, third, he has another source of sayings about Jerusalem that neither Matthew nor Mark make use of. Perhaps Luke brings in his own “take” as a result of these independent sources. Perhaps Jesus did use both turns of phrase, in his fairly frequent statements about the future of the temple, found in various contexts. Luke’s siege language may not signify anything about a post-event reinterpretation at all.

The view I prefer, while not discounting that Luke may have had independent sources, is that he was editing the language for his Gentile audience, either simply making the meaning plain (editing) or selecting from his alternative source. To return to Mark 13:14 and Luke 21:20, both Mathew and Luke have the comment, “Let the reader understand.” This follows the apocalyptic saying about the “abomination of desolation” that relates back to Daniel 9:27; 11:31 and 12:11. History tells us that Daniel was speaking of the moment when the Syrian successor to Alexander the Great, Antiochus Epiphanes, desecrated the temple. It was a time when a foreign army defeated and overpowered Israel. Jewish readers would have understood that “let the reader understand” was code language for recalling the desecration of Antiochus with his Syrian armies. But would Gentile readers know what this meant? Luke therefore gives a generalized approximation to what it means. It means a foreign army attacking Jerusalem and desecrating the temple.

Following on from 2 above, if one has even a cursory knowledge of the Old Testament, one would know that Mark and Matthew are really showing that Jesus predicted the fall of Jerusalem no less than Luke. To be consistent, one has to date all three Synoptics after the fall of Jerusalem, or all of them before the fall of Jerusalem, if this text is the criterion. Jewish readers of the time would have known that to desecrate the temple meant that one had to be a conquering army, and that the act of desecration would normally follow violent military action. In AD 40 Caligula wanted to place a statue of himself in the Holy Place. The fact that it did not take place, despite his wishes, is testimony to the fact that the occupying power (Rome) was trying to rule in peace, not in war.

It is interesting to see how dismissive some scholars are of this argument. Bo Reike describes it as “an amazing example of uncritical dogmatism in New Testament Studies”.[89] Donald Guthrie says that,

It is a doubtful method of dating early books to use a particular interpretation of the one available datum and then to build a superstructure of other books upon it. It will be clear that if a predictive element in the ministry of Jesus is allowed the whole basis of this generally held dating collapses.[90]

John A.T. Robinson, whose treatment of this subject is quite the most thorough of all, has a number of persuasive arguments of his own. It is worth repeating some of his arguments here. However, those who are interested in this subject should note his work as one of the most important scholarly works on the subject.

1. He notes how the subject of dating New Testament books has gone through a number of fashions. Each time an almost complete consensus exists for decades, only to be radically altered later on. He mentions the second century dating for Luke popular when F.C. Baur was influential (1850’s). This consensus was then shattered when Lightfoot showed that the letters of Clement and Ignatius were dated in 95-96 and 110-115 respectively, and showed clear knowledge of most of the books of the New Testament, including Luke. This incidentally, makes the 2nd Century date for Luke-Acts impossible.

2. He notes that there are in fact very few fixed reference points for dating the New Testament documents. Many theories are based on complex and subjective theories of literary dependence, source and redaction criticism.

It would not be an exaggeration to say that on the basis of these two foci most New Testament scholarship determines the dates of the Synoptic gospels and Acts. Ranged around them are various supportive arguments.

Supporting arguments for AD 60-62

First, those who are for the AD 60-62 date offer the following arguments.

1. Luke never quotes, alludes to, or shows any knowledge of Paul’s letters. We cannot be sure exactly when they were collected and distributed, but his letters are the earliest New Testament documents. This suggests that Luke wrote before Paul’s letters became known, which suggests an early date.[91]

2. One of Luke’s key themes is the attitude of the Roman authorities towards Christianity. They are shown in a favourable light throughout, since they have a generally positive or just attitude and do not get manipulated by Jewish attempts to bring the church into disrepute. All that changed after AD 64, when Nero decided to place blame on the Christians for the fire of Rome and the first serious persecution began.

3. The most probable chronology of Paul’s life, as deduced from the Pastoral Letters is that he re-visited the church in Ephesus. However, in his farewell address to the Ephesian elders (Acts 20:25, 38) Paul tells them that he will never see them again. If Luke had known that Paul would return when he wrote Acts, would he have left this statement as it is, or perhaps made some comment?

4. Some consuming issues in Acts relate to the time when the church was emerging from within Judaism: there were prejudices against Gentiles being allowed into the church and attempts to impose circumcision and food laws on those who were allowed in. All this changed after the fall of Jerusalem.

5. The theology found in Acts, particularly the Christology, is more primitive than what we find in Paul’s letters, or the Johannine writings. “Christ” is used as a title. Later it came to be used like a proper name, as in Paul’s frequent use of “Jesus Christ” (Romans 1:1, 4). Acts uses names for Jesus like “servant” (pais—4:27) and “son of man” (7:56) which tend to disappear in later New Testament writings.[92] Christians are “disciples” of “the Way”. “The people” (laos) are still the Jewish people (2:47; 4:1-2).

Supportive arguments for a later date

As noted above, the central argument is that Luke’s language indicates that he wrote after the fall of Jerusalem. He has edited an earlier tradition, where Jesus used unspecific language about a time of tribulation and judgment to reflect the details of the fall. Then various supportive arguments are used to strengthen this position. Most of these apply to Acts.

1. Some have suggested an imaginary third volume, which has somehow become lost to history. That is why Acts ends as it does.

2. Acts 20:25 indicates knowledge of his death. Use of this text is therefore used in reverse of the way it is used under 3 above.

3. Acts is written in a remote and vague manner. According to C.K. Barrett, he was “describing one age of the Church, and that a unique one, with the presuppositions of another.”[93] For instance, there is the “anomaly” on how people received the Spirit. Did it precede, accompany or follow baptism? He takes the lack of a theology of the cross as a sign that Luke’s theology is much later than Mark’s.

4. Luke’s theology shows signs of “early Catholicism”.[94] Luke has placed an emphasis on the church as the vehicle of salvation in the place of the lost awareness of the eschaton.[95]

5. Luke has “historicized” the kerygma, or early proclamation of the imminent end of the world. The early church believed in the near arrival of the end. As time went by, they were disappointed in this expectation. Luke therefore developed a view of historical process which could give an answer to this problem. Conzelmann believes he constructed the history of redemption into three epochs: the period of Israel, the period of Jesus, and the period between the coming of Jesus and the Parousia (second coming).[96] This caused Luke to falsify the early message.[97] Ernst Haenchen, following Conzelmann, tries to show that Luke has sought to bridge the gap between the time of Jesus and the time of the church by the history of the process of the word of God from one period to another. He has therefore submerged the really explosive issues, such as the relationship between Jews and Gentiles and the origin of the Gentile mission. [98]

6. Somewhat more in touch with known data is the argument that Luke’s portrayal of Paul is irreconcilable with Paul’s letters. Some attempt to drive an extreme wedge between the two “Pauls”. Others provide a somewhat more measured argument. For instance, Philipp Vielhauer offers these arguments.

a) He finds a contradiction between Acts 16:3 and Galatians 5:1-11. The real Paul would never have circumcised Timothy.

b) He gives eight points showing how Pharisaical Paul is in Acts. He criticizes the “suspect” motivations behind Paul taking a vow to please the Judaisers, something the real Paul would never have done.[99]

c) He compares the “Areopagus” speech in Acts, with its “natural theology” to the “natural theology” of Paul in Romans 1-2 and finds them contradictory.[100]

d) Paul’s eschatological keryma in the epistles has been transformed into the non-eschatological continuity which Luke sees between the history of Israel and the history of the church.[101] This is similar to 5. above.

e) Another frequently raised issue is the number of visits Paul made to Jerusalem. In Acts he appears to visit Jerusalem three times (9:20; 11:30; 15:2). In Galatians he appears to visit twice (Galatians 1:16f; 2). Luke is therefore incorrect.

Evaluating these arguments

In general, these arguments are not based on hard data, but on literary theories.[102]

1. This must be the weakest of the list, which Robinson describes as the recourse of desperation.[103] The so-called volume is simply a speculation. The only possible, plausible explanation for why Luke would have ended Acts the way he did, other than an early dating, is the journey motif. The destination of Rome had been reached.

2. At most, these two arguments cancel each other out. One simply needs to read the use of this text under 3 in supportive arguments to draw this conclusion.

3. Like some other supportive arguments, Barrett's position is based on a literary argument, rather than on hard data. His ideas about the reception of the Spirit may suggest Barrett’s lack of experience in charismatic phenomena more than what one reads in Acts. Most Pentecostals and charismatics will describe exactly the same timing issues in charismatic experiences.[104] The idea that Luke lacks a theology of the cross has a number of counter arguments. Perhaps Luke, the only Gentile amongst New Testament writers and possibly trained in medicine, did not “get” the depths of the atonement. Those of us who preach to congregations over years can tell of many who have sat listening to us for hours and who also do not “get” our theology. Others have argued that Luke has his own theology of the cross. Plummer argued that Luke’s Gospel was one of “atonement and propitiation.” Leon Morris argues that “the cross dominates the whole”, since the journey to Jerusalem reaches its climax in the cross. [105] Marshall concludes “As compared with Mark and Matthew … Luke’s silence about the death of Jesus in the Gospels is not especially remarkable.” Alternatively it can be argued that Luke has placed the emphasis on the resurrection more than the cross, which is a sign of earlier, not later dating.[106]

4. The whole subject of “early Catholicism” is very much in dispute, and what scholars mean by it is often poorly defined.[107] C. K. Barrett, who we have noted, supports a later dating for Luke, examines the subject in some detail. His resulting definition removes the essence of the argument against an early date namely, the idea of a misrepresentation of the apostolic rule, the sacramentalising of the church’s worship and the institutionalizing of the church’s authority structure.[108] Dunn points out that the fading of the urgent expectation of the Parousia had already taken place in Paul before Luke-Acts. [109]

5. This is probably one of the most subjective arguments on this subject, since it assumes an existentialist worldview. One should refer to comments made above under scholarly worldview and context. Haenchen believes Luke has “smoothed over” the divisions of the early period by projecting an image of unity, a “trouble free” period of expansion. However, our knowledge about the disunity, problems and pressures of the early church come precisely from Acts. One wonders how one can read Acts and gain this impression (Persecution 4:1-22; 5:17-26, 33-42; Disunity 15:1-5, 36-40; 6:1-6).

6. Vielhauer’s first and last points are supportive arguments that attempt to deal with the actual data available and should be taken seriously.

a) Paul does not say that he would never circumcise anyone. What Galatians says is that he would never preach circumcision as an indication of wanting to submit again to the law. If they get circumcised in this way, then they must submit to the whole law or be cursed (Galatians 3:10). The circumcision of Timothy for practical reasons of avoiding unnecessary arguments with Jews on their missionary journeys was an entirely different context (Acts 16:3b with 1 Corinthians 9:19-23).

b) The whole question of the two “Paul’s” has been argued this way and that by many scholars. One can in fact use the same data to come to the opposite conclusions, namely a great deal of congruity between the two “Paul’s.” [110] One can also ask what “Paul” is exactly being presented as the real Paul. Is this Paul not a most European, Protestant, Lutheran, existentially interpreted Paul, or is it the Paul as now viewed in far more rabbinical pose through the eyes of scholars like Paul Sanders[111] and N.T. Wright?[112] The discrepancies between the two “Pauls” need to be discussed in the context of the various lenses worn by those who analyze Acts and the Pauline letters.

c) This is again one of those rather subjective theological arguments. The whole nature of Paul’s so-called “natural theology” in either Acts or Romans is itself the subject of discussion, as shown for instance in the historic debate between Karl Barth and Emil Brunner. It tends to get mixed up with Lutheran theological presuppositions.[113]

d)Again, this is a theological or literary argument, filled with too many presuppositions.[114] Sufficient comment has been made on this above.

e) This assumes that Galatians was written after the Council of Jerusalem, based on the North Galatian theory of dating Galatians. An alternative theory is the South Galatian theory. Paul’s second visit (Galatians 4:13) is then identified with the one mentioned in Acts 14:21 when Paul and Barnabas revisited the southern Galatian churches on their return journey to Antioch, in which case the date may be before the Council. Choosing between these theories and relating Galatians to Acts is a complex subject. Guthrie concludes that the Southern theory perhaps has fewer difficulties.[115]

Conclusion

Depending on their worldview, different scholars will access all these arguments differently. My own view is that the arguments supporting a later date are weaker than those supporting an earlier date.

Does it really matter? If Luke-Acts is dated in the 80’s, would it make much of a difference? For Luke to have been Paul’s companion, he would need to be an adult, perhaps already trained in his profession, during the 50’s. If he was in his thirties during this time, he would have been in his 60’s when he wrote. One does not have to link the later dating with the rejection of Luke as a companion of Paul. However, those who tend to support the later dating also tend to discount the idea of the author as a companion of Paul.

This leads to our next subject.

AUTHORSHIP

The text of Luke-Acts is anonymous. The author nowhere names himself. Further, if one is of the opinion that he has written from a later generation and projected backwards, the author cannot be a companion of Paul. Views of dating therefore tend to determine views of authorship. Although the two subjects are interrelated, dating tends to determine authorship rather than vice versa. One can be more confident of ascribing authorship to Luke on the basis of the earlier dating, although even the later dating can still be linked to Lucan authorship.

The argument for Luke, the companion of Paul, as the author, involves a number of steps that build on one another.

1. The author of Luke and Acts are the same.

2. The author of Acts was the companion of Paul (the “we” sections).

3. The author was Luke.

4. Early church traditions support this ascription.

Luke and Acts are by the same author

This is hardly disputed today. There are a number of theories about sources. Luke tells us he used sources. But whatever they were, a common literary and linguistic style is imposed on each and every source. Added to that is the way the two prologues are associated.

The companion of Paul

The “we” sections are most naturally explained by the fact that the author joined Paul at various stages (Troas: 16:10-17; Philippi: 20:5-21:18; Departure for Italy through to Rome: 27:1-28:16).

Added to this is the fact that there are no stylistic or linguistic changes in this section. The author of the text remains the same.

This most obviously conclusion can be replaced with the theory of a literary fiction, or the use of someone else’s travel narrative used as a source by the eventual author.[116] Some scholars have argued that such literary fictions were common amongst ancient historians. But all such theories are more speculative than the obvious conclusion.[117]

Who was this companion?

Paul mentions Luke as his companion during his Roman imprisonment.

- Jesus, who is called Justus, also sends greetings … Epaphras, who is one of you and a servant of Christ Jesus, sends greetings. Our dear friend Luke, the doctor, and Demas send greetings (Colossians 4:10-14).

- Epaphras, my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, sends you greetings. And so do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas and Luke, my fellow workers (Philemon 23-24).

- Do your best to come to me quickly, for Demas, because he loved this world, has deserted me and has gone to Thessalonica … Only Luke is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, because he is helpful to me in my ministry (2 Timothy 4:9-11).

Guthrie states the logic most succinctly. Assuming the “we” sections refer to the author:

It would mean that the author (1) first joins Paul at Philippi; (2) reappears on Paul’s return visit to Philippi; (3) accompanies the apostle on the journey towards Jerusalem and stays with Philip at Caesarea, and (4) after Paul’s two years’ imprisonment at Caesarea, during which time there are no definite date regarding the author’s whereabouts, accompanies Paul to Rome and experiences shipwreck with him. 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, and Trophimus).[118]

Since the story ends in Rome with Paul awaiting trial, and the author was with him on the journey to Rome, it is likely that he is one of the companions Paul mentions in his captivity letters but not included in the list above (Mark, Jesus Justus, Epaphras, Demas, Luke and Epaphroditus). Mark is unlikely, because he is normally viewed as the author of the Gospel by that name. Demas is unlikely because he did not seem to be in a good place. That narrows down the possibilities still further.

The existence of medical language is not sufficient to prove that the author was a doctor, but it makes more sense if he was. It is a supportive argument, not a decisive one.

Early church tradition

Irenaeus (130-200), Clement of Alexandria (150-215), Origen (185-245), Tertullian (160-255), The Muratorian Canon (later 2nd Century, 180-200), and the anti-Marcionite prologue to Luke (could be later 2nd Century), all state that Luke was the author of both Luke and Acts.

Luke or Acts is known, either by quotation or allusion, by Justin Martyr (100-165), the Gnostic Basilides (125-150), Tatian (roughly 130-180), the Gnostic Valentinus (Rome from 136-165), Irenaeus (130-200), the Gnostic Heracleon (145-180), Marcion (in Rome 140-160), Clement of Alexandria (150-215), Tertullian (160-255), and the Muratorian Fragment (170-200).

The earliest manuscript of Luke, Bodmer Papyrus XIV (P^75), which is dated at 175-225, ascribes the Gospel to Luke. It is unlikely that the two volumes ever circulated without his name attached to them.

The way Paul seems to distinguish him from his Jewish brothers (those of the circumcision) in Colossians 4 seems to indicate that he was a Gentile.

Conclusion

While none of the above amounts to total proof, the theory of a totally anonymous author who has been lost to history seems to me to require more proof than the traditional authorship.

SOURCES

Luke is the one New Testament writer to tell us that he used sources. Here are the sources, according to the widest scholarly consensus.

- The most commonly accepted source is Mark.

- Due to the common material he shares with Matthew (popularly called Q), most believe Matthew and Luke used a source now no longer existent, mostly made up of teaching material.

- Then Luke seems to have had sources of his own that include the infancy narrative, aspects of the passion/resurrection narrative, and his sources for Acts prior to the “we” sections. These are normally called L.

A more detailed discussion would involve a study of the Synoptic problem.[119] However, some comments are appropriate.

Mark

The least problematic assumption is that Luke used Mark. This allows us to check his editorial method and draw conclusions about his use of other sources. Such conclusions have already been mentioned under “Luke the Historian” above. Here is a typical case.

Luke’s editing of Mark: The man with a withered hand

Mark 3:1-5

Luke 6:6-11

Another time he went into the synagogue, and a man with a shrivelled hand was there. Some of them were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath. Jesus said to the man with the shrivelled hand, "Stand up in front of everyone." Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent. He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored. Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.

On another Sabbath he went into the synagogue and was teaching, and a man was there whose right hand was shrivelled. The Pharisees and the teachers of the law were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal on the Sabbath. But Jesus knew what they were thinking and said to the man with the shrivelled hand, "Get up and stand in front of everyone." So he got up and stood there. Then Jesus said to them, "I ask you, which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to destroy it?" He looked around at them all, and then said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." He did so, and his hand was completely restored. But they were furious and began to discuss with one another what they might do to Jesus.

One notices slight variations with little essential altered.

- Mark tells us who were watching at the end. Luke moves this to the beginning. Further, Mark mentions the Herodians, which Luke leaves out.

- The most important difference is that Luke says Jesus knew what they were thinking, whereas Mark describes Jesus emotion of anger. However, Luke describes the opponents as being furious, which Mark does not.

Of course, we do not know for certain the Luke used Mark, and we do not know if he had other sources, but given this supposition, it shows someone exercising editorial freedom without changing the basic story.

Q

Similarly, a comparison of material common to Matthew and Luke shows editorial freedom but respect for the story or teaching. We do not really know if Luke used Matthew or both Matthew and Luke used a source called Q, but the latter is more likely. Notice below that Luke has a different order, italics is material in this section not in the Matthean parallel, and underlined is in the Matthew section and not in Luke. Then within similar sentences there are slight variations. For instance 6 in Matthew has “pagans” and Luke has “sinners.”

Teaching shared by Matthew and Luke

Matthew 5:40-48

1. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well.

2. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.

3. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

4. You have heard that it was said, `Love your neighbour and hate your enemy. But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,

5. that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.

6. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?

7. Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Luke 6:27-36

4. But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.

If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also.

1. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic.

3. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back.

Do to others as you would have them do to you.

6. If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even `sinners' love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even `sinners' do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even `sinners' lend to `sinners,' expecting to be repaid in full.

But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back.

5. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked.

7. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

The existence of Q as a written document, rather than a common oral tradition, is much debated. Over confident assumptions on its supposed literary history have lead some, like Kloppenburg, to get into all sorts of speculations.[120] Further, earlier confident results of research into the Synoptic problem (the relations between Matthew, Mark and Luke) are not so confident today. More and more scholars are suggesting a greater role for oral tradition alongside documentary sources, give more value to oral tradition, and suggest more complex theories of Synoptic relationships. Q may show that Luke used Matthew. Alternatively, all three writers may even have used one another before finalizing their Gospels. The “neat” conclusions of the past are being replaced by more complex and open-ended theories.[121] Already in 1976 Francois Bovon suggested that the whole redaction-critical method (based for instance, on how Luke used Mark or Q) had more or less exhausted itself and that we stand on the brink of a new stage of Lucan studies.[122]

Proto-Luke & L

"Proto-Luke" describes the theory that Luke had already written a version of his Gospel before he had access to Mark. He then added Mark to what he had already arranged and structured.

Luke has much more material of his own than Matthew. Matthew takes over 90% of Mark, where Luke takes over 55%. Markan material makes up only 40% of Luke. Therefore 60% of Luke is not from Mark, and of that, roughly 20% is shared with Matthew (i.e. Q). The remaining 40% is special to Luke (usually called L).

Further, the way Luke has used his sources is worthy of note. When we examine L material it seems possible that it existed in some coherent form before being combined with the rest. For instance, there is a collection of 15 parables (see below). Many of the items have an interest in women. Here is an outline of the L material.

L Material in Luke

Ministry in Galilee

Women

Parables

1:5-2:52

The birth of John and Jesus, Jesus childhood

x

4:16-30

Rejection at Nazareth

5:1-11

The catch of fish

7:11-17

Widow of Nain

x

7:36-40

The sinful women

x

7:41-43

The two debtors

x

8:1-3

The women who travelled with Jesus

x

The Journey to Jerusalem

9:51-56

Samaritan villages

10:1-16

Mission of the 70

10:29-37

The good Samaritan

x

10:38-42

Mary and Martha

x

11:5-8

The friend at midnight

x

11:27-28

Mary’s blessedness declared

x

12:13-21

The rich fool

x

13:6-9

The fig tree

x

13:10-17

The crippled women

x

14:1-16

The man with dropsy

14:28-30

The tower builder

x

14:31-33

The rash king

x

15:8-10

The lost coin

x

x

15:11-32

The lost son

x

16:1-9

The shrewd manager

x

16:19-31

The rich man and Lazarus

x

17:7-10

The servants duty

x

17:11-19

The ten lepers

18:1-8

The persistent widow

x

x

18:9-14

The Pharisee and the tax collector

x

19:1-10

Zacchaeus

19:11-27

The ten minas

x

The Passion & Resurrection Narrative

22:15-30

Extra content in the last supper

22:40-46

The sweat like blood

22:47-53

The arrest

22:54-23:16

The triple trial

23:26-31

The women who lamented

x

23:39-43

The penitent thief at the cross

24:1-12

The women at the tomb

x

24:13-35

The walk to Emmaus

24:36-49

The appearance in Jerusalem

24:50-53

The ascension of Jesus

There are many technical details to this theory, some of which can be disputed, but some of the fairly persuasive points are the following.

1. If you take the Markan material out of the passion narrative, a fairly connected story remains.

2. In the Galilean and Journey sections, Markan material is arranged in alternative blocks to L material.[123]

3. The dating synchronism in 3:1 looks like it could have been the start of a document, and the genealogy is found thereafter, which one would normally place at the beginning of a life story (like Matthew does).

One of the virtues of the proto-Luke hypothesis is that is shows an earlier, cohesive source. It also fits with what we know of Luke’s probable movements. Luke was with Paul in Caesarea when Paul was imprisoned for two years (AD 56-58 or 58-60). Mark, as Peter’s interpreter, may have been writing his Gospel in Rome when Luke arrived there with Paul, or they may have both written soon thereafter (AD 60-63). It makes sense to think that Luke had been gathering sources in Palestine and had an initial draft of his gospel, to which he added his use of Mark at the end.

A Hebrew infancy source

This theory is also much debated and there are many details.[124] However, even a reader of the English text will be struck by the Old Testament flavour of the infancy narrative. The Greek text shows more obvious signs of Hebrew flavour and fairly poor Greek. Luke can write good Greek, evident in the prologue just before. Many scholars believe this is “translation Greek”, showing that his source was Hebrew.[125] Others think Luke was saturated in the language of the Septuagint (which is translation Greek from the Hebrew) and could therefore evoke an Old Testament impression.[126] One of the arguments that lends more weight to the idea of a Hebrew source is the fact that some of the names of the key figures rhyme with words in the text when one projects back into Hebrew.[127]

An Aramaic source behind Acts 1-12

Again, there are many details, and scholars argue the value of the evidence. Indications of an Aramaic source are strongest in 1:1-5:16 and 9:31-11:18.[128]

The Speeches in Acts

Once again, this is a large subject. Clearly the ancient world did not have tape recorders, MP3 recorders, or video cameras. We therefore have to ask, what norms applied to ancient historians and their use of speeches? Unfortunately, there is quite a spectrum. Generally, a well known speech or sermon would be recalled in general, not necessarily word for word. Further, early church sermons may well have been recalled with more freedom than the teaching of Jesus. Opinions amongst scholars therefore range from those who think Luke invented all the sermons in Acts to the view that he was careful to obtain an accurate résumé of what was said. On the basis of the habits of ancient historians, he may have done either, so we have to fall back on our opinion of whether he was a companion of Paul who met Peter, James and others, or not.[129]

Two characteristics seem to be generally observed by scholars. First, Luke’s Greek grammar is found throughout, so whatever the sources were, we have them in their final from through his editorial activity. Second, they show signs of primitive words and ideas that lend weight to his claim to have investigated carefully, including amongst eye-witnesses. The differences come when scholars decide how much of each element prevails.

F. F. Bruce quotes the conclusion of F. J. Foakes Jackson as follows:

Whatever these speeches may be, it cannot be disputed that they are wonderfully varied as to their character, and as a rule admirably suited to the occasion on which they were delivered. Luke seems to have been able to give us an extraordinarily accurate picture of the undeveloped theology of the earliest Christians, and to enable us to determine the character of the most primitive presentation of the gospel. [130]

Then he adds,

The speeches in Acts are not Luke’s invention, but summaries giving at least the gist of what was really said on the various occasions, and therefore valuable and independent sources for the life and thought of the primitive Church.[131]

How did Luke gather his sources

He tells us that he had two kinds of sources:

- Many have drawn up accounts (1:1) – source documents, and

- Those handed down to us by eye-witnesses (1:2).

We have noted that he probably had access to Mark once he reached Rome. He visited Jerusalem in AD 57 (Acts 21:15-19). On his way he stayed with Philip the evangelist (21:8). In Jerusalem he stayed with Mnason and, with Paul, visited James. A fascinating question is whether he met Mary. Certainly James (not one of the twelve, but one of Christ’ brothers) would have been an invaluable source. The possible evidence of information from Mary is the interest in women noted in the L source, and the statement in 2:51, “his mother treasured all these things in her heart.” How did Luke know this? Either he freely invented what he wrote, or had some access to the report of her feelings and memories. If Mary was say 18 when Jesus was born, and if Jesus was born in BC 4, it would make her 61 in AD 57. Those who view Luke as a much later writer will dispute all these indications. However, the indications are there in the text and there are no hard facts that should cause us to dispute them. Then Paul, as his hero and companion, would have been the source of much of Acts.

The Infancy Narrative

As a generalization, Matthews’s infancy narrative is told from Joseph’s point of view, and Luke’s from Mary’s. Critical scholars have raised all sorts of contradictory details between the two accounts, which have been explained and defended by other scholars.[132] Clearly the two genealogies cannot be formally reconciled, but Matthew’s genealogy is quite openly theological commentary.[133]

Some suggest that Luke drew on a special “Baptist” source taken from a sect still loyal to John the Baptist, but this theory has never gone further than a speculation.[134]

Some have suggested that the virgin birth (1:34-35) is a later interpolation. Those who suggest this usually argue that the rest of the New Testament is silent about the virgin birth. However, the interpolation theory is not well supported linguistically and the rest of the New Testament is far from silent about the virgin birth.[135]

Some scholars believe Luke has invented much of the story and used the technique of “verisimilitude” (the appearance of an historical narrative). However, there are no verifiable reasons for coming to this conclusion.[136] The stories can neither be shown to be true or false from the available external evidence, but if the possible manner of Luke’s use of sources has merit, then we could be very close to eye-witness evidence.

The focus of the infancy narrative is not the virgin birth (which is one small part), but the arrival of the messianic era. The way the stories are structured and told may indicate that they were transmitted through a community of early Christian prophets.[137]

FOOTNOTES

[1] Howard Marshall lays out the same three categories in The Acts of the Apostles, New Testament Guides, Sheffield Academic Press, 1997, p 14-15.

[2] Charles H. Talbert traces the shift in focus to the work of Dibelius and Bultmann, “Luke-Acts,” in The New Testament and Its Modern Interpreters, edited by Eldon Jay Epp and George W. MacRae, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989, p 297-298.

[3] For a recent “take” on narrative in Luke-Acts, see John M. Court, Reading the New Testament, London: Routledge, 1997, p 35-38. He sees the journey as the central motif.

[4] For a helpful summary of these eras in Lukan studies see D.A. Carson & Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992, (hereafter referred to as Carson/Moo), p 216-219. Howard Marshall also gives a helpful summary of the first two eras in Luke, Historian and Theologian, Exeter: Paternoster, 1970, (hereafter referred to as Luke Historian), p 13-20. A typical narrative approach will be found in Joel Green, The Gospel of Luke. He says his approach "pursues a line of study to which I have referred elsewhere as 'discourse analysis' - correlating culture-critical and narratological concerns," (p 1). He points out that in describing his work as a "narrative" (Luke 1:1-4), Luke actually invites such an approach.

[5] The approach adopted in my dissertation (hereafter referred to as Thesis), Derek Morphew, A Critical Investigation of the Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke, Doctoral Dissertation, University of Cape Town, 1984.

[6] Hence the title of his primary work, Luke: Historian and Theologian.

[7] Discussed in detail in Thesis, chapter 3, “The Historical-Critical Method.”

[8] Some of the primary scholars in this approach were Ernst Kasemann, Philipp Vielhauer, Hans Conzelmann and Ernst Haenchen. See references in the bibliography.

[9] For a good summary of recent trends in Synoptic and Lukan studies that question the whole agenda of redaction criticism, see Charles H. Talbert, “Luke-Acts,” in The New Testament and Its Modern Interpreters, p 306-298. He believes the future of Lucan studies will involve literary and genre criticism, p 310.

[10] An interesting analysis of the walk to Emmaeus, as narrative, will be found in John M. Court, Reading the New Testament, London: Routledge, 1997, p 38-39, following the structural analysis of Daniel Patte. A sound narrative approach, using the key idea of the purpose of God, will be found in Robert C. Tannehill, The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts, A Literary Interpretation, Volume I: The Gospel according to Luke, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986 and The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts, A Literary Interpretation, Volume II: The Acts of the Apostles, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1990.

[11] Structuralism is a primary methods used in Morphew, Thesis, for an analysis of the method, see p 178-184.

[12] Glen Taylor, in the VBI course on Deuteronomy has given a helpful summary of what he means by a canonical approach. Here is what he says:

“By canonical form I mean the divinely inspired final form of the Bible. Whoever the various authors and editors were, and regardless of what the literary sources these authors and editors used, it is this form that the Holy Spirit has inspired and has spoken through, to transform people and communities down through the ages. Jesus recognized the final form of the OT as the Word of God. The believing community down through the centuries has recognized the OT and NT as authoritative. The canonical understanding and study of the Bible contrasts most sharply with an historical-critical approach. The latter places primary importance on finding the ‘real’ sources which underlay the canonical form of the Bible (B. S. Childs, Biblical Theology of the Old Testament [Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993] 70–1; B. S. Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture [London: SCM, 1979] 57–60). The historical critical method has not been without benefit, but it is basically an Enlightenment project, which means that, foundationally, it eschews an ultra-human worldview inherent in Scripture. This worldview is of paramount importance to the life and vitality of the community of faith. Many critical scholars have admitted that their speculative pursuit of sources has led them into a barren wasteland.

Brevard Childs was the first critical scholar, of more recent times, to seriously grapple with the necessity of putting primary importance on understanding the message of the canonical text, even though he did not abandon the methods of historical criticism (Childs, Introduction). Walter Brueggemann, another critical scholar, goes further in criticizing the excesses of historical criticism (W. Brueggemann, The Bible and Postmodern Imagination [London: SCM, 1993]). In more recent times, a number of Jewish, Catholic, Protestant and Evangelical scholars have been helpful in providing a firmer theoretical framework for a canonical and reverential reading of Scripture (R. Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative [New York: Basic Books, 1981]; S. Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art in the Bible [Sheffield: Almond, 1989]; C. G. Bartholomew, Reading Ecclesiastes: Old Testament Exegesis and Hermeneutical Theory [Analecta Biblica; Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1998]; A. Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative [Sheffield: Almond, 1983]; D. M. Gunn, and D. N. Fewell, Narrative in the Hebrew Bible [Oxford: Oxford Bible Series, 1993]; J. L. Ska, Our Fathers Have Told Us: Introduction to the Analysis of Hebrew Narratives, [Subsidia Biblica; Rome: Editrice Pontifico Istituto Biblico, 1990]; M. Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Literature: Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading, [Bloomington, IN: Indiana University, 1985]).”

[13] “His theme was the reign of Christ, how it is established, how it must be maintained,” A.R.C. Leaney, A Commentary on the Gospel according to Luke, 1958, p 34-37. Earle E. Ellis writes, “The main theme of the Gospel is the nature of Jesus Messiahship and mission,” The Gospel of Luke, 1967.

[14] The term often associated with the ground breaking work of Hans Conzelmann in The Theology of Saint Luke, London: SCM, 1960, translated from his Die Mitte der Zeit, 1954, but more positively to be associated with the work of Oscar Cullman; Christ and Time and Salvation in History. For a more recent exploration of the theme, see John T. Squires, The Plan of God in Luke-Acts, Cambridge University Press, 1993.

[15] “The fulfillment of God’s plan provides the overarching structure for Luke’s gospel,” Carson/Moo, p 219. "In it we see the working out of God's purpose to bring salvation in all of its fullness to all people," Joel Green, The Gospel of Luke, p 9.

[16] “That plan aims at the provision of salvation for the world, and this focus on salvation constitutes Luke’s second main contribution,”Carson/Moo p 219. “It is our thesis that the idea of salvation supplies the key to the theology of Luke,” Marshall, Luke Historian, p 92.

[17] F.F. Bruce says of Acts, “…in all the book there is nothing which is unrelated to the Holy Spirit,” The Acts of the Apostles, London: Tyndale, 1965, p 30.

[18] Ernst Haenchen, The Acts of the Apostles, Oxford: Blackwells, 1971.

[19] Norman R. Petersen, Literary Criticism of New Testament Critics, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1978.

[20] For a sound synthetic view of most of these themes, see Joel B. Green, New Testament Theology: The Theology of the Gospel of Luke, Cambridge University Press, 1995.

[21] See especially his analysis on the use of kingdom language in Luke Historian, p 89-91.

[22] N.T. Wright can be credited, amongst others, for showing how Jesus re-interpreted Israel’s faith and initiated a totally new approach. For my comments on N.T. Wright refer to the VBI course, Peter Davids, The Ministry of the Kingdom, p 109 to 111. His major works are: Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume I, The New Testament and the People of God, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992; Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume II, Jesus and the Victory of God, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996; Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume III, The Resurrection of the Son of God, London: SPCK, 2003.

[23] Sir William Ramsay, Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament, reprint, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1953.

[24] For these features see Guthrie, Introduction, p 371-372.

[25] F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable, IVP, p 90, and see the whole chapter on Luke for a more detailed list of ways to test his accuracy, p 80-92.

[26] Peter Davids, VBI Course, The Ministry of the Kingdom III, p 83.

[27] John M. Court, Reading the New Testament, London: Routledge, 1997, p 37.

[28] Therefore I am agreeing with Leaney, Ellis, Carson & Moo.

[29] Conzelmann’s failure to see this is a glaring weakness in his whole position, as noted by many. See especially Paul S. Minear, “St. Luke’s uses of the Birth Stories,” SLA, p 111-130; H. H. Oliver, “The Lucan Birth Stories and the Purpose of Luke-Acts,” NTS, 10, 1963-4, p 202-226; W. Barnes Tatum, “The Epoch of Israel: Luke 1-2 and the Theological Plan of Luke-Acts,” NTS, 13, 1966-67, p 184-195.

[30] Marshall, Luke Historian, discussing this language comments: “This means that the activity of Jesus may properly be described as eschatological. That is to say, His activity is regarded as something which was prophesied as taking place in the future in the Old Testament, and, since a period of several hundred years separated the prophecy from the fulfillment, it is certain that the prophecy was regarded as referring to the time of the End, so that the appearance of Jesus would have been seen as an event of the End time. This is an important conclusion; it means that the ministry of Jesus is regarded as an eschatological event in the strict sense of the term. It is confirmed by the evidence of other passages in Luke”, p 119-120.

[31] Marshall, Luke Historian, 90-91.

[32] Hans Conzelmann, The Theology of Saint Luke, London, MacMillan, 1969; “Luke’s Place in the Development of Early Christianity," SLA, p 298-316.

[33] The list of scholars who have queried Conzelmann’s views is long. Here are a few samples. Earle, E. Ellis, “Present and Future Eschatology in Luke," NTS, 12, 1965-66, p 26-41. Fred O. Francis, “Eschatology and History in Luke-Acts”, JAAR, 37, 1969, 49-63. Richard H. Hiers, “The Problem of the Delay of the Parousia in Luke-Acts”, NTS, 20, 1973-4, p 145-155. R. Maddox, “The Sense of New Testament Eschatology”, Reformed Theological Review, 36, 1977, p 42-50. Howard Marshall, “Slippery Words 1, Eschatology”, ET, 89, 1977, p 246-269. For the way philosophical trends influence the debate, see Ulrich Wilckens, “Interpreting Luke-Acts in a Period of Existentialist Theology”, SLA, p 60-83.

[34] For further comment on this subject, Derek Morphew, Breakthrough: Discovering the Kingdom, the chapter on “Studying the Theology of the Kingdom.” Refer also to my introductory comments about the assumptions behind the “theology of the delay”.

[35] This theme is developed in some detail in Derek Morphew, Breakthrough: Discovering the Kingdom.

[36] Marshall, Luke Historian, p 114.

[37] John Squires, p 192.

[38] See the appendix summarizing Isaiah’s kingdom expectation in Derek Morphew, Breakthrough: Understanding the Kingdom.

[39] For such phenomena, see the James Burns classic in Revivals, Their Laws and Leaders.

[40] Peter Davids articulates this well in the VBI Course, The Ministry of the Kingdom, “Receiving the Spirit”, p 86 f.

[41] Some of these terms are more likely as candidates for a medical interest than others. “Luke alone relates what may be called the surgical miracle of the healing of Malchus’ ear (22:51). And perhaps the marked way in which he distinguishes demoniacal possession from disease (6:18; 13:32; Acts 19:12) may be put down to medical training. His exactness in stating how long the person healed had been afflicted (13:11; Acts 9:33) and the age of the person healed (8:42; Acts 4:22) is a feature of the same kind … The coincidences between the preface of the Gospel and the opening words of some medical treatises are remarkable (e. g. Dioscorides). And it is worth noting that Luke alone records Christ’s quotation of the proverb, ‘Physician, heal yourself!’ (4:23).” Alfred Plummer, The International Critical Commentary, London, T & T Clark, 1910; lxiii-lxvi, quote from lxv-lxvi, altered to use digital references.

[42] Western Christianity has been deeply influenced by Gnostic Dualism. See Derek Morphew, The Spiritual Spider Web, a study of ancient and contemporary Gnosticism.

[43] These points are made succinctly in The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering Who Jesus Was and Is, Dowers Grove, IVP, 1999 and more fully in his trilogy: Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume I,The New Testament and the People of God, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992; Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume II,Jesus and the Victoryof God, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996; Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume III, The Resurrection of the Son of God, London: SPCK, 2003. Readers of Derek Morphew, Breakthrough: Discovering the Kingdom, will notice that I agree with Dunn, that the return from exile theme has been somewhat overworked by Wright.

[44] The letter of James speaks to the same context.

[45] For the Old Testament use, the NIDNTT says, “It is used relatively seldom in the sense to forgive … In general it is often used of the release of captives and slaves” (Volume I, p 698-99). However, for the New Testament usage the comment is “The use of aphesis is in contrast to this. Of 17 examples in the NT, 15 have the sense of forgiveness”. This is Paul’s way of using the term. But then the article gives Luke 4:18-19 as one of the cases where the Old Testament sense has been retained.

[46] For an excellent, relevant treatment of Luke’s language of the word in Acts, refer to Michael Green, Evangelism in the Early Church, London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1969.

[47] Refer to Derek Morphew, Breakthrough: Discovering the Kingdom, p 73f.

[48] Charles H. Kraft, Christianity With Power: Your Worldview and Your Experience of the Supernatural, Vine Books, 1989; Joel Green, in The Gospel of Luke, has this to say: "Luke's world is one in which God intervenes through miraculous conceptions, angels regularly mediate between heaven and earth, and diabolical forces are active, for example." The Gospel "gives expression to an eschatological vision currently manifesting itself in the world wherein God 'has brought down the powerful from their thrones, and lifted up the lowly' (1:52). Indeed, it is not too much to say that the Lukan narrative is an invitation to embrace an alternative worldview and to live as if the reign of God had already revolutionized this age," p 11.

[49] Alfred Plummer, Luke, p xlv.

[50] Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Moral Teaching of the New Testament, New York: Herder & Herder, 1969, P 171.

[51] Joel B. Green, New Testament Theology: The Theology of the Gospel of Luke, Cambridge University Press, 1995, p 102-121.

[52] Carson & Moo, p 303-304.

[53] Alfred Plummer, p xliii.

[54] For a helpful summary of the purpose of Acts, including its various apologetic priorities, see Howard Marshall, The Acts of the Apostles, New Testament Guides, p 31-46.

[55] The whole of 2 Corinthians expounds this theme.

[56] For more comments on this subject, see Breakthrough: Discovering the Kingdom, the chapter entitled, "Studying the Theology of the Kingdom.”

[57] Marshall comments, “it is legitimate to ask to which historian Luke stands nearer: Josephus of Polybius.” Marshall’s analysis of this subject leads him to say, “Our conclusion is that the attempt to set Luke in the context of ancient historians does not lead to any firm result”, Luke Historian, p 54-57.

[58] Otherwise the best source for evangelical students is Marshall, Luke Historian. I have added some statements not found in Keener’s discourse from Dunn, Marshall, Stanton, Bruce, Blaiklock, Hemer, and van Eldered below. Hemer is one of the few who still examines details, in the tradition of Ramsay. Howard Marshall thinks he has rather overstated Luke’s accuracy from the evidence available.

[59] Craig Keener, The Gospel of John, A Commentary, Peabody: Hendriksen, 2003, p 8-51.

[60] Keener, p 11. Similar conclusions are made by Howard Marshall in The Acts of the Apostles, New Testament Guides, p 22-23.

[61] Keener, p 12; Joel Green, The Gospel of Luke, p 2-6.

[62] Keener, p 13.

[63] Keener, p 17.

[64] Keener, p 19.

[65] Keener, p 19.

[66] Keener, p 30.

[67] Keener, p 31. Very similar conclusions will be found in James Dunn, Jesus Remembered.

[68] Quoted in Marshall, Luke Historian, p 64, see also 64-67.

[69] G. N. Stanton, “Presuppositions in N.T. Criticism”, p 70, note 11.

[70] F. F. Bruce, Acts, p 15-16.

[71] Keener, p 32.

[72] Edward M. Blaiklock, “The Acts of the Apostles as a Document of First Century History,” p 41-54.

[73] C. J. Hemer, “Luke the Historian,” BJRL, 60, 1977, 28-51.

[74] B. van Eldered, “Some Archaelogical observations on Paul’s first missionary journey”, p 151-161, also “Jesus of Nazareth” in Christian Faith and Modern Theology, edited C. F. H. Henry, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1964.

[75] Quoted in Marshall, Luke Historian, p 69.

[76] Of these the most thorough and well presented is James A. T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament, London, SCM, 1976.

[77] For a highly obtuse, but thorough and quite brilliant analysis of Boehme and his wide influence, refer to Cyril O’Regan, Gnostic Return in Modernity, New York: State University of New York Press, 2001, ISBN: 0791450228; Gnostic Apocalypse: Jacob's Boehme's Haunted Narrative, New York: State University of New York Press, 2002, ISBN: 0791452026.

[78] This story is best followed by general introductions to the history of NT research, notably Kümmel and Stephen Neill. W.G. Kümmel, The New Testament. The History of the Investigation of Its Problems, London: SCM, 1972; Stephen Neill, The Interpretation of the New Testament 1861-1961, New York: Oxford University Press, 1966.

[79] N.T. Wright is one of the most highly respected scholars to have examined post-Enlightenment assumptions.

[80] “Apart from general considerations of the time required for the development of the theological and historical perspective of Luke-Acts, which are notoriously subjective, and in turn depend on the other datings, the three ‘hard’ pieces of evidence are: (a) the prophecies of the fall of Jerusalem in Luke; (b) the dependence (according to the most widely held solution of the synoptic problem) of the gospel of Luke upon that of Mark; and (c) the fact that Acts ends where it does,” Robinson, Redating, p 88.

[81] Donald Guthrie, “The Chronology of the Life of Paul,” New Testament Introduction, Revised Edition, Downers Grove: Intervarsity, 1990, p 1006.

[82] So Robinson, Redating, p 91, “If the outcome of that trial (or a subsequent one) was already known, it is surely incredible, as Harnack says, that no foreshadowing or prophecy of it after the event is allowed to appear in the narrative.”

[83] “If the outcome of that trial (or a subsequent one) was already known, it is surely incredible, as Harnack says, that no foreshadowing or prophecy of it after the event is allowed to appear in the narrative,” Robinson, p 91. For this argument see also Leon Morris, Luke, p 22.

[84] “Then there is the apparently almost willful blindness of investigators to the seemingly obvious. Thus Harnack chided scholars – and himself – for failing to take seriously the explanation which stared them in the face of why Acts ends where it does. They could not believe it, because of previous assumptions about the dating of Mark and therefore of Luke. In the same way, the absence of all reference in the gospels, Acts, epistles or apocalypse to the fall of Jerusalem in the past tense is a phenomenon that should have raised fare more questions than it has. Even – or especially – a deliberate rewriting of history to conceal it must surely have left more trace than it has … The assumption that the epistle to the Hebrews could have been written as it is without reference to this cataclysmic event (so specifically mentioned in the comparable Epistle of Barnabas) is surely quite astonishing, ” Robinson, Redating, p 342.

[85] “It is noticeable as one visits the literature of the past hundred years how much more thoroughly grounded in these questions was the work of the older generation – most of whom were brought up on the classics – and how much more rigorous in the dating of evidence, as well as attentive to the evidence of dating, than some of their successors. This, one has to say it, has been true of many, though not all … of the form critics and redaction critics. Their world has been a world without fences, where words and ideas, myths and movements, Hermetic, Gnostic, Mandean and the rest, have floated freely with no very noticeable tethering to time or place. Many of the circles and communities of the early church with their tensions and tendencies are frankly creations of the critics or highly subjective reconstructions,” Robinson, Redating, p 345.

[86] A good general introduction would be Bill Jackson, The Quest for the Radical Middle, Vineyard International Publishing, 19. At a more popular level is David Pytches, Some Said It Thundered, Nashville: Oliver Nelson, 1991.

[87] Jack Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993, p 45-76.

[88] Howard Marshall, The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text, NIGTC, Exeter: Paternoster, 1978, p 753.

[89] “An amazing example of uncritical dogmatism in New Testament studies is the belief that the Synoptic Gospels should be dated after the Jewish War of AD 66-70 because they contain prophecies ex eventu of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in the year 70,” Bo Reicke, ‘Synoptic Prophecies on the Destruction of Jerusalem,’ in D.W.Aune (ed), Studies in New Testament and Early Christian Literature: Essay in Honor of Allen P.Wikgren (NovTest Suppl.33), Leiden 1972, 121-134.

[90] Guthrie, Introduction, p 362.

[91] Kümmel, who adopts the later date, agrees that this is an almost “universal opinion”, Introduction, p 133. Conzelmann also recognizes this difficulty for later dating, “Luke’s Place”, p 229. John Knox, faced with the impasse of the fact that “Luke made little or no use of the letters” and that “Luke could not have failed to know them” argues that Luke would not have wanted to quote them. He offers a complicated theory that Luke was combating a Marcionite use of Paul’s letters, and concludes that Luke wrote in AD 125, “Acts and the Pauline Letter Corpus”, p 279-286.

[92] For the primitive nature of the Christology of Acts see H.N. Ridderbos, “The Speeches of Peter in the Acts of the Apostles”, The Tyndale N.T. Lecture, p 19-27 and F.F. Bruce, Paul, Apostle, p 65-67. Eduard Schweizer believes the use of Son of God in Acts 13.33 reflects a pre-Pauline and primitive Christology, in “The concept of the Davidic ‘Son of God’ in Acts and Its O.T. Background,” p 186-205.

[93] C. K. Barrett, Luke the Historian in Recent Study, p 24.

[94] A helpful treatment of this subject will be found in James Dunn, “Early Catholicism”, in Unity and Diversity, p 341-374. He shows that the term is often poorly defined, p 341-344.

[95] A helpful summary of the arguments is provided by Charles H. Talbert “Luke-Acts,” in The New Testament and Its Modern Interpreters, p 305-306. He notes that W.G. Kümmel has given the following summary: (1) Luke knows nothing of the near expectation of the kingdom, (2) does not understand Jesus death as a saving event, (3) holds to the notion of ‘succession,’ and (4) therefore thinks there are guarantees for the Christian tradition so that faith’s assurance is handed over to human accomplishments, and (5) misunderstands the kerygma evidenced by the existence of Acts after the Gospel.”

[96] Conzelmann, Theology, p 150, also “Luke’s Place” p 302-303.

[97] Conzelmann, “Luke’s Place” p 298-309, especially p 302-303.

[98] Ernst Haenchen, Acts, p 112-116.

[99] Philipp Vielhauer, “On the Paulinism of Acts”, p 38-40.

[100] Vielhauer, p 33-34.

[101] Vielhauer, p 45-49.

[102] Hemer notes that we do have a great deal of external evidence for checking Acts and that this should not be set aside in favour of a dogmatic understanding of Luke’s theology, “Luke the Historian” p 34-40.

[103] J. A. T. Robinsons phrase, Redating, p 86-90.

[104] The point here is not to support or deny the “theology of subsequence” in Pentecostalism, simply to note that it is based on experience, as well as a reading of Acts.

[105] Leon Morris draws attention to Plummer and makes these arguments in Luke, p 42-44 and The Cross in the NT, p 107-143.

[106] Marshall, “The Resurrection”, p 103-105, also H. N. Ridderbos, “The Speeches of Peter”, p 23-24, p 18.

[107] Talbert comments on the problem of poor definition, “Luke-Acts,” in The New Testament and Its Modern Interpreters, p 306 and notes Kümmel’s replies to the five items listed. “Luke does know the expectation of the near end, (2) does not entirely remove the redemptive significance of Jesus’ death (e.g. Luke 22:19b-20; Acts 20:28) though his chief emphasis is on Jesus’ death as corresponding to God’s will, (3) does not reflect on apostolic succession, and (4) recounts the history of Jesus not as a mere historian but as do Matthew and Mark, with the aim of proclamation. Finally (5) since the kerygma Paul received (1 Cor.15:3ff.) presupposes that the resurrection experience of witnesses must also be portrayed in designating the basis of Christian faith, the presence of [in?] Acts is not betrayal of a primitive Christian stance”, p 306.

[108] “For Luke the apostles are essentially witnesses … There is nothing in his treatment of this subject to suggest that Luke had any ecclesiastical axe to grind, … it can scarcely be maintained that Luke’s view of the sacraments represents the church as purveying salvation along official sacramental channels”, Barrett, Luke the Historian in Recent Study, p 71-76.

[109] James Dunn, Unity and Diversity, p 344-366.

[110] Refer to F. F. Bruce, “Is the Paul of Acts the Real Paul”, p 297-298 and Paul, Apostle, p 213-216. It can be argued that the agreements between Paul in Acts and Paul in the epistles far outweigh the differences, as in Hemer, Luke the Historian, p 42-45. The relationship between the two Paul’s is argued in a different way by Ernst Käsemann in “Ephesians and Acts” p 288-297. Ephesians and Acts, he says, evidence the same transition between the apostolic and sub-apostolic “early catholic” period. His argument assumes the non-Pauline authorship of Ephesians, which is far from evident to many scholars. If Ephesians is in fact Pauline, Käsemann’s article becomes further evidence of a link between Paul and Acts. A. J. Mattill argues that even if Luke was quite creative in his telling of the story it would not argue against him being a companion of Paul, “The purpose of Acts, Schneckenburger Reconsidered,” p 108-122, especially p 115-122. For a recent and sensible summary of the various arguments about Paul and Acts, see Howard Marshall The Acts of the Apostles, New Testament Guides, p 91-99.

[111] E.P. Sanders, Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983.

[112] N.T. Wright, Paul: Fresh Perspectives, London: SPCK, 2005.

[113] For instance W. C. Van Unnik asks why salvation history must be viewed so negatively by certain scholars. Is it not perhaps a reaction against German pietism, “Luke-Acts, a Storm Centre in Contemporary Scholarship”, SLA, p 15-32.

[114] As noted earlier, refer to Ulrich Wilckens, “Interpreting Luke-Acts in a Period of Existentialist Theology”, p 60-83.

[115] Donald Guthrie, Introduction, p 480 for his conclusion, and see p 472-482 for the whole discussion.

[116] The primary scholars to argue for a literary fiction are Vernon Robbins, “The We-Passages in Acts and Ancient Sea Voyages,” Biblical Research, 20, p 1-14 and Eckhard Plümacher, quoted in Talbert, “Luke-Acts”, p 309.

[117] Howard Marshall summarizes the history of discussion on Lukan authorship and his use of sources and decides that the most likely conclusion is that the author the “we” of Acts, The Acts of the Apostles, New Testament Guides, p 98-99.

[118] Guthrie, Introduction, p 116.

[119] This work draws on Bill Jackson, VBI Course, Introduction to the Gospels.

[120] J. S. Kloppenburg, editor, The Shape of Q, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994 and Excavating Q: The History and Setting of the Sayings Gospel, Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000.

[121] A helpful summary of the direction just described will be found in R. T. France, Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher, Exeter: Paternoster, 1997, p 24-49.

[122] Francois Bovon, Luke the Theologian, and see comments by Talbert, “Luke-Acts”, p 308-309.

[123] A helpful chart is provided in Bill Jackson, VBI Course, Introduction to the Gospels.

[124] For a section by section analysis, see Derek Morphew, Thesis, p 114-177.

[125] One of the primary protagonists of this view was Paul Winter, “Some Observations on the Language in the Birth and Infancy Stories of the Third Gospel, NTS, 1, 1954, p 111-121; “Magnificat and Benedictus – Maccabaean Psalms?” BJRL, 37, 1954-55, p 328-347; “Luke 2:49 and Targum Jerushalmi," ZNTW, 45, 1954, p 145-179; “The Cultural Background of the Narrative in Luke I and II” JQR, 45, 1954, p 159-167, 230-242; “On Luke and Lucan Sources: A Reply to the Reverend N. Turner” ZNTW, 47, 1956, p 217-242; “The Proto-Source of Luke 1”, NT, 1, 1956, p 184-199; “Nazareth and Bethlehem in Luke I and II," NTS, 3, 1957, p 136-142; “The Main Literary Problem of the Lucan Infancy Story”, Anglican Theological Review, 40, 1958, p 257-264; “On the Margin of Luke I, II”, Studia Theologica, 12, 1958, p 103-107.

[126] One of those who questioned the Hebrew source theory and found other possible explanations was Nigel Turner, “The Relations of Luke I and II to Hebraic Sources and to the Rest of Luke-Acts”, NTS, 2, 1955, p 100-109, supported by Peirre Benoit, “L’Enfance de Jean-Baptiste, Selon Luc.1”, NTS, 3, 1957, p 169-194.

[127] The primary research for this was done by René Laurentin, “Traces D’Allusions Etymologiques en Luc. 1-2”, Bib, 37, 1956, p 18-30.

[128] One of the first pieces of research was by Charles C. Torrey, “Translations Made from the Original Aramaic Gospels”, Studies in the History of Religions, Presented to Crawford Howell Toy, New York: MacMillan, 1912. For a more recent comment on the state of the discussion see F. F. Bruce, Acts, p 22-23.

[129] A helpful summary of recent treatment of this subject will be found in Howard Marshall, Luke Historian, p 72-73, and The Acts of the Apostles, New Testament Guides, Sheffield Academic Press, 1997. Also refer to F. F. Bruce, Acts, p 18-21; Eduard Schweizer, “Concerning the Speeches in Acts”, SLA, p 208-214 and Herman Ridderbos, “The Speeches of Peter in the Acts of the Apostles”, The Tyndale N.T. Lecture, p 19-27.

[130] F. F. Bruce, Acts, p 21.

[131] F. F. Bruce, Acts, p 21.

[132] For a detailed analysis of such arguments and counter arguments, see Morphew, Thesis.

[133] Morphew, Thesis, p 14-16, 173-175. An excellent treatment of the theology Matthew was teaching, through the way he constructed the genealogy, will be found in Frederick Dale Bruner, Matthew, A Commentary: The Christbook 1-12, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004.

[134] Morphew, Thesis, p 26-29

[135] Morphew, Thesis, p 16-21.

[136] Verisimilitude is the general approach of Raymond Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1977. This view is analysed section by section in Morphew, Thesis, p 89-177.

[137] Morphew, Thesis, p 236-261.

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

F. F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable‌, London: IVP, 1972.

Michael Green, Evangelism in the Early Church, London: Hodder &Stoughton, 1969.

Joel B. Green, New Testament Theology: The Theology of the Gospel of Luke, Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Howard Marshall, Luke, Historian and Theologian, Exeter: Paternoster,1970; The Acts of the Apostles, New Testament Guides, Sheffield Academic Press, 1997.

James A. T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament, London, SCM,1976.

John T. Squires, The Plan of God in Luke-Acts, Cambridge University Press, 1993.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

C. K. Barrett, Luke the Historian in Recent Study, London: Epworth,1961.

Peirre Benoit, “L’Enfance de Jean-Baptiste, Selon Luc.1”, NTS, 3, 1957, p 169-194.

Edward M. Blaiklock, “The Acts of the Apostles as a Document of First Century History,” in Apostolic History & the Gospel, edited W.Ward Gasque & Ralph Martin, Exeter: Paternoster, 1970.

Günther Bornkamm, “The Missionary stance of Paul ion 1 Cor.9 and inActs”, SLA, p 194-207.

Francois Bovon, Luke the Theologian, Fifty-five Years of Research (1950-2005), Baylor University Press, 2005.

Colin Brown, editor, The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Exeter: Paternoster, 3 Volumes, Exeter: Paternoster, 1975; “The Parousia and Eschatology in the New Testament, NIDNTT, Vol 2,p 90-931.

Raymond Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, London: Geoffrey Chapman,1977.

W. R. F. Browning, The Gospel According to Saint Luke, Torch Bible Commentaries, London: SCM, 1965.

F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary, London: Tyndale, 1965; The Acts of the Apostles, New London Commentary on the New Testament, London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott,1954; “Acts” in The New Bible Commentary, edited D. Guthrie et.al.,London: IVP, 1967; The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable‌?, London: IVP, 1972; Paul: Apostle of the Free Spirit, Exeter: Paternoster, 1977; “Is the Paul of Acts the Real Paul”, BJRL, 58, p 282-305.

Frederick Dale Bruner, Matthew, A Commentary: The Christbook 1-12, GrandRapids: Eerdmans, 2004.

Rudolf Bultmann, History and Eschatology, Edinburgh: EdinburghUniversity Press, 1957; The History of the Synoptic Tradition, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1968.

James Burns, Revivals: Their Laws and Leaders, Hodder and Stoughton in 1909.

Earle E. Cairns, “Luke as a Historian”, BS, 122, 1965, p220-226.

D.A. Carson & Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the NewTestament, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.

Hans Conzelmann, The Theology of Saint Luke, London: SCM, 1960; “Luke’s Place in the Development of Early Christianity, SLA, p298-316.

John M. Court, Reading the New Testament, London: Routledge, 1997.

J. M. Creed, The Gospel According to Saint Luke, London: MacMillan, 1969.

Oscar Cullman, Christ and Time, London: SCM, 1952; The Christology of the New Testament, London, SCM, 1971; Salvation in History, Harper and Rowe, 1967.

Jack Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit, Grand Rapids:Zondervan, 1993.

James Dunn, Christianity in the Making: Volume I, Jesus Remembered, Michigan: Eerdmans, 2003; “Early Catholicism”, in Unity andDiversity, An Inquiry into the Character of Earliest Christianity, London: SCM, 1977, p 341-374.

Earle E. Ellis, The Gospel of Luke, The Century Bible, Edinburgh: T.Nelson & Sons, 1967; “Present and Future Eschatology in Luke, NTS, 12, 1965-66, p 26-41.

R. T. France, Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher, Exeter: Paternoster,1997.

Fred O. Francis, “Eschatology and History in Luke-Acts”, JAAR, 37, 1969, 49-63.

Michael Green, Evangelism in the Early Church, London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1969.

Joel B. Green, New Testament Theology: The Theology of the Gospel of Luke, Cambridge University Press, 1995; The Gospel of Luke, NICNT, Eerdmans, 1997.

Donald Guthrie, Introduction to the New Testament, Revised Edition,Downers Grove: Intervarsity, 1990.

Ernst Haenchen, The Acts of the Apostles, Oxford: Blackwells, 1971; “The Book of Acts as a source material for the history of early Christianity, SLA, p 258-278.

Wilfred J. Harrington, The Gospel According to Saint Luke, London:Geoffrey Chapman, 1968.

C. J. Hemer, “Luke the Historian,” BJRL, 60, 1977, 28-51.

Richard H. Hiers, “The Problem of the Delay of the Parousia in Luke-Acts”, NTS, 20, 1973-4, p 145-155.

Bill Jackson, The Quest for the Radical Middle, Cape Town: Vineyard International Publishing, 1999; VBI Course: Biblical Overview II, Vineyard Bible Institute, E-Publication; VBI Course: Introduction to the Gospels, Vineyard Bible Institute, E-Publication.

Ernst Käsemann, “Ephesians and Acts,” SLA, p 288-297.

Craig Keener, The Gospel of John, A Commentary, Peabody: Hendriksen, 2003.

J. S. Kloppenburg, editor, The Shape of Q, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994; Excavating Q: The History and Setting of the Sayings Gospel, Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000.

John Knox, “Acts and the Pauline Letter Corpus”, SLA, p 279-286.

Charles H. Kraft, Christianity With Power: Your Worldview and Your Experience of the Supernatural, Vine Books, 1989.

W. G. Kümmel, Introduction to the New Testament, London, SCM, 1970.

L. E. Keck & J. L. Martyn, Editors, Studies in Luke-Acts, London:SPCK, 1968, abbreviated as SLA.

René Laurentin, “Traces D’Allusions Etymologiques en Luc.1-2,” Bib, 37, 1956, p 18-30; Structure et Theologie De Luc 1-2, Paris: Etudes Bibliques, Librairie Lecoffre, 1957.

A.R.C. Leaney, A Commentary on the Gospel according to Luke, London: Adam & Charles Black, 1958; “The Birth Narratives in St Matthew and Luke”, NTS, 8, 162, p 158-166.

R. Maddox, “The Sense of New Testament Eschatology,” Reformed Theological Review, 36, 1977, p 42-50.

Howard Marshall, Luke, Historian and Theologian, Exeter: Paternoster,1970; The Acts of the Apostles, New Testament Guides, Sheffield Academic Press, 1997; The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text, NIGTC, Exeter: Paternoster, 1978; “Slippery Words 1, Eschatology”, ET, 89, 1977, p 246-269.

Paul S. Minear, “The Interpreter and the Birth Narratives,” Theology Today, 7, 1950, p 358-375; “St. Luke’s uses of the Birth Stories,” SLA, p 111-130.

Derek Morphew, Breakthrough: Discovering the Kingdom, Cape Town: Vineyard International Publishing, 2006; A Critical Investigation of the Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke, Doctoral Dissertation, University of Cape Town, 1984; The One and Only, forthcoming Amazon Kindle publication; The Church & Its Leaders, forthcoming Amazon Kindle publication; The Spiritual Spider Web: Ancient and Contemporary Gnosticism, Amazon Kindle publication, 2011.

Leon Morris, Luke, Tyndale NT Commentary, London: IVP, 1974; The Cross in the NT, Exeter: Paternoster, 1965; “Luke and Early Catholicism,” in Studying the New Testament Today, edited J. H.Skilton, Philadelphia: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1974.

Stephen Neil, The Interpretation of the New Testament 1861-1961, New York: Oxford University Press, 1966.

H. H. Oliver, “The Lucan Birth Stories and the Purpose of Luke-Acts”, NTS, 10, 1963-4, p 202-226.

Norman R. Petersen, Literary Criticism of New Testament Critics, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1978.

Cyril O’Regan, Gnostic Return in Modernity, New York: State University of New York Press, 2001; Gnostic Apocalypse: Jacob's Boehme's Haunted Narrative, New York: State University of New YorkPress, 2002.

Alfred Plummer, The International Critical Commentary, London, T& T Clark, 1910.

David Pytches, Some Said It Thundered, Nashville: Oliver Nelson, 1991.

Sir William Ramsay, Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness ofthe New Testament, reprint, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1953.

Bo Reicke, “Synoptic Prophecies on the Destruction of Jerusalem,” in D.W.Aune (ed), Studies in New Testament and Early Christian Literature: Essay in Honor of Allen P.Wikgren (NovTest Suppl.33), Leiden 1972, 121-134.

H. N. Ridderbos, “The Speeches of Peter in the Acts of theApostles”, The Tyndale N.T. Lecture, p 19-27.

James A. T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament, London, SCM,1976.

E.P. Sanders, Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983.

Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Moral Teaching of the New Testament, New York: Herder & Herder, 1969,

Eduard Schweizer, “The concept of the Davidic ‘Son of God’ in Acts and Its O.T. Background,” SLA, p 186-205; “Concerning the Speeches in Acts”, SLA, p 208-214.

John T. Squires, The Plan of God in Luke-Acts, CambridgeUniversity Press, 1993.

G. N. Stanton, “Presuppositions in N.T. Criticism”, in New Testament Interpretation, edited Howard Marshall, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1977.

Charles H. Talbert, “Luke-Acts,” in The New Testament and Its Modern Interpreters, edited by Eldon Jay Epp and George W. MacRae, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989, p 297-312; “Shifting Sands, The Recent Study of the Gospel of Luke,” Int, 30, 1976, p 381-395.

Robert C. Tannehill, The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts, A Literary Interpretation, Volume I: The Gospel according to Luke, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986; The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts, A Literary Interpretation, Volume II: The Acts of the Apostles, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1990.

W. Barnes Tatum, “The Epoch of Israel: Luke 1-2 and the Theological Plan of Luke-Acts,” NTS, 13, 1966-67, p 184-195.

Charles C Torrey, “Translations Made from the Original Aramaic Gospels”, Studies in the History of Religions, Presented to Crawford Howell Toy, New York: MacMillan, 1912.

Nigel Turner, “The Relations of Luke I and II to Hebraic Sources and to the Rest of Luke-Acts”, NTS, 2, 1955, p 100-109.

B. van Eldered, “Some Archaeological observations on Paul’s firstmissionary journey”, in Apostolic History and the Gospel, edited Gasque W. Ward Ralph P. Martin, Exeter: Paternoster, 1970, p 151-161; “Jesus of Nazareth” in Christian Faith and Modern Theology, edited C. F. H. Henry, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1964.

W. C. Van Unnik, “Luke-Acts, a Storm Centre in Contemporary Scholarship,” SLA, p 15-32.

Philip Vielhauer, “On the Paulinism of Acts”, SLA, p 33-50; “Das Benedictus des Zacharias”, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche, 49, 1952, p 255-272.

Adolf von Harnack, Luke the Physician, London: Williams and Norgate, 1909; The Date of Acts and of the Synoptic Gospels, London: Williams and Norgate, 1911.

Ulrich Wilckens, “Interpreting Luke-Acts in a Period of Existentialist Theology,” SLA, p 60-83.

R McL Wilson, “Some Recent Studies in the Lucan Infancy Narrative” SE, 1, 1959, p 235-253.

Paul Winter, “Some Observations on the Language in the Birth and Infancy Stories of the Third Gospel,” NTS, 1, 1954, p 111-121; “Magnificat and Benedictus – Maccabaean Psalms‌” BJRL, 37, 1954-55, p 328-347; “Luke 2:49 and Targum Jerushalmi,” ZNTW, 45, 1954, p 145-179; “The Cultural Background of the Narrative in Luke I and II” JQR, 45, 1954, p 159-167, 230-242; “On Luke and Lucan Sources: A Reply to the Reverend N. Turner” ZNTW, 47, 1956, p 217-242; “The Proto-Source of Luke 1”, NTS, 1, 1956, p 184-199; “Nazareth and Bethlehem in Luke I and II,” NTS, 3, 1957, p 136-142; “The Main Literary Problem of the Lucan Infancy Story”, Anglican Theological Review, 40, 1958, p 257-264; “On the Margin of Luke I, II”, ST, 12, 1958, p 103-107.

N. T. Wright, Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume I, The New Testament and the People of God, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992; Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume II, Jesus and the Victory of God, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996; Christian Origins and the Question of God, Volume III, The Resurrection of the Son of God, London: SPCK, 2003; The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering Who Jesus Was and Is, Dowers Grove, IVP, 1999; Paul: Fresh Perspectives, London: SPCK, 2005.

VBI, Vineyard Bible Institute Course, ePublication.

Table of Contents

PUBLICATION DETAILS

ABBREVIATIONS

PREFACE

INTRODUCTION

LUKE THE WRITER

Luke’s historical synchronisms

Luke’s Shape, or Structure

Luke’s geographical-demographic interest

LUKE'S THEOLOGY

The Messianic Age has dawned

The relentless will of God

The Messianic Age – the Age of the Spirit

Healing and Salvation

Salvation to previously excluded groups

The Proclamation of the Word

Signs, Wonders and Reactions

Prayer

Financial and social implications

A Synthesis in Discipleship

THE PURPOSE OF LUKE-ACTS

THE STRUCTURE OF LUKE-ACTS

The Journey Motif

LUKE THE HISTORIAN

Greco-Roman historical norms

Jewish historical norms

The Gospels

DATE

Scholarly worldview and context

Two focal points

Conclusion

AUTHORSHIP

Luke and Acts are by the same author

The companion of Paul

Who was this companion?

Early church tradition

Conclusion

SOURCES

Mark

Q

Proto-Luke & L

A Hebrew infancy source

An Aramaic source behind Acts 1-12

The Speeches in Acts

How did Luke gather his sources

The Infancy Narrative

FOOTNOTES

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY