Scholarly consensus
Luke is the longest of the four gospels and the first volume of a two-volume work; the Acts of the Apostles is the second. It is the only gospel to open with a formal preface in the manner of the Greek historians (1:1-4), and the preface is the nearest thing the New Testament has to a gospel writer explaining his method. It is usually dated between 80 and 90 CE, though some scholars place it later, and its author is unknown.
What the preface admits
“Since many have undertaken to set down an orderly account of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed on to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, I too decided, after investigating everything carefully from the very first, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus.” Three things follow. The author was not an eyewitness; he received the tradition from those who were. Written accounts already existed, and there were many of them, not two or three. And the author thought those accounts could be improved on, which is why he wrote. The synoptic evidence agrees: Luke takes over most of Mark and a body of sayings shared with Matthew, rearranges both, and adds a great deal of his own, including the parables of the Good Samaritan and the Prodigal Son. See the synoptic problem.
The name
A Luke is named three times in the letters as a companion of Paul of Tarsus (Philemon 24; Colossians 4:14; 2 Timothy 4:11), and the “we” passages of Acts (16:10-17; 20:5-15; 21:1-18; 27:1-28:16) are written in the first person plural. The second-century church put the two together. Against it, Acts and the letters disagree about Paul of Tarsus’s career at several points where a travelling companion would have known better (see Acts against Galatians), and Acts never mentions that Paul of Tarsus wrote letters at all. Most scholars treat the author as an educated Greek-speaking Christian of the second generation, writing for gentile readers, and leave his name open.
The nativity
Luke’s infancy story is told from Mary’s side and runs parallel to the story of John the Baptist, birth for birth. It dates the birth of Jesus to a census ordered by Augustus “when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (2:2). Quirinius became governor in 6 CE, and the census he conducted, recorded by Josephus, covered Judaea, not Galilee, and did not require anyone to travel to an ancestral town. Matthew dates the birth to the reign of Herod the Great, who died in 4 BCE. The two dates are ten years apart, and no satisfactory reconciliation has been found. Luke has no magi, no massacre and no flight to Egypt; the family presents the child in the Temple after forty days and goes home to Nazareth (2:39).
The genealogy
Luke traces Jesus through Joseph back to Adam and to God (3:23-38), seventy-seven generations, where Matthew counts forty-two from Abraham. From David to Joseph the two lists diverge: Matthew runs through Solomon, Luke through Nathan, and the names between share almost nothing but Shealtiel and Zerubbabel. Joseph’s father is Heli in Luke and Jacob in Matthew. Attempts to harmonise them, by making one the genealogy of Mary or by levirate marriage, go back to Julius Africanus in the third century and have persuaded few historians.
The resurrection in Luke
Luke’s appearances all take place in and around Jerusalem on a single day: the road to Emmaus, the upper room, and the ascension from Bethany that evening (24:13-53). Matthew sends the disciples to Galilee, where Jesus meets them on a mountain (28:16). Mark’s young man says Jesus is going ahead to Galilee (16:7). Luke rewrites that message so that it refers back to what Jesus said while he was in Galilee (24:6), and his disciples are told to stay in the city (24:49). Acts then spreads the appearances over forty days (1:3). See the resurrection accounts compared.
Luke and Acts
Acts is the only narrative of the first generation after Jesus, and of Paul of Tarsus’s career, apart from the letters. It gives Paul of Tarsus three speeches about his conversion that differ from one another (9:3-9; 22:6-11; 26:12-18) and a council in Jerusalem whose decree Paul of Tarsus never mentions (15:20, 29). Where Acts and the letters disagree, historians prefer the letters. Acts ends with Paul of Tarsus in Rome, preaching unhindered, and with the Jews rejecting the message and the gentiles receiving it (28:25-28). That is the author’s argument, and the gospel is written to lead up to it.
Why it matters here
Luke tells the reader, in his own voice, that he worked from earlier documents and oral report, that he was not present, and that he arranged his material to make a point. That is an honest description of a work of history, and it is not a description of revelation. The Injīl the Qur’an speaks of was given to ʿĪsā (5:46). Luke is a book written about him, a lifetime later, by a man who says he was not there.
Sources
- Joseph Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to Luke, Anchor Bible, two volumes.
- Raymond Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, on the census.
- Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 18.1-2, on the census of Quirinius.
- Raymond Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament, chapters on Luke and Acts.