AskAWord.com
Spellcheck • Thesaurus • Dictionary • Encyclopedia


History: Gospel of Luke

Gospel of Luke

Spellcheck: no suggestion

Thesaurus: No synonyms found.

Dictionary: canonical, Κλεοπᾶς, enligt, gospel, Transwiki:List of Latin phrases (F–O), Transwiki:List of Latin phrases

adjective

  1. Present in a Biblical canon, (Theology). "The Gospel of Luke is a canonical New Testament book".
  2. Pertaining to canonic law.
  3. According to recognised or orthodox rules. "The men played golf in the most canonical way: with no local rules."
  4. Stated or used in the most basic and straightforwardly applicable manner. "This definition would be more useful if it were canonical."
  5. In canonical form (Math., Comp. Sci.)
  6. Part of the backstory of a media franchise (Arts).
  7. Accepted as being authentic, accurate, and authoritative.


Encyclopedia: Gospel of Luke, Talk:Gospel of Luke

Gospel of Luke is the third and longest of the four canonical Gospels of the New Testament, which tell the story of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. Although neither this gospel nor the Acts of the Apostles, written by the same person, name the author, the traditional view ascribes its authorship to Luke named in Colossians , a doctor and follower of Paul.
The main characteristic of this Gospel, as Farrar (Cambridge Bible, Luke, Introd.) remarks, is expressed in the motto, "Who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil" (Acts ; cf. with Luke ). Luke wrote for the "Hellenic world".

The purpose of the text is expressed in the introductory dedication to Theophilus, , which states that since many others have compiled an "orderly narrative of the events" (SV) from the original eyewitnesses, that the author has decided to do likewise, after thorough research of everything from the beginning, so that Theophilus may realize the reliability of the teachings in which he has been instructed.


Content


The approximate contents of the Gospel, in order, are as follows:


*Dedication to Theophilus (1:1-4)
*Zacharias the Priest (1:5-25)
*Annunciation (1:26–45)
*Magnificat (1:46–56)
*John the Baptist (1:57–80; 3:1–20; 7:18-35; 9:7–9)
**Benedictus (1:68-79)
*Census of Quirinius (2:1-5)
*Nativity of Jesus (2:6–7)
*Adoration of the Shepherds (2:8–20)
*Circumcision in the Temple (2:21–40)
**Nunc dimittis (2:29-32)
*Teaching in the Temple at 12 (2:41-52)
*Baptism of Jesus (3:21–22)
*Genealogy of Jesus (3:23–38)
*Temptation of Jesus (4:1–13)
*Good News (4:14–15)
*Rejection in Nazareth (4:16–30)
*Capernaum (4:31-41)
*Galilee preaching tour (4:42–44)
*Calling Simon, Andrew, James, John (5:1–11)
*Leper and Paralytic (5:12-26)
*Recruiting the tax collector (5:27–32)
*Question about fasting (5:33–39)
*Sabbath observance (6:1–11)
*Commission of the Twelve (6:12–16; 9:1–6)
*Sermon on the Plain (6:17–49)
*Healing many (7:1-17)
*A woman anointed Jesus (7:36–50)
*Women companions of Jesus (8:1–3)
*Parable of the Sower (8:4-8,11–17)
*Purpose of parables (8:9-10)
*Salt and Light (8:16–18; 11:33; 14:34–35)
*Rebuking wind and waves (8:22–25)
*Demon named Legion (8:26–39)
*Synagogue leader's daughter (8:40-56)
*Feeding of the 5000 (9:10–17)
*Peter's confession (9:18–20)
*Son of Man (9:21–25, 44–45, 57-58; 18:31–34)
*Return of the Son of Man (9:26-27)
*Transfiguration of Jesus (9:28–36)
*Disciples' exorcism failure (9:37-43)
*The First must be Last (9:46-48)
*Those not against are for (9:49–50)
*On the road to Jerusalem (9:51)
*Samaritan rejection (9:52–56)
*Let the dead bury the dead (9:59-60)
*Don't look back (9:61-62)
*Commission of the Seventy (10:1-24)
**Cursing Chorazin, Bethsaida, Capernaum (10:13-15)
**Praising the Father (10:21-24)

*Great Commandment (10:25-28)
*The Good Samaritan (10:29–37)
*Visiting Martha and Mary (10:38-42)
*Lord's Prayer (11:1–4)
*The Friend at Night (11:5–13)
*Jesus and Beelzebul (11:14–22,8:19–21)
*Those not with me are against me (11:23)
*Return of the unclean spirit (11:24–26)
*Those who hear the word and keep it (11:27-28)
*Sign of Jonah (11:29–32)
*Eye and Light (11:34-36)
*Cursing the Pharisees (11:37-54)
*Veiled and Unveiled (12:1-3)
*Whom to fear (12:4-7)
*Unforgivable sin (12:8-12)
*Disputed inheritance (12:13-15)
*Parables of the Rich Fool and Birds (12:16-32)
*Sell your possessions (12:33-34)
*Parable of the Faithful Servant (12:35–48)
*Not Peace, but a Sword (12:49–53; 14:25–27)
*Knowing the times (12:54-56)
*Settle with your accuser (12:57-59)
*Repent or perish (13:1-5)
*Parable of the barren fig tree (13:6-9)
*Healing a woman on the Sabbath (13:10-17)
*Parables of Mustard seed and Leaven (13:18–21)
*The Narrow Gate (13:22–30)
*Lament over Jerusalem (13:31-35)
*Healing the man with dropsy (14:1-6)
*Parables of the Guests, Wedding Feast, Tower and War, Lost sheep, Lost money, Lost son, Unjust steward (14:7–16:9)
*God and Mammon (16:13)
*Not one stroke of a letter (16:16-17)
*Teaching about divorce (16:18)
*Lazarus and Dives (16:19-31)
*Curse those who set traps (17:1-6)
*The Master and Servant (17:7-10)
*Cleansing ten lepers (17:11-19)
*The Coming Kingdom of God (17:20-37)
*Parables of the Unjust judge, Pharisee and Publican (18:1-14)
*Little children blessed (18:15-17)
*Rich man's salvation (18:18-30)
*Blind Bartimaeus (18:35–43)
*Zacchaeus (19:1-10)
*Parable of the Talents (19:11–27)
*Entering Jerusalem (19:28–44)
*Temple incident (19:45–20:8)
*Parable of the vineyard (20:9–19)
*Render unto Caesar (20:20–26)
*Resurrection of the dead (20:27–40)
*Messiah, the son of David? (20:41-44)
*Denouncing scribes (20:45-47)
*Lesson of the widow's mite (21:1-21:4)
*The Coming Apocalypse (21:5–38)
*Plot to kill Jesus (22:1–6)
*Last Supper (22:7–23)
*Who's the greatest? (22:24-27)
*Twelve thrones of judgment (22:28-30)
*Peter's denial (22:31–34, 54–62)
*Two swords (22:35-38)
*Arrest (22:39–53)
*Before the High Priest (22:63–71)
*Before Pilate (23:1–5, 13–25)
*Before Herod Antipas (23:6–12)
*Crucifixion (23:26–49)
*Joseph of Arimathea (23:50–56)
*Empty tomb (24:1–12)
*Resurrection appearances (24:13–43)
*Great Commission (24:44–49)
*Ascension of Jesus (24:50–53)


Author



see also|Acts of the
Although the author of Luke is generally considered to be anonymous, there is some suggestion that the author of Luke also wrote the book of Acts. The most direct evidence comes from the prefaces of each book. Both prefaces are addressed to Theophilus, the author's patron, and the preface of Acts explicitly references "my former book" about the life of Jesus. Furthermore, there are linguistic and theological similarities between the two works, suggesting that they have a common author. With the agreement of nearly all scholars, Udo Schnelle writes, "The extensive linguistic and theological agreements and cross-references between the Gospel of Luke and the Acts indicate that both works derive from the same author" (The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings, p. 259). Those biblical scholars who consider the two books a single, two-volume work often refer to both together as Luke-Acts.E.g., C. Kavin Rowe, "History, Hermeneutics and the Unity of Luke-Acts," JSNT 28 (2005): 131-157, raising questions about the literary unity of Luke-Acts.

Nowhere in Luke or Acts does it explicitly say that the author is Luke, the companion of Paul. The earliest surviving witnesses that place Luke as the author are the Muratorian Canon (c. 170), the writings of Irenaeus (c. 180), and the Anti-Marcionite Prologue (second half of the 2nd century).http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09420a.htmhttp://www.tektonics.org/ntdocdef/lukedef.html According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, the evidence in favor of Lucan authorship is based on two main things: first, the use of "we" in Acts 16, 20, 21 and 27 suggests the writer traveled with Paul; second, in the opinion of the Roman Catholic writers of the encyclopedia, the "medical language" employed by the writer is "identical with those employed by such medical writers as Hippocrates, Arctæus, Galen, and Dioscorides". http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09420a.htm According to this view, Paul's "dear friend Luke the Doctor" (Col 4:14) and "fellow worker" (Phlm 24) makes the most likely candidate for authorship out of all the companions mentioned in Paul's writings.

Modern scholarship does not unanimously agree on these points, stating that the author of Luke was anonymous. A number of theories exist regarding the first-person ("we") passages. According to V. K. Robbins, the first-person narration was a generic style for sea voyages. Robbins goes on to discuss why the book of Acts also uses first-person narration on land and why it is absent from many other sea passages. It is also possible a first-person travel diary could have been incorporated into Acts from an earlier source, or the author could simply have been untruthful about being a companion of Paul. Additionally, the thesis that the vocabulary is special to a physician was questioned by H. J. Cadbury in his dissertation The Style and Literary Method of Luke, which argued that some of the vocabulary is found in nonmedical works as well.

The evangelist does not claim to have been an eyewitness of Jesus' life, but to have "investigated everything carefully" and "written an orderly account" "of the events . . . just as they were handed on . . . by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses" (Luke http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%201:1-4;&version=31; 1:1–4). According to the two-source hypothesis, the most commonly accepted solution to the synoptic problem, Luke's sources included the Gospel of Mark and another collection of lost sayings known as Q, the Quelle or "source" document.

Date



Estimates range from c. 50 to c. 100.

Traditional views of the date


Traditionally, Christians believe that Luke wrote under the direction, if not at the dictation, of Paul. Conservative scholars suggest this would place it as having been written before Acts, with Acts being composed around 63 or 64. Consequently, the tradition is that this Gospel was written about 60 or 63, when Luke may have been at Caesarea in attendance on Paul, who was then a prisoner. If the alternate conjecture is correct, that it was written at Rome during Paul's imprisonment there, then it would date earlier, 5060. Additionally, Acts does not contain the martyrdom of Paul (c. 62), so conservative scholars suggest Luke-Acts were written before this.

Critical views of the date


In contrast to the traditional view, many contemporary scholars regard Mark as a source text used by the author(s) of Luke, following from the theory of Markan Priority. Since Mark may have been written around the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem, around 70, Luke probably would not have been written before 70. These scholars have suggested dates for Luke from 75 to as late as 100, and Acts shortly thereafter, between 80 and 100. Support for a later date comes from a number of reasons. The universalization of the message of Luke is believed to reflect a theology that took time to develop. Furthermore, Acts is believed to present a significantly different picture of Paul than that which is seen in the undisputed Pauline Epistles. Differences of chronology, "style", and theology suggest that the author of Luke-Acts was not familiar with Paul's distinctive theology but instead was writing a decade or more after his death, by which point significant harmonization between different traditions within early Christianity had occurred.

Debate continues among non-traditionalists about whether Luke was written before or after the end of the 1st century. Those who would date it later argue that it was written in response to heterodoxical movements of the early 2nd century. Those who would date it earlier point out both that Luke lacks knowledge of the episcopal system, which had been developed in the 2nd century, and that an earlier date preserves the traditional connection of the gospel with the Luke who was a follower of Paul.

Audience



The consensus is that Luke was written by a Greek or Syrian for gentile/ non-Jewish Christians. The Gospel is addressed to the author's patron, the most excellent Theophilus, which in Greek simply means Friend of God, and may not be a name but a generic term for a Christian. The Gospel is clearly directed at Christians, or at those who already knew about Christianity, rather than a general audience, since the ascription goes on to state that the Gospel was written "so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught" ).

Manuscripts


see also|Acts of the
The earliest manuscripts of the Gospel of Luke are four papyrus fragments dating from the first half of the 3rd century http://biblefacts.org/history/oldtext.html, one containing portions of all four gospels (P45) and three others preserving only brief passages (P4, P69, P75). These early copies, as well as the earliest copies of Acts, date after the Gospel was separated from Acts.

Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus are 4th-century codices of the Greek bible that are the oldest manuscripts that contain Luke. Codex Bezae is a 5th- or 6th-century Western text-type manuscript that contains Luke in Greek and Latin versions on facing pages. The Greek version, also called the Western version, appears to have descended from an offshoot of the main manuscript tradition, departing from more familiar readings at many points. (Verses and are not present in early versions and are generally marked as such in modern translations.)

Relationship with other gospels



According to Farrar, "Out of a total of 1151 verses, Luke has 389 in common with Matthew and Mark, 176 in common with Matthew alone, 41 in common with Mark alone, leaving 544 peculiar to himself. In many instances all three use identical language." Mark is widely considered a principal direct source, and Martin Hengel has made the more controversial argument that Luke also made use of Matthew.Martin Hengel. 2000. The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ: An Investigation of the Collection and Origin of the Canonical Gospels. Trans. J. Bowden. London and Harrisburg: SCM and Trinity Press International. Pp. 169-207.

There are 17 parables peculiar to this Gospel. Luke also attributes to Jesus seven miracles which are not present in Matthew or Mark. The synoptic Gospels are related to each other after the following scheme. If the contents of each Gospel are numbered at 100, then when compared this result is obtained: Mark has 7 peculiarities, 93 coincidences. Matthew 42 peculiarities, 58 coincidences. Luke 59 peculiarities, 41 coincidences. That is, thirteen-fourteenths of Mark, four-sevenths of Matthew, and two-fifths of Luke describe the same events in similar language. Luke's style is more polished than that of Matthew and Mark with fewer Hebrew idioms. He uses a few Latin words (Luke ; ; ; ; and ), but no Syriac or Hebrew words except sikera, an exciting drink of the nature of wine but not made of grapes (from Heb. shakar, "he is intoxicated"; Lev ), perhaps palm wine. According to Walter Bauer's Greek English Lexicon of the NT, in Aramaic (שכרא) it means barley beer, from the Akkadian shikaru. This Gospel contains 28 distinct references to the Old Testament.

Many words and phrases are common to the Gospel of Luke and the Letters of Paul; compare:

* Luke with Colossians http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians%204:6;&version=31; 4:6
* Luke with 1 Corinthians http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20corinthians%202:4;&version=31; 2:4
* Luke with 2 Corinthians http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20corinthians%201:3;&version=31; 1:3
* Luke with Romans http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%202:19;&version=31; 2:19
* Luke with 2 Corinthians http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20corinthians%2010:8;&version=31; 10:8
* Luke with 1 Corinthians http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20corinthians%2010:27;&version=31; 10:27
* Luke with Titus http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=titus%201:15;&version=31; 1:15
* Luke with 2 Thessalonians http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20thessalonians%201:11;&version=31; 1:11
* Luke with Ephesians http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%206:18;&version=31; 6:18
* Luke with 1 Corinthians http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20corinthians%2011:23-29;&version=31; 11:23–29
* Luke with 1 Corinthians http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20corinthians%2015:5;&version=31; 15:5

Luke's writing style



Greek



Most scholars believe that the Gospel of Luke was written originally in Greek. The first four verses of Luke are in more formal and refined Greek, which would be meant to be familiar to the elite citizens of the Greco-Roman era. Then the language changes into a style of Greek which is very similar to the Septuagint (the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible). Then the language makes its final change toward the end into a more secular form of 1st-century Greek (called "koine").

Popular opinion among scholars is to see these variations in writings as the Lukan author's ability to write in different literary styles. This view could be further substantiated by Luke's praise of Theophilus.

It seemed good to me to write it all up for you, most excellent Theophilus, in order that you might recognize the reliability of the instruction you have received. (Luke 1:3–4)


Attention to women



Compared to the other canonical gospels, Luke devotes significantly more attention to women. The Gospel of Luke features more female characters, features a female prophet ), and details the experience of pregnancy ).

Prominent discussion is given to the lives of Elizabeth and of Mary, the mother of Jesus (ch. ).

See also


*Order of St. Luke

Footnotes




External links


wikisource|Bible (King James)/Luke|Gospel of Luke
Online translations of the Gospel of Luke:
* http://www.biblegateway.com Bible Gateway 35 languages/50 versions at GospelCom.net
* http://unbound.biola.edu Unbound Bible 100+ languages/versions at Biola University
* http://www.gospelhall.org/bible/bible.php?passage=Luke+1 Online Bible at gospelhall.org
* http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/luke.html Early Christian Writings; Gospel of Luke: introductions and e-texts
* http://www.ifrance.com/bezae/index.html French; English translation

Related articles:
*http://www.katapi.org.uk/4Gospels/Ch8.htm#II B.H. Streeter, The Four Gospels : A study of origins 1924.
*http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/TC-Luke.pdf A textual commentary on the Gospel of Luke Detailed textcritical discussion of the 300 most important variants of the Greek text (PDF, 467 pages)
*http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09420a.htm Gospel of Saint Luke @ Catholic Encyclopedia
*http://22.1911encyclopedia.org/L/LU/LUKE_GOSPEL_OF_ST.htm Luke, Gospel of St. in the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica

----
This article was originally based on text from http://www.site-berea.com/dicionarios.html Easton Bible Dictionary of 1897 and from M.G. Easton M.A., D.D., Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Third Edition, published by Thomas Nelson, 1897.

start
succession box
| title= Books of the Bible
| years=
| before=Mark
| after= John

end

Luke
Luke

ar:انجيل لوقا
zh-min-nan:Lō͘-ka Hok-im
bs:Evanđelje po Luki
ca:Evangeli segons Lluc
cs:Evangelium podle Lukáše
da:Lukasevangeliet
de:Evangelium nach Lukas
el:Κατά Λουκάν Ευαγγέλιον
es:Evangelio de Lucas
eo:Evangelio laŭ Luko
fr:Évangile selon Luc
ko:루카 복음서
hr:Evanđelje po Luki
id:Injil Lukas
ia:Evangelio secundo Luca
it:Vangelo secondo Luca
jv:Injil Lukas
la:Evangelium secundum Lucam
hu:Lukács evangéliuma
fj:Ai Tukutuku-vinaka sa vola ko Luke
nl:Evangelie naar Lucas
ja:ルカによる福音書
no:Lukasevangeliet
nds:Lukasevangelium
pl:Ewangelia Łukasza
pt:Evangelho segundo Lucas
ro:Evanghelia după Luca
ru:Евангелие от Луки
sm:O le Evagelia a Luka
scn:Vancelu di Luca
sr:Свето Јеванђеље по Луки
sh:Evanđelje po Luki
fi:Evankeliumi Luukkaan mukaan
sv:Lukasevangeliet
ta:லூக்கா நற்செய்தி
zh:路加福音

Spellcheck • Thesaurus • Dictionary • Encyclopedia



Comments

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wiktionary article "canonical" . It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Gospel of Luke" .