0
Another answer from our community:
Luke 1:1-3 (King James Version): "1Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
2Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; 3It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,"
The prologue makes it explicit that Luke used sources for his work. He also states that others have written before him and he indicates his 'editorial approach' is to be to write 'in order', that is, chronologically about Jesus Christ. If Luke had been written at a date when many of the actual eyewitnesses were undoubtedly alive it means that Luke was also able to use personal eyewitness testimony as well as the other written sources available.
Being specific, it would appear Luke used at least Mark and Matthew as his written sources. Although it is also evident that, since some of his material is found in neither Mark or Matthew, that he also used other sources, particularly around the early part of Jesus' life. Since he had access to living witnesses, these could have been many. In recent times some scholars are suggesting a very early date for John, which would also make this another possibility as a written source, although this is only a minority view.
Luke also uses the word 'many' in referring to written sources and this may refer to a number of other partial written records of various aspects of Jesus' life and teachings which are now lost.
Another factor is what Luke asserts in his prologue: "..me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write..' This would seem to indicate that Luke himself was acquainted with at least some of the events in terms of direct personal knowledge. He refers to 'perfect understanding' as well as 'from the very first'. This latter statement is certainly supported by the great additional detail he puts into the infancy narratives. Such detail would have been difficult if not impossible to obtain at a later date.
Wiki User
∙ 8y ago
Scholars believe that Luke used a variety of sources to write the Acts of the Apostles, including earlier written accounts, oral traditions, personal interviews, and his own experiences. These sources helped him create a comprehensive narrative of the early Christian church and the spread of Christianity after the resurrection of Jesus.
Wiki User
∙ 12y agoIt has been estimated that the Missing Block probably corresponded to 13 pages that were missing or had been removed from the copy of Mark's Gospel that the author of Luke used as his source for the life and mission of Jesus, leading to speculation as to the reason for that omission. In Mark chapter 7, which is just in the middle of the block, Jesus called Gentiles 'dogs' and only agreed to help a Gentile woman when she humbly accepted that description. One suggestion is that this would have offended Luke's author, so the page was removed. The removal of just this page would have been too obvious, so it was necessary to remove enough pages as to avoid detection by anyone not familiar with the original contents of Mark's Gospel.
Wiki User
∙ 12y agoIt has been demonstrated conclusively that Acts contains some material that could only have come from Antiquities of the Jews, published by Josephus in 93 CE. The accounts of Paul's conversion in Acts and the account of his release from prison appear to have been based on the ancient play of Euripedes called the Bacchae. It has been suggested that some material could have been inspired by Homer's Greek epics, but that is speculative.
Apart from the above, the origin of most of the material in Acts is unknown, although it can be seen that the book draws a series of subtle comparisons between Peter and Paul, always demonstrating Peter to be the greater apostle.
Wiki User
∙ 11y agoParallels have been discerned between Paul's epistles and Mark. Since there is no doubt among scholars that the epistles were written first, the original gospel could indeed have been written around some key events, persons and ideas identified in those epistles in Galatians and 1 Corinthians. However, these would only have provided an outline, with other sources needed for much of the detail.
Dennis R MacDonald (The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark) also provides credible evidence that Mark was strongly influenced by the Iliad and the Odyssey.
John Dominic Crossan (The Birth of Christianity) lays Mark's Gospel alongside the Gospel of Thomas and the 'Q' Gospel and believes he has established that certain identified sayings attributed to Jesus in Mark's Gospel come from a source common to all three gospels and which he terms the Common Sayings Source.
Wiki User
∙ 9y agoLuke's Gospel opens by saying that it is an account of what is believed by the author and his fellow-Christians. These things were passed down by others, from someone Luke assumed to have been an eyewitness (Luke 1:2). One of those sources is now known to have been Mark's Gospel, and most New Testament scholars say the other major source was the hypothetical 'Q' document. The author, who was actually anonymous, also used the Old Testament and possibly the earlier works of the Jewish historian Josephus.
Wiki User
∙ 8y agoLuke is known to have used Mark's Gospel as the main single source for information about the life and mission of Jesus. Whenever Luke agrees with Mark, the text is almost identical in Greek, something that could not happen unless one Gospel was being copied. We also have the "Missing Block", a section of text that was obviously missing from the copy of Mark that Luke was using. That he was trying to follow Markfaithfully and did not know that there were missing sheets in his copy, is demonstrated by the fact that he unintelligibly merged the verses from Mark, before and after the Missing Block. Given the importance of material in the "Missing Block", particularly the miracle of walking on water, we could expect that Luke would have added this material from his other sources, if any such sources of that specific material were known to him.
It is also known that Luke used the hypothetical 'Q' document as a source for sayings attributed to Jesus. Because 'Q' did not provide the context for those sayings, Luke had to create his own contexts, usually as parables.
By writing a story of the birth of Jesus, Luke was able to assure his readers that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, as it was thought the Old Testament had prophesied the Jewish Messiah would be. To this extent, he agrees with Matthew, but in almost all other respects the two accounts differ. Given that even conservative Christians place the authorship of Luke more than sixty years after the birth of Jesus (and many scholars would place it more than one hundred years after that event), this is hardly surprising. Where were the eyewitnesses that Luke could have talked to in order to establish exactly what happened some time prior to 4 BCE?
Undoubtedly, Luke's copy of Mark's Gospel did not yet have the "Long Ending" (verses 16:9-20), and therefore did not say whether Jesus was resurrected in his physical body on earth or whether he rose straight to heaven. Luke provided his own description of Jesus appearing to the two on the road and then the eleven apostles at dinner, before being taken up on Sunday evening. Since this differs significantly from the other parallel accounts, there is reason to believe that it originated with Luke himself rather than from a well-known source.
There is quite convincing evidence that Acts of the Apostles, by the same author, relied on the works of the Jewish historian, Josephus, to provide a historical flavour to events. With the Gospel, this evidence is less certain and he could have gained information elewhere. However, if we know that Acts is based in part on the works of Josephus, then there are reasonable grounds for crediting Jesephus for historical information (such as the census of Quirinius) in Luke.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
How did the Holy Spirit use Luke to gather information for his Gospel and Acts?
Of course, Luke the physician and companion of Paul was unlikely to have been the real author of this Gospel or of Acts of the Apostles, both of which were originally anonymous until attributed to him later in the second century. Luke 1:2 gives us a summary of how our 'Luke' gathered his information for the Gospel: "Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word." In other words, the information was delivered to Luke's community ("us") in written form through a chain of writers, the earliest of which Luke believed to have been eyewitnesses.We now know that the writings that were delivered to Luke were Mark's Gospel and the hypothetical 'Q' document (it is 'hypothetical' because we have no extant copy, although its former existence is almost universally accepted by scholars). Luke also found information in the Old Testament to be useful in writing his gospel.
How many years of history does the Acts of the Apostles cover?
There was total of 30 years of history covered by the Acts of the Apostles.Not as many as you might think; less than 25It covers 30 years of history.The actual value varies, but most people generally agree that it covers from about 29 A.D. to about 64 A.D., meaning that it covers around 35 years worth of history.Acts covers the period from approximately 33AD to 62AD.
Who is the apostle who wrote the fourth gospel?
The apostle who wrote the fourth gospel in the New Testament is traditionally believed to be John, one of the twelve disciples of Jesus. The Gospel of John differs in style and content from the other three synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), focusing more on the spiritual aspect of Jesus' teachings.
What is the biblical basis of the Sacrament of Holy Orders?
The biblical basis for the Sacrament of Holy Orders comes from passages in the New Testament, such as the selection of the apostles by Jesus in Luke 6:13 and the ordination of deacons in Acts 6:6. Additionally, Paul instructs Timothy and Titus on the qualifications and responsibilities of bishops and deacons in his pastoral letters. These passages provide the foundation for the Church's understanding of ordained ministry.
Was mark one of the apostles?
A:The Bible tells us that Matthew and John were disciples of Jesus, but not Mark or Luke. More importantly, it is unlikely that any of these wrote the gospels that now bear their names, as the gospels were originally anonymous until attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John later in the second century. Scholars say that none of the gospels could have been written by eyewitnesses to the events portrayed.
Is Paul responsible for writing the Acts of the Apostles?
No, Paul is not responsible for writing the Acts of the Apostles. It was written by Luke, the writer of the Gospel of Luke. In Acts 1:1, Luke refers to the "first book" he had written. He was a physician who was a companion of Paul beginning probably on Paul's second missionary journey. Luke uses the third person "they" in his written history until Acts 16:10 where he begins to use the first person "us," indicating that at some recent point, he had joined Paul on his journey.
In the bible what was Lukes job?
LUKE was a physician and faithful companion of the apostle Paul. He was the writer of the Gospel of Luke and of the Acts of Apostles. That Luke was well educated is apparent from his writings. Also, his background as a doctor is noticeable in his use of medical terms.-Lu 4:38; Ac 28:8.
How would one have become an apostle of Jesus Christ?
AnswerThere is no clarity on this. Paul called himself an apostle, but Acts of the Apostles seems reluctant to use this term about Paul. Acts suggests that the twelve disciples became apostles at the Pentacost. The word comes from Greek, to mean a messenger.
How did the Holy Spirit use Luke to gather information for his Gospel and Acts?
Of course, Luke the physician and companion of Paul was unlikely to have been the real author of this Gospel or of Acts of the Apostles, both of which were originally anonymous until attributed to him later in the second century. Luke 1:2 gives us a summary of how our 'Luke' gathered his information for the Gospel: "Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word." In other words, the information was delivered to Luke's community ("us") in written form through a chain of writers, the earliest of which Luke believed to have been eyewitnesses.We now know that the writings that were delivered to Luke were Mark's Gospel and the hypothetical 'Q' document (it is 'hypothetical' because we have no extant copy, although its former existence is almost universally accepted by scholars). Luke also found information in the Old Testament to be useful in writing his gospel.
What does quis ergo usus angeli mean?
Quis ergo usus angeli, which means "What, then, is the use of the angel?", is a quotation from Acta Apostolorum sive Lucae ad Theophilum liber alter ("The Acts of the Apostles, or the Second Book of Luke to Theophilus") by biblical scholar Friederich Blass. It refers to a scene in the New Testament book of Acts in which an angel of the Lord frees the apostles from imprisonment so that they may return to the temple and preach. Since they are later re-arrested anyway, Blass asks, what was the point of their release by the angel?
Was Luke with Paul when he was a prisoner in Rome?
Yes, judging from his continuous use of the pronouns "we" and "us" in Acts 27 and 28.
How do you use apostle in a sentence?
Jesus had twelve apostles. Are you an Apostle of Christ? Apostles are followers.
Which scripture confirms Luke wrote Luke's Gospel and Acts of the Apostles?
A:The New Testament gospels and Acts of the Apostles were all anonymous until later in the second century, when the Church Fathers decided who they felt probably wrote each of these books. This author is someone who is especially concerned with the Gentile mission of the early church and who is particularly interested in showing that Gentiles do not have to become Jews in order to be Christian. It is sensible to conclude that this person was probably himself a Gentile and, by his occasional use of 'we', the author is claiming to be a travelling companion of Paul.The Epistle to the Colossians has three persons who were Gentile companions of Paul: Epaphras, Demas, and Luke the physician (Colossians 4:12-14). Of these, it seems unlikely that Demas could be the author, since we learn elsewhere that Demas "abandoned" Paul (2 Timothy 2:10). Epaphras is described as the founder of the church in Colossae (Colossians 1:5-7), a church that is never mentioned in Acts. That would be odd if its founder were the author. This leaves one candidate, Luke the Gentile physician, who was therefore chosen by the Church Fathers.The idea that Luke was a Gentile companion of Paul comes from Colossians, but the Church Fathers were not to realise that Colossians was really a pseudepigraphical book written in Paul's name long after his death. Had they known this, they might have looked elsewhere for an author.Luke 1:1-2 says that the Gospel contains that which is believed by 'Luke' and his community, having been handed down over time, from earlier apostles who are assumed to have been eyewitnesses. A close associate of Paul could never have written these words since the real Luke would surely have said that this was the gospel he learnt from Paul himself.
What parts in the Acts of the Apostle are believed to be sourced from the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus?
The author of Acts of the Apostles did not use the writings of Josephus as his main source, but did rely on them for historical background. Many parallels have been found between the works of Josephus and some representative examples follow: * Josephus used the term sects or 'philosophical schools' (Greek: haireseis), to describe the Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes. Luke was the only other author known to have described the Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes this way (Acts 5:17, 15:5, 26:5), and he also referred to Christianity as another philosophical school of the Jews (Acts 24:5, 28:22). * Moreover, Luke had Paul call the Pharisees the 'most precise school' among the Jews in the reference at 26:5. Only Josephus and Luke referred to the Pharisees as the 'most precise school'. * Luke had Gamaliel speak about an uprising that had taken place under Theudas, placing this speech in Acts 5:36, before the martyrdom of Stephen. In the next verse, Luke said that after this man, Judas of Galilee rose up. The uprising by Theudas occurred within the procuratorship of Fadus, who was procurator in the years 44-46 CE. However, Acts 11:25-28, tells us that Paul was already a Christian before the famine that also started around the same time as this uprising. It is evident that Luke knew nothing of Theudas from Christian sources, but inserted mention of him into the account as a piece of useful history that Luke learnt from Josephus, and no where else. We can establish that because, when Josephus mentioned Theudas, he immediately followed with commentary on the sons of Judas and then took the opportunity to describe the much earlier actions of Judas himself. Luke repeated the incorrect sequence of Theudas and Judas, which only makes sense in the context of Josephus' narrative - a clear sign that Luke relied on information from Josephus. * Luke, writing in Greek, used the term sicarii, a Latin word for assassins. Josephus, who also wrote in Greek, seems to have been the first to use this foreign word as a term for Jewish rebels who carried out assassinations under cover of urban crowds. * Both Josephus and Luke mentioned three specific rebel leaders, and no other, even though Josephus says there were numerous such men. These rebels were Theudas, Judas and 'the Egyptian'. Luke had the chief captain ask Paul whether he was the Egyptian who led four thousand sicarii (KJV translated as 'murderers') into the desert (Acts 21:38). Far from leading anyone into the desert, 'the Egyptian' wanted to bring down the walls of Jerusalem by a miracle. Ancient writers did not acknowledge their sources using footnotes in the style of modern academic authors, but they did have another way of acknowledge their sources, known as mimesis. This was an intellectually amusing technique that required placing a clue, or flag, within the text, enabling others to identify the source. But the flag must not be obvious - it had to be a clue that needed to be searched for and identified. Josephus had dedicated Jewish Antiquities to Epaphroditus, a real name that meant 'Touched by Aphrodite'. Luke dedicated both the Gospel and Acts to Theophilus, which means 'Friend of God'. This could be a real name but is an apparent transvaluation of Epaphroditus.
Was Luke narrating Acts chapter 27?
A:The switch to the use of the first person in this chapter has led some earlier scholars to wonder whether this material was actually written by a companion of Paul. It was no doubt taken into account by the Church Fathers of the second century when they decided to attribute the third gospel and Acts of the Apostles to Luke, a sometimes companion of Paul. Modern scholars not only do not accept the attribution to Luke, but place the date of authorship too late for this chapter to have been written by Luke or any other companion of Paul. Sometimes it does happen that an author changes from the third person to the first person and back, and we are left to speculate why. The Book of Daniel is another example of this, yet it was either written entirely by Daniel (as conservative Christians believe) or entirely by a much later author (as historians and biblical scholars believe).
Who was with Paul on second missionary journey?
Silas (Acts 15:40) Timothy was added at Lystra Acts 16:1-3. Luke is the recognized author of Acts and has references later in chapter 16 that use the pronoun "we" so he was apparently with them on this trip.
What was Judas' last name in the Bible?
There are seven men named Judas mentioned or discussed in the Bible.In Bible times, they did not use last names. The use of last names or family names did not really start until the 13th century.Here are the seven men:1. An ancestor to Jesus mentioned in Luke 3:30, 312. Judas the Galilean of Acts 5:373. One of the 12 Apostles, also called Thaddaeus of Luke 6:16 & Acts 1:134. One of the 12 Apostles, called Judas Iscariot, the betrayerMatthew 10:4, Luke 6:16, John 6:71 and others.5. One of four half brothers of Jesus Christ. Mt 13:55; Mr 6:36. A man from Damascus whose home was visited by Saul. Acts 9:117. Another name for Barsabbas - a disciple in the early Christian faith.Acts 5:22
