Luke The Apostles

The Gospel of Luke was also written around eighty CE, written somewhere outside of Palestine (Tatum, 1999, p.34). The author may have been Luke the Gentile Christian, writing to another Gentile, Theophilus. Like Matthew, Luke is strongly believed to be written after Mark, with references from him, “Q” and “L” if following the Two (Four)-Document Hypothesis. The authors of Luke and Matthew are believed to be written during the same time without the knowledge of knowing. As mentioned before, Luke is about fifty percent longer than Mark is, making it important source since it contains more information about the historic life of Jesus. There is also a second part to Luke which is the book Acts, but is separate in Bible. Both include the beginnings

Luke was a medical doctor, a missionary, and evangelist, a historian, a researcher, and the writer of the third Gospel. The book of Luke was written in a formal literacy introduction noting his purpose in writing, his methodology, and the attempts others had made in such writing. Luke is the author of the book and it was written in AD 60 in Caesarea. According to Hindson and Elmer Luke’s purpose is to give “an orderly sequence” of the events about Christ’s birth, life, and sacrificial death followed by his resurrection and ascension back to heaven. The occasion calling for Luke to write his Gospel was that Theophilus, and other new believers like him, needed a clear account of the life and ministry of Jesus as an aid to confirm his faith

In his introduction, Tannehill refers to the importance of having into account the book of Acts. The author says that some modern Christian readers are unable to see the relationship that the book of Luke and the book of Acts have. Tannehill clarifies, that we must study the Luke-Acts in terms of narrative rhetoric in order to be adequately able to understand the narrative unity of Luke-Acts. In pages 9 through 80, it is indicated that in order to understand more clear the narrative of Luke-Acts, Tannehill studies and analyzes Luke-Acts using a method called narrative criticism. Also in the pages mentioned above, the author made some literary comparisons between Luke and Acts to find its similarities and differences.

I chose to read The Gospel of Luke for my project. It is said that The Gospel of Luke was written somewhere between 80 CE - 90 CE. The Gospel of Luke was written for Theophilus, who was called “Friend of God”. But The Gospel was also written for a wider audience, including converts and potential converts.

Longenecker’s The Lost Letters of Pergamum encapsulates the socio-historical, cultural, and political atmosphere of the first-century setting in which Mark’s Gospel would have been experienced. Understanding Jesus in context of this background alters the way I understand the Gospel of Mark. Specific passages in Mark can be reflected upon based on the socio-historical, cultural, and political aspects of the setting described in Longenecker’s book. In The Lost Letters of Pergamum, readers see Euphemos and Antipas admonishing Luke against associating himself with Christians for they worship and follow a different lord than the emperor as well as endorse an empire other than Rome.

In the first section, “The Holy Spirit in Luke-Acts: A Challenge in methodology”, Stronstad discusses the theological

Bruce W. Longenecker emerges as a contemporary innovator of Christian literature through his historical fiction work The Lost Letters of Pergamum. Throughout this work, Longenecker analyzes the fundamental features of first-century Christianity, which were primarily affiliated with the New Testament. The Lost Letters of Pergamum is composed of the combination of letters. These letters primarily document the communication between two citizens: Antipas, “citizen of the blessed empire of Rome, and worshiper of Jupiter, Zeus Olympios the Savior” and Luke, "Doctor, historian, and servant of God” (19, 36). After examining the reoccurring letters between the two citizens and in regards to Luke’s “historical monograph,” it becomes evident that Longenecker’s work focuses on the distinct theme of understanding (29).

In the first four verses, Luke gives a short but valuable outline about the nature of the gospel. He says he want to declare those things that are most assuredly believed

I believe that Luke wrote the book of Acts to allow Christians to see the early history of the Church. Also, it was the place in the bible where to Holy Spirit arrived. The Holy Spirit is first mentioned when the Lord tells His people that He will send The Holy Spirit soon. Then later after Jesus told them that He was sending the Holy Spirit to guide the disciples, the Holy Spirit came. When the Holy Spirit came the Disciples, they were able to experience God on a whole new level. It allowed them to preach the gospel with much more power because it wasn't them speaking, it was God. Luke's purpose in writing the book of Acts was to make clear of what the early church history looked like and the arrival of the Holy Spirit. It was also written

Readers of the Gospel of Luke often try to identify Luke’s intended audience. Understanding Luke’s intended audience can provide insight into how Luke used current culture to strategically spread the word of God. Specifically, we can look at the period of Hellenization, along passages, to interpret Luke’s Gospel as intended for a Greco-Roman audience.

I would agree that the Book of Acts is historically accurate of the early church and its leaders. I think Acts shows great detail about what the early church believed and practiced. Many historians love the book of Acts due to the detailed information that is included in this book. Luke seems to be knowledgeable about culture events that were happening in his era of history that has proven to be accurate. The book of Acts has many different examples that clearly show that Luke was living in this time of history. There is no reason why Acts would not be historically accurate. I would continue to discuss my beliefs about the legitimacy of the Bible. My personal belief is that the Bible is completely historically accurate.

60-70. The author of Acts (Luke) leaves off with Paul in Rome waiting to make his appeal to Caesar. Meaning it was written before Paul?s death around AD 68. However, the events near the end of Acts happened around A.D. 64. If Acts is the sequel of Luke, (Acts 1:1-3) then it is only logical that Luke was written prior to Acts. This logic places the writing of Luke around A.D. 58-63. This time table working in reverse ?Markan Priority,? places all three Synoptic Gospels very close in time frame: Mark around A.D. 52-56; Matthew A.D. 57-60; and Luke A.D. 58-62. These dates however, are widely debated and are based on my own research. Some sources and commentaries date Luke much later. This debate focuses on the gospel according to Mark. It is unclear whether Mark was written before the death of Peter or after. Peter died around AD 64, if it was written after his death then that pushes all the gospels back several years from what I have concluded here, (assuming Mark was indeed written first, and used as a source for Luke). Both the Holman Christian Study Bible and the Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible agree with my time frame for Luke. These sources along with my own research and the use of ?Markan Priority? lead me to understand this (A.D. 58-63) as the most likely period for the

Luke’s Gospel is known to be the last synoptic to be written. Since Luke introduced Acts, it is crucial to date Acts before a date for Luke can be determined. Luke leaves the reader with Paul in Rome, waiting to present his case before Caesar. Acts had been completed long before Paul’s outcome was known, this means that Acts came about in the early sixties with the Gospel of Luke being written in the late fifties or early sixties. Luke-Acts doesn’t mention the destruction of Jerusalem, which is why there are uncertainty of where Christianity fits in amongst the religions of the Roman Empire, and the uncertainty of Jew-Gentile relations at the same level as in Paul’s epistles.

It would be easy to say that the book of Acts was written to tell the story of the Holy Spirit. While this is important, it is not the book's only purpose. Luke had a mission in mind to make sure future generations would have a model of how the church was supposed to look. Acts also documents the spread of Christianity to from Jerusalem to Rome. Written approximately in the early AD 60's, Acts has both historical importance ad theological insight into the coming of the Holy Spirit and the spreading of the modern church.

Written in approximately 63 AD, the Gospel of Luke teaches many lessons that are still applicable today. Luke, who is also the suspected author of Acts, was an eyewitness to many of Jesus’s miraculous works. Both Luke and Acts are addressed to a man named Theophilus, which means lover of God. Luke wanted Theophilus to have certainty in the truth of Christ, so Luke gave him an account from a trustworthy author. In Luke 18:6-8, Jesus encourages the disciples to pray faithfully and ceaselessly. Verses 9-14 describe Jesus’s story about two men, one a tax collector and one a Pharisee, praying in the temple. Speaking to the Pharisees, he told this parable because they “trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt. (English Standard Version Lk. 18:9)” Through this parable, the tax collector exemplified humility in a situation that the Pharisees could relate to.