(Minor Fulfillment of Matt. 24/25 or Revelation
Oswald T. Allis
John A. Broadus
Wilhelm De Wette
Charles Homer Giblin
Johann von Hug
J, F, and Brown
Jean Le Clerc
Jack P. Lewis
Sir Isaac Newton
Dr. John Owen
William W. Patton
Rudolph E. Stier
(Major Fulfillment of Matt. 24/25 or Revelation
John L. Bray
Dr. John Brown
Francis X. Gumerlock
J. Marcellus Kik
Ovid Need, Jr
Milton S. Terry
(Virtually No Fulfillment of Matt. 24/25 & Revelation in 1st
C. - Types Only ; Also Included are "Higher Critics" Not Associated With Any
Alan Patrick Boyd
John N. Darby
Charles G. Finney
J.P. Green Sr.
John N.D. Kelly
Dr. John Smith
George Fox |
Margaret Fell (Fox) |
PRETERIST UNIVERSALISM |
The Gospel of Luke
Crucial Sources in Early Christianity
INTRODUCTION TO THE GOSPEL OF LUKE
From Student's New Testament Handbook By Marvin Richardson Vincent
Here to Read Book
DATING THE BOOK OF LUKE
Dr. Kenny Barfield (1995)
"Wenham's latest study, for instance, concludes that all three synoptic Gospels circulated during the fifth decade of the Christian era. He even places both Matthew and Mark during the early-to-mid 40's. An earlier treatise by the respected Dr. John A.T. Robinson reached similar conclusions. Both works show the flimsy, deteriorating foundations on which critical scholars constructed their late-date hypotheses. If even one of the three synoptic Gospels circulated before 65 A.D., one cannot deny that it contained some amazingly accurate descriptions of the period from 66-70A.D."
(The Prophet Motive; Gospel Advocate Company, 1995; p. 247)
Neale Pryor (1987)
"If Acts is dated around A.D.62, it would be logical to date Luke around A.D.60." ("Luke" in
New Testament Survey: An Introduction and Survey of the New Testament by the Faculty of Harding; p. 143)
Dr. Walter L. Liefeld (1984)
"All things considered, then, it seems preferable to date the composition of Luke's two works somewhere in the decade of A.D.60-70." (Luke, the Expositor's Bible Commentary; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans; p. 8:809)
Pamela Binnings Ewen (1999)
"The silence of the Gospels with respect to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple is strong circumstantial evidence that they were written before, not after, A.D.70." (Faith on Trial; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman; 1999; p.39)
"There are some of those who are standing here who shall not taste
death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom." (Matt.
16:28; cf. Mk. 9:1; Lk. 9:27)
"From now on, you [Caiaphas, the chief priests, the scribes, the elders,
the whole Sanhedrin] shall be seeing the Son of Man sitting at the right
hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven." (Matt. 26:64; Mk.
14:62; Lk. 22:69)
“Who warned you to flee from the wrath about to come?” (Lk. 3:7)
“The axe is already laid at the root of the trees. " (Lk. 3:9)
"His winnowing fork is in His hand…." (Lk. 3:17)
“The kingdom of God has come near to you.” (Lk. 10:9)
“The kingdom of God has come near.” (Lk. 10:11)
“What, therefore, will the owner of the vineyard do to them? He will
come and destroy these vine-growers and will give the vineyard to
others." …The scribes and the chief priests …understood that He spoke
this parable against them.” (Lk. 20:15-16,19)
“These are days of vengeance, in order that all things which are written
may be fulfilled.” (Lk. 21:22)
"This generation will not pass away until all things take place.” (Lk.
"Daughters of Jerusalem, stop weeping for Me, but weep for yourselves
and for your children. For behold, the days are coming when they will
say, 'Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bore, and the
breasts that never nursed.' Then they will begin to say to the
mountains, 'Fall on us,' and to the hills, 'Cover us.'” (Lk. 23:28-30;
Compare Rev. 6:14-17)
"We were hoping that He was the One who is about to redeem Israel.” (Lk.
Luke the Evangelist (Greek Λουκάς Loukas) is said by tradition to be
the author of both the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles, the
third and fifth books of the New Testament. He is patron saint of
painters, physicians and healers, and his feast day is October 18.
His earliest notice is in Paul's Epistle to Philemon, verse 24. He is
also mentioned in Colossians 4:14 and 2 Timothy 4:11, two works commonly
ascribed to Paul. Our next earliest account of Luke is in the Anti-Marcionite
Prologue to the Gospel of Luke, a document once thought to date to the
2nd century AD, but more recently has been dated to the later 4th
century. However Helmut Koester claims the following part – the only
part preserved in the original Greek – may have been composed in the
late 2nd century:
Luke is a Syrian of Antioch, a Syrian by race, a physician by
profession. He had become a disciple of the apostles and later followed
Paul until his [Paul's] martyrdom. Having served the Lord continuously,
unmarried and without children, filled with the Holy Spirit he died at
the age of 84 years. (p.335)
Some manuscripts add that Luke died "in Thebes, the capital of Boeotia".
All of these facts support the conclusion that Luke was associated with
Later tradition elaborates on these few facts. Epiphanius states that
Luke was one of the Seventy (Panarion 51.11), and John Chrysostom
indicates at one point that the "brother" Paul mentions in 2 Corinthians
8:18 is either Luke or Barnabas. J. Wenham asserts that Luke was "one of
the Seventy, the Emmaus disciple, Lucius of Cyrene and Paul's kinsman."
Not all scholars are as confident of all of these attributes as Wenham
Another Christian tradition states that he was the first iconographer,
and painted pictures of the Virgin Mary (The Black Madonna of
Częstochowa) and of Peter and Paul. Thus late medieval guilds of St Luke
in the cities of Flanders, or the Accademia di San Luca ("Academy of St
Luke") in Rome, imitated in many other European cities during the 16th
century, gathered together and protected painters. There is no
scientific evidence to support the tradition that Luke painted icons of
Mary and Jesus, though it was widely believed in earlier centuries,
particularly in Eastern Orthodoxy.
Luke and the New Testament Books
Contemporary scholarship is far more skeptical about Luke's authorship
of the Gospel attributed to him, and Acts. Neither work contains the
name of its author, although several passages written in the first
person plural (known as the We Sections), have traditionally been
understood as the eye witness accounts of Luke. Both are also dedicated
to one Theophilus, and Acts is clearly meant to be read as a sequel to
the Gospel account; no scholar seriously doubts that the same person
wrote both works.
On the other hand, the earliest manuscript of the Gospel (Papyrus Bodmer
XIV = P75), dated circa AD 200, ascribes this work to Luke. Scholars
defending Luke's authorship point out that there is no reason for these
works to be attributed to such a minor figure if he did not write them,
nor is there a tradition attributing this work to another author.
What do YOU think ?
Submit Your Comments For Posting Here
..Will Be Spam
Filtered and Posted Shortly..
- 31 Oct 2003
English Standard Version reads: "for these be the days of vengence, to fulfill all that is written." Thank you for the great website and study helps. RW San Diego, CA
- 30 Jan 2005
trying to solve the "number of the beast" by adding up the letters in someone's name may not be the correct way. "The number of his name" may have a totally different meaning. Read www.biblebits.com/666.htm C.P.M. North Carolina
Date: 12 Dec 2005
Luke 21:22 is the completion of the prophetic reading which Jesus began
in Luke 4:18
v18 "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to
preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the
brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of
sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
v19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
v20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and
sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were
fastened on him.
v21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled
in your ears.
Jesus stopped in the middle of Isaiah's prophecy, and didn't mention the
"Day of the vengeance of our God." That was a logical place to stop
reading. It would not have been appropriate to mention God's judgments
for rejecting the offer of the kingdom before the nation had actually
done the deed.
But by Luke chapter 21, the rejection was complete, and it was time to
read the rest of Isaiah's prophecy, pronouncing judgment on the wicked
unbelievers of Israel.
Futurists somehow miss the connection between Luke 4 and Luke 21,
believing that the last part of Isaiah's prophecy will be completed in
some future "tribulation." I beieve that is a mistake. The days of God's
vengeance came in AD70.
Date: 22 Aug 2010
I can't buy the theory that the lack of mention of the Fall of Jerusalem
means that Luke-Acts was necessarily written before then. When did the
Gospel of Luke stop? Doesn't that logic mean that Luke's Gospel must
have been written ca 33 CE? A quick online search for US History
textbooks showa the book "From Colonies to Country: 1735-1791 A History
of US Book 3". It was written in 2007, not 1791!
Personally, I believe the theory that Luke was the first-written Gospel,
using the source, among many (see his prologue), that Mark used also.