Über die Autorinnen und Autoren

David E. Garland (PhD, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) is professor emeritus of Christian Scriptures George W. Truett Seminary, Baylor University. He is the author of A Theology of Mark’s Gospel and has written commentaries on each of the Synoptic Gospels, Acts, Romans, both Corinthian epistles, Colossians, and Philemon. He also serves as the New Testament editor for the revised Expositor's Bible Commentary.

Clinton E. Arnold (PhD, University of Aberdeen) is research professor of New Testament at Talbot School of Theology, Biola University in La Mirada, California. He has authored many books and commentaries, including Ephesians in the Zondervan Exegetical Commentary series and Acts in the Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary.

Auszug. © Genehmigter Nachdruck. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.

Luke

Zondervan

Contents

Series Introduction...................................7Author's Preface......................................11Abbreviations.........................................13Introduction to Luke..................................21Select Bibliography...................................43Commentary............................................49Theology of Luke......................................974Scripture Index.......................................984Index of Other Ancient Literature.....................1017Subject Index.........................................1026Author Index..........................................1034

Chapter One

Literary Context

Luke is the only gospel to include a preface in which the author addresses the one to whom the work is dedicated. He composes these opening verses in elegant Greek with a carefully balanced structure and employs current literary conventions used in opening dedications. This care and skill would reassure an educated Greek reader. It signals that the author was aware of the customs used in the non-Christian world and that he self-consciously intended for his work to be read widely and by those familiar with these literary conventions.

Luke's use of secular models for his preface does not mean that the Bible is not also his model. Du Plessis comments that while Luke writes as a historian of the Christian movement, "we must guard against the temptation to consider Luke as a mere imitator of classical conventions. He was writing independently although using conventional form, and uses his own terminology when it suits him.... He is not just writing ordinary history and thus the differences should be considered in the same way as the similarities!" He establishes his authority as one who has "followed everything closely" and as a result compiled an improved "orderly account," which leads the auditor to "full ... certainty" about the teachings received from the tradition.

Main Idea

This gospel's narrative is intended to persuade readers of the full certainty of the truth of the traditions about Jesus and their significance for salvation.

Structure and Literary Form

Luke composes a carefully balanced period (a single sentence) for his preface. This preface has been conventionally linked to historiographical works that typically include mention of any predecessors (sometimes with criticism), the subject, the qualifications of the writer, the purpose of the work, its organization, and often a dedication to a patron or friend. This formal preface has traditionally, and I think rightly, been taken as an indication that Luke intended to write history.

Alexander has seriously challenged this view and argues that "Luke's preface-style seems to be more closely related to that of the 'scientific' tradition than it is to that of the hellenistic Jewish literature or any other Greek literary tradition." In a review of her work, Marshall argues that her conclusions strengthen the assumptions about the historical reliability of Luke's work since readers would expect accuracy from a scientific writing, and it would suit the tradition that Luke was a medical doctor who would have been familiar with these kinds of works. The problem is that Alexander compares style, which is not genre specific.

Aune offers these other criticisms of Alexander's conclusions. (1) Few historical works survive, and those that do often cover a millennium of historical writing and are missing the preface. This fact impairs any statistical comparison to determine what is normative or rare. (2) Those histories that have survived come from authors of much higher social status than Luke, whose preface may have been more comparable to the hundreds of histories (see Lucian, Hist. 2) that have been lost and would have been considered pedestrian and lacking taste and ability by the educated (see Lucian's satirical critique of examples of such a preface in contemporary historians [Hist. 16]). (3) In trying to demonstrate what Luke's preface is not, a historical preface, Alexander does not demonstrate, beyond citing the parallels, how scientific prefaces functioned. (4) Luke's writing does not strike anyone as a scientific or technical treatise. It has biographical and historical content with a plotted narrative. It is not an explicatory discourse that is characteristic of a scientific treatise. Alexander's work has not completely derailed the premise that Luke intends to write history.

Aune compares Luke's preface to Plutarch's essay "The Dinner of the Seven Wise Men" (Mor. 146B – 164D). He characterizes its preface as "a cliché" in that it "adopts a pastiche of elements that the ancient reader would reflexively recognize as an explanatory prooimion whose primary function would be to bolster the claim that the following account is the truth and nothing but the truth." Plutarch's work has numerous parallels with Luke's preface, which suggests that Luke's intention with his preface is also to bolster the claim that what follows is the truth and nothing but the truth.

The structure divides into two balanced segments:

Inasmuch as many ... to compile a narrative ... just as they were delivered to us ... It seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you ... ... the certainty of the teachings in which you have been instructed.

Exegetical Outline

I. Previous endeavors to relate the events that have been fulfilled among us (1:1 – 2)

II. Qualifications for undertaking the task anew (1:3)

III. Purpose of the task: to establish the reliability of the tradition and the certainty of faith (1:4)

Explanation of the Text

1:1 Inasmuch as many have set their hands to compile a narrative concerning the events that have been fulfilled among us ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]). Luke was not the first to undertake the audacious task of committing to writing the oral traditions about Jesus, and he explains why he tackles this comprehensive project. It is a literary convention among historians to refer to one's predecessors when writing on the same topic. Marincola says that ancient historiography did not attempt "to strike out boldly in a radical departure from one's predecessors, but rather to be incrementally innovative within a tradition, by embracing the best in previous performers and adding something of one's own marked with an individual stamp." "Inasmuch as" expresses cause so that Luke associates his work with these predecessors and thereby justifies it.

The verb "set their hands" underscores the difficulty of the task. "To compile [[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], an uncommon verb] a narrative [[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]]" means that Luke's predecessors have arranged the events sequentially. The "events" are not simply occurrences; they are matters that concern salvation history. The passive participle translated "that have been fulfilled" ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) can simply mean "happened" or "taken place, " but here it refers to divine acts (see Heb 2:3 – 4), and Luke customarily refers to God's action with the passive voice (4:21; 22:37; 24:44; Acts 1:16; [3:18 has God as the subject]). The perfect tense used here suggests that these are not only events "in which God is active" but those "which He brings to completion."

1:2 Just as they were delivered to us by those who were...