Criswell
Theological Review 5.2 (1991) 183-201.
Copyright © 1991 by The
UNDERSTANDING LUKE'S TASK:
CAREFULLY BUILDING ON
PRECEDENT (LUKE 1:1-4)
DARRELL
L. BOCK
Introduction
There
is only on~ Gospel where the writer spells out his purpose
and preparation in detail. That is the Gospel of
Luke. The introduc-
tion of Luke's Gospel is
significant because he not only tells us why
he writes and how he writes but also indicates the
state of the tradi-
tion about Jesus at the time
he writes. In addition, the meaning of the
passage is hotly debated, with virtually every
phrase a matter of dis-
pute. This article seeks to
examine the preface and its meaning.1
Structure, Genre, and Luke's Description of Narrative
Structure
Luke begins his work, as other
ancient writers do, with a preface.
The
entire paragraph is one long Greek sentence. Luke writes with
balance as he argues his connection to the past and
his desire to give
his readers assurance about the instruction they
have received. Luke
discusses the tradition he inherited in v 1. Then
he traces the origin of
that tradition to eyewitnesses and servants who
preach the Word in
v 2. Luke 1:3 is the main clause of the preface
and discusses how Luke
wrote his account. The purpose of Luke's writing is
found in the last
verse. He desires to give his reader, Theophilus, assurance about the
events surrounding Jesus. Theophilus
had prior knowledge of these
1 This article represents
a slightly reworked portion of a forthcoming two-volume
commentary on the Gospel of Luke by the author.
184
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
events, and Luke wishes to reassure his recipient that
Jesus is the
fulfillment of God's promises. Luke 1:1 speaks of
fulfilled events to
raise the note of God's activity at the very start.
History makes it clear
that Theophilus was not
the only one who benefited from Luke's la-
bor. The church is the major beneficiary of Luke's
work.
The structure of Luke 1:1-4 reflects
balanced Greek periodic style
with a protasis, vv 1-2
("Inasmuch as'' or "since"), and an apodosis,
vv 3-4 ("so also it seemed good to me").2
BDF describes how the peri-
odic parallelism works:
"many" is parallel to "also to me," while "to
compose a narrative" goes with "to
write for you," and "even as eye-
witnesses and servants handed down" is tied
to "in order that you
might have assurance." The parallelism in the
third unit is not as
clear as in the first two units.3 Tiede notes how the period lays out in
parallel lines.4 He parallels the
suggestion of BDF. So the parallelism
of Luke 1:1-4 goes as follows:
a) Inasmuch
as many have undertaken (v 1a)
b) to
compile a narrative of the things. . .(v 1b)
c) just as they were delivered to us by . . .(v 2)
a') it
seemed good to us also. . .(v 3a)
b')
to write an orderly account for you. . . (v 3b)
c') in order that you may know the truth (v 4)
The
balance of the passage provides an aesthetic touch to the intro-
duction. The parallelism also
reflects the effort Luke spent in trying to
create a culturally appropriate introduction to his
work.
Ancient Parallels: Other
Historical Prefaces
There are ancient parallels to the
prologue. Some are in
Hellenistic-Jewish
writings.5 Here one can note 2 Macc
2:19-31, which
parallels Luke in some particulars. The writer of
2 Maccabees cites a
predecessor and then explains what his own goal is
in writing a new
summary work (v 23). He compares his work to
painting an already
constructed house (v 29). He wishes to entertain and
provide facts for
the profit of the reader (v 25). Josephus' prologue
to
Ep. Arist 1. 1-8 should also be
mentioned. There also is the prologue to
Sirach,
where this writer also explains the rationale for his work.
2 BDF
464.
3 The main clause is in
Luke 1:3. A stylistic parallel to the period exists in Acts
15:24-25.
4 D. Tiede,
Luke (
5 W. Wiefel,
Das Evangelium nach Lukas (THKNT 3; Berlin: Verlagsanstalt,
1988)
38, n.l.
Darrell L. Bock: UNDERSTANDING
LUKE'S TASK 185
Josephus says that he writes to set
out events in which he took
part and to remove the prevailing ignorance that
exists about impor-
tant events. Josephus' introduction in Ag. Ap. 1.1. 1-5 even has a dedi-
catory line to "most
esteemed Epaphroditus" and describes the
quality of the witnesses on whom Josephus
relies. He writes this work
to convict detractors of falsehood, to correct
ignorance, and to instruct
all who desire to know the truth. Aristeas' prologue speaks of a "trust-
worthy" narrative of memorable matters (vv 1, 6).
The author of Sirach
has simply tried to present to the outside world
the legacy of
traditions of wisdom and discipline.
Greek parallels also exist for this
form. Tiede mentions a later
work by Lucian of Samosota
(c. AD. 125-180), who wrote in his treatise,
How to Write History 53-55 that unlike the
orators, he will not appeal
for a favorable hearing. He desires to interest his
audience and in-
struct them. Earlier, he had
said that the only task of an historian is to
tell the truth (39-40).6 Fitzmyer notes that the ancients knew how to
distinguish between fact and fiction.7
The goals in many Greek writers
are like those of the author of 2 Maccabees and the other Jewish
historian-theologians. Lucian argues if what
is said is important and
essential, it will receive attention. The goal is
to be clear, set forth
causes, and outline the main events. Luke is written
with similar goals.
Alexander
argues that Luke is a writer in the classic "ancient
scientific" mold.8 This places Luke
in the "middle brow" of classical
writing. In Alexander's view, such a work respects
tradition, uses
sources, but also has some reworking of tradition.
Luke's Term: Narrative
Account
Among the ancients, there are
various terms tied to writing his-
tory. The term, yuxagwgi<a (psychagogia,
"persuasion") is often nega-
tive.9 It refers to the goal
of some writers, while others refuse to adopt
it. Another term is u[po<mnhma (hypomnema, "records,"
"memorial,"
"commentary," or "minutes").10 Still a third idea is i[stori<a (historia,
6 Tiede,
34-35.
7 J. Fitzmyer,
The Gospel According to Luke (AB 28,
28a, 2 vols.; Garden City, NY:
Doubleday,
1981,1985) 16. .
8 L Alexander,
"Luke's Preface in the Context of Greek Preface-Writing," NovT
28
(1986) 48-75, esp. 60-63. F. Bovon (Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Lk 1, 1-9, #50
[EKKNT
3.1; Zurich/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Benziger/Neukirchener
Verlag, 1989], 30, n. 1)
notes that these comparisons with ancient prologues
date back to the 18th century with
G.
Raphelius and J. J. Wettstein.
C. F. Evans (St. Luke [TPI New Testament Commentar-
ies;
9 LSJ
2026.2.
10 LSJ
1889.2.4. These are often unpolished materials. Lucian On How to Write
History 47-48.
186
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
"inquiry,"
"information," "narrative," or "history").11 The
absence of
references to these other terms in BAGD show that
Luke chose none
of these terms to describe his work. His term is dih<ghsij (diegesis, "nar-
rative account").12
Buschel in
TDNT notes that the term dih<ghsij simply means "nar-
rative" and does not
refer to some form of an incomplete literary work
that one could compare to the individual, detached
traditions of mod-
ern form criticism.13
Luke has longer materials in mind than individ-
ual pericopes.
His note 3 gives some extra-biblical texts using the term.
Some
texts describe oral reports. Others refer to written reports or to
historical accounts: Sir 6:35 (oral); 9:15 (oral);
22:6 (oral); 27:11, 13 (oral);
38:25 and 39:2 (concerning discourses of famous
men); Ep. Aris. 1. 8.322
(written); 2 Macc 2:32 (written);
6:17 (historical narrative). LSJ adds
Plato Rep. 392d; Phaed. 246a, and LXX-Hab 1:5.14 The term in
the NT
speaks of both oral and written accounts: (oral)--Luke
8:39; 9:10; Acts
8:33;
9:27; 12:17; (written)--Mark 5:16; 9:9; Heb 11:32. So whatever type
of narrative Luke alludes to in v 1, it is not
clear whether the sources
are oral, written, or both. What is clear is that
these accounts are long
and that Luke's work is similar to them, as v 3
makes clear.15 This as-
sociation might suggest written
sources but does not guarantee it.
Major Themes
So Luke explains why he has written
and establishes that his
work has precedent. However, Luke makes other points
as well. He
highlights the eyewitness origin of tradition; he
points out his account
is the result of a careful consideration of the
events; and he notes that
the study was carefully done. In fact, the account
begins at the start
and is thorough. Luke's contribution is significant
not only because of
his careful work, but also because only he writes a
second volume in
which he ties fulfillment in Jesus to God's work in
the church.
So the basic outline of Luke 1:1-4
is as follows:
Carefully
Building on Precedent: Luke 1:1-4
A. The Precedent (1:1-2)
1. What Came Before (1:1)
2. The Source of Earlier
Accounts: Apostolic Eyewitnesses (1:2)
11 LSJ
842.2.
12 BAGD 195; Bauer, 6th
ed., col. 392; LSJ 427, defines it broadly as "recount."
13 TDNT 2.909.
14 F. Buchsel's
reference to Hab 2:16 is incorrect
15 R Tannehill,
The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary
Interpretation vol. I
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) l.lO.
Darrell L. Bock:
UNDERSTANDING LUKE'S TASK 187
B. Luke's Contribution (1:3-4)
1. Luke Describes His
Work (1:3)
2. Luke's Purpose (1:4)
Translation
(1) Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account
of
the things which have been fulfilled among us, (2) even as
those who
were from the beginning eyewitnesses and servants of the Word
de-
livered to us, (3) it seemed good also to me, having followed all
things carefully from the beginning to write an orderly account
for
you, most excellent Theophilus, (4)
that you might know certainty
concerning the things about which you were instructed.
Meaning: Luke Carefully Builds on Precedent
The Precedent (1:1-2)
What
Came Before (1:1). Luke's work is not novel. His
Gospel be-
gins by noting the precedent of others in recounting
what Jesus did.
The
term e]peidh<per (epeideper, "inasmuch as'')
gives a condition and is
usually causally related to the action in the
main clause, so "since
many have undertaken."16 The
accounts of others laid the groundwork
for why Luke writes. Ancient writers loved to show
how what they
were doing had precedent.
Luke also produces an introduction
with stylistic parallels in other
ancient writings. Fitzmyer
cites similar beginnings from Josephus J. W.
1.6.17
and Philo Legatio ad Gaium 164.17 No
LXX usage exists for the
introductory term e]peidh<per ("inasmuch as''), but this style of introduc-
tion is common. The causal
nuance is defended by
Schneider.18
So Luke is not the first to write
about Jesus. "Many" (polloi<, pol-
loi) refers to his literary
and or oral predecessors. For most scholars
today, this would allude, at least, to Mark and Q. Q
is a posited source
or set of sources that contained teaching material
from Jesus to which
both Luke and Matthew had access. Those who hold to
the existence
of Q usually think that Mark was the first Gospel.
For those who think
Mark
is first, Luke uses Mark, Q and a set of special traditions called
"L."
Others believe that Matthew is a source that precedes Luke, and
16 BDF
456.3.
17 See above for more
examples, also cr. Fitzmyer, 290-91.
18 I. H.
G.
Schneider, Das Evangelium nach Lukas (Okumenischer Taschenbuch Kommentar
zum Neuen
Testament 3; 2 vols.; Gerd Mohn:
Gillersloher Verlagshaus,
1977) 38.
188
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
some who hold to Matthew as a source do not think an
appeal to Q is
necessary. When scholars hold to the Griesbach or Augustinian hy-
pothesis, then Matthew is the
first Gospel, and Luke's sources depend
on which variation is preferred (Griesbach: Matthew, Luke, then
Mark;
Augustinian: Matthew, Mark, then Luke). Regardless of
the
view preferred, and good arguments exist on each
side of the debate,
Luke
does tell us that he had predecessors, even if he does not name
them for us.19
"Epexei<rhsan (epecheiresan,
"have set their hand," "attempted")
describes the work of Luke's predecessors. The
idea of "setting the
hand" to tell a story might well suggest
written accounts here, except
that other terms in the context can suggest
organized oral reports. So
Luke's
remark suggests the presence of written materials but need
not be limited to such sources. Is this term
neutral or pejorative? Did
Luke
think Jesus' story was well served by previous accounts? First,
the term is the natural term to use for composing
an account.20 The
use of ka]moi< (kamoi,
"and I also") in v 3 looks as if Luke joins himself
to his predecessors.21 But Fitzmyer argues that the stress on accuracy
and research shows Luke still thought work needed
to be done. Klos-
termann also views a critique
as implied.22
However, another fact complicates
the discussion. Luke's sequel
makes his task unique as he seeks to join Jesus tradition
and church
history together. Luke adds to the recorded
accounts of Jesus' ministry
with more detail and includes the additional
discussion of the
church's rise (a third of the Gospel contains
"L" material). He does so
without necessarily downgrading his
predecessors, who blazed a diffi-
19 G. Caird,
St Luke (Pelican Gospel Commentaries;
Baltimore: Penguin, 1963) 23-
27.
For evaluation of this issue, see the introduction and the excursus in the introduc-
tion to Luke 3:7-9 in D. L
Bock, Luke (forthcoming). See also
cism," in New Testament Criticism and Interpretation (D.
A Black and D. Dockery eds.;
Introduction (Grand Rapids: Baker,
1987).
20 BAGD 304; Bauer, 6th
ed., col. 617; H. J. Cadbury, "Commentary on the Preface
of Luke," in The Beginnings of Christianity, part 1, ed. by F. J. F. Jackson and
K Lake;
21 ARC.
Leaney, The Gospel According
to St Luke (2 ed.; Black's New Testament
Commentaries;
A
Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on the Gospel according to St
Luke (ICC; Edinburgh: T.
& T. Clark, 1922) 2, have good discussions, as
does G. Delling,
TDNT 8.32-33, esp. n. 3. Here Delling makes it clear that a censure of the predecessors
is not in view. He cites the 1st century B. C.
historian Diodorus Siculus
1. 1.1-3. as a par-
allel. To this H. Conzelmann (TDNT9:596) adds from the same work 1.2.7. and l.4.4-5.
22 E. Klostermann,
Das Lukasevangelium
(HNT 5; 3d ed.;
[Paul Siebeck], 1975)
2.
Darrell L. Bock: UNDERSTANDING
LUKE'S TASK 189
cult trail ahead of him.23 One can note
the neutrality in the term by
citing common usage from Moulton/Milligan.24
Acts 9:29 and 19:13
represent other NT uses, which are more negative,
but ka]moi< in Luke
1:3
is the key to the problem. The phrase is not as pejorative
as Danker suggests when he includes the
possibility of heretics in
this group.25 Along with Luke 1:3, the
connection of these accounts
with the apostolic eyewitnesses shows that they are
seen in a good
light (v 2).
Luke describes the previous
accounts. ]Anata<casqai dih<ghsin (ana-
taxasthai diegesin) means to "compile
an orderly account." Fitzmyer
has a detailed lexical survey of dih<ghsij, which refers to
historical
narrative.26
]Anata<casqai refers to an orderly account.27 Thus, others
had given accounts of the events surrounding Jesus.
Delling suggests
that the term refers to the movement from oral to
written tradition.28
Taken
with this sense, the Lucan reference is exclusively
to written
sources, but it is not guaranteed that this is
the point. The term itself
can refer to oral or written accounts, so the idea
that only written ac-
counts are in view cannot be defended merely form the
use of this
term.29 This term is a
technical expression of ancient historians for
different kinds of recounting.30
23 For a defense of the
unity of Luke-Acts and the prologue as serving both vol-
umes, Maddox, The Purpose of Luke-Acts (Studies of the
New Testament and its world;
24 Moulton and Milligan,
250-51; Cadbury (2:494), has a list of texts where the
term is both neutral and pejorative. As always,
context determines the proper force in a
given example.
25 F. Danker, Jesus and the New Age (2d ed.;
Bovon (34) the usage in Acts is decisive for a
negative sense, but he calls the criticism
"discrete."
26 Fitzmyer, 292. Note also the discussion above.
27 BAGD
61; Bauer, 6th ed., col. 122.
28 G. Delling,
TDNT, 8.32-33.
29 For more on dih<ghsij; as meaning oral and
written accounts, see key terms above
and TDNT
2.909, where Buchsel provides a nice summary of
usage. One parallel to note
is Polybius 5. 31. 4.
30 W. C. van Unnik, "Luke's Second Book and the Rules of
Hellenistic Histo-
riography," in Les Actes des Apotres: traditions, redaction, theologie
(BETL; ed.
J.
Kremer;
in De Acte conscribentae historiae (On
Writing History) 47-48, cf. esp. 42, n. 23. See also
W.
C. van Unnik, "Once More St. Luke's
Prologue," Neot 7 (1973) 7-26. It should be
said,
however, that when used in a prologue and tied
to a term like "setting down an orderly
account," the term suggests written or, at
least, well-organized reports. Also arguing for
written predecessors is L L
du Plessis, "Once
More: The Purpose of Luke's Prologue
(Lk I 1-4)," NovT 16 (1974)
262-63.
Written sources are still the most likely referent
here. Our point is that it is not guaranteed that
this is all that is meant.
190
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
These were not just any set of
events. They had a special charac-
ter. Peri> tw?n
peplhroforhme<nwn e]n u[mi?n pragma<twn (peri ton peplero-
phoremenon en hemin pragmaton) means "concerning
the fulfilled
events among us." The meaning of
"fulfilled" is disputed.31 Does
it
mean 1) "completed events";32
2) "assured events";33 or 3) "fulfilled
events"?34 The third meaning,
"fulfilled," is the best since Luke's em-
phasis in his volumes is on
the fulfillment of God's plan (Luke 1:20,
57;
2:6, 21-22; 4:21; 9:31; 21:22, 24; 24:44-47). The passive participle pep-
lhroforhme<nwn ("which were being
fulfilled") suggests God's acts with
its use of the "theological" passive.35
These fulfilled past events con-
tinue to color how one should
see the present. The effect of Jesus' life,
death, and resurrection lives on. Luke will chronicle
one of the imme-
diate effects, the rise of
the church, in his second volume. In Acts,
Luke
makes the point that Jesus continues to work in the world as the
exalted Lord (Acts 1:1-5).
These divinely wrought events did
not occur in a corner. ]En h[mi?n
describes "events fulfilled among us." At the minimum, the
first per-
son plural pronoun refers to those believers who
saw the time of sal-
vation history's initiation,
the "first generation." Both Fitzmyer and
Leaney stress the reference here is to those who
observed these
events.36 Leaney
is more narrow, taking "us" to refer to only this
original group. But Fitzmyer
correctly extends the reference to all
affected by salvation history, as does Marshall.37
Dillon argues that
this phrase moves away from a reference only to the
original events
to the effect of those events in a later time for
all who came to be-
lieve. It refers to the
"second" and "third" generations.38 He notes cor-
rectly that the perfect tense
of the participle "fulfilled" can include a
reference to a group that was not originally
present at these events.
Past
and present believers are united by these events and share in
31 Fitzmyer, 293.
32 So Cadbury, 2.495-96.
Cf. RSV, NASB--"things which have been accomplished."
Similar
translations are found in Neu Luther and Zurcher.
33 K. Rengstorf,
Das Evangelium nach Lukas (NTD 3;
und Ruprecht, 1937) 14.
34 Fitzmyer,
293,
(Atlanta: John Knox, 1984), 11. Du
Plessis, Luke 263-64. Cf. NN, NKJV--"things that
have been fulfilled." The German Einheitsubersetzung
speaks of events which occurred
among us and were fulfilled, combining meanings one
and three.
context suggests that God acts.
36 Fitzmyer, 293-94; Leaney, 77.
37
38 R Dillon, From Eye-Witnesses to Ministers of the Word (AnBib 82;
cal Institute Press, 1978) 271, n. 115. The perfect
participle suggests a broader time frame
for the remark.
Darrell L. Bock: UNDERSTANDING
LUKE'S TASK 191
their significance. The historical ground that
produced this impact is
the topic of Luke's two volumes.
The
Source of Earlier Accounts: 1:2. Luke 1:2 details the ulti-
mate source for these accounts. The conjunction kaqw<j (kathos, "even
as'') describes how the accounts originated by
comparing the previous
accounts about Jesus to their point of origin.39
The term stresses the
reliable basis on which these accounts rested (
counts of v 1 go back to traditions passed down to the
reporters by the
eyewitnesses and ministers of the
Word. There is a two step process
described here; but the nature of the sources
guarantees the quality.
Luke
still is discussing the other earlier accounts here, not his own
study, which he will describe in Luke 1:3-4.
The ultimate sources of the Jesus
tradition are described by two
terms, au]to<ptai
(autoptai,
"eyewitnesses") and u[phre<tai (hyperetai,
"ministers"). Here is a clear allusion to the original
oral level of the
tradition. This is the only NT use of this term
for eyewitness. These
servants served Jesus' cause as eyewitnesses who
preached the Jesus
they saw.40 Fitzmyer
notes that the word order favors a reference to
one group that holds a twofold role: early
witnesses who became min-
isters of the Word.41
The one article, oi[ (hoi, "the"), and the trailing
participial phrase, geno<menoi tou? lo<gou
(genomenoi tou logou, "became
of the Word"), argue for this view, though the
plural makes it less
than certain, since the Granville-Sharp rule does
not apply in plural
constructions. Fitzmyer
suggests the reference is to those disciples
who became apostles. Those eyewitnesses go back to
"the beginning"
(a]p ] a]rxh?, ap arche) of Jesus' ministry, a ministry
that started after
Jesus' baptism by John the Baptist (Acts
1:21-22; 10:37-41). One group
is referred to as they functioned in two stages of
church history: they
saw, and then they reported.42
Fitzmyer
argues that Luke is a third-generation Christian be-
cause before him there were 1) those present at the
beginning and
2)
those who ministered the Word.43 But if the
same group is present
39 Fitzmyer, 294; BDF 453.
40 K Rengstorf, TDNT,
8.543; also W. Michaelis, TDNT, 5.348, 373. Luke will call
these men "witnesses" later in Luke-Acts
(Luke 24:44-48; Acts 1:8). Such eyewitnesses
were important to ancient historians, Thucydides 1.
22. 2. Josephus Ag. Ap. 1. 10. 55, and
Lucian's parody in Varae Hist (True History) 1.4; Du Plessis, 265.
41 Fitzmyer,
294; J. Nolland, Luke
1-9:20 (Word Biblical Commentary 35a;
Word, 1989) 7.
42 So also E. E. Ellis, The Gospel of Luke, (New Century Bible;
Marshall,
& Scott, 1974), 65; For details, see Dillon,
270-71, esp. n. 114. The title of this
work alludes to the unified view of this phrase.
43 Fitzmyer, 294; also Goulder, 201.
192
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
in these two periods" then Luke could be a
direct descendent of the
original group. Even though Luke may be
"second generation," he is
describing three stages of history in the
tradition: 1) the experienced
events; 2) the witnesses' formulation of the events'
tradition; and
3)
the recording of that tradition and the reflection
upon those events.
Ellis'
description of Luke as second generation is more accurate than
seeing Luke in the third generation.44
The reference to the Word is to the
Christian message about
Jesus,
which was a message about divine events.45 The Word
preached as God's authoritative message is
powerful.46 The ministers
served not their own ends, but the cause of God's
message.47
The message was preached and it was
passed on, as pare<dosan
h[mi?n (paredosan hemin,
"passed on to us") indicates. This verb, pare<-
dosan, is a technical term
for passing on official tradition.48 Since an
account (v 1) was made of what these ministers
passed on (v 2), it is
likely that the reference in v 2 is to apostolic oral
tradition.49 The ref-
erence to "us" in v
2 alludes to the tradition's transmission to a later
generation of the church, to those of Luke's time.
The appeal to eye-
witnesses is more than mere literary convention.
Creed notes against
Cadbury
that one mentions eyewitnesses in the hope that one's ac-
count will be believed. The recording of this tradition
preserves this
important material for all time.
Luke's Contribution
(1:3-4)
Luke
Describes His Work: 1:3. This verse introduces the main
clause of the prologue. Here is Luke's view of his own
work. @Edoce
ka]moi< (edoxe kamoi) means "it seemed well to me
also."50 Luke wishes
to join himself to those others who have
catalogued the events of
Jesus' life. As v 2 makes clear,
they drew from the apostolic tradition
for these accounts. Luke joins a line of accounts
about Jesus. Most
agree that Luke wishes to add to this tradition of
writing because he
feels he has something to contribute (Schneider, Fitzmyer). Any
44
Ellis, 65.
45 H. K Luce, The Gospel According to S. Luke (
don:
46 Cf. Leaney (77), who mentions the responses to Jesus and the
apostles through-
out this book as examples of this theme; Luke 4:22;
6:17; Acts 2:36-37; 4:13-14.
47
48 1 Cor
11:2, 23; 15:3: Mark 7:13; Jude 3; Fitzmyer, 296. On
the form of this aorist
verb, cf. BDF 95. 1.
49 So also J. M. Creed, The Gospel According
to St. Luke (
1930) 4.
50 The grammatical
parallels to the e@doce
ka]moi< construction are Acts
15:22, 25, and
28; Fitzmyer, 296.
Darrell L. Bock: UNDERSTANDING
LUKE'S TASK 193
description of Luke's meaning contrasting him to his
predecessors
does not honor the presence of kai< (kai, "and") in the
verse.51
Luke notes four characteristics of
his work in v 3, but the mean-
ing of several terms in the
verse is disputed. So the terms surrounding
each characteristic need careful study in order to
determine exactly
what Luke asserts. The first key term is parhkolouqhko<ti
(parekolouthekoti),
whose literal rendering is "having followed along
closely." The verb basically means "to
follow," but its precise force
here is very much debated.52 Though six
possibilities exist for the
term, the dispute boils down to three options. 1)
The term refers to
"following closely the progress of certain events," so
it means,
"to
keep up with a movement.53 In this view, it refers to following
something with interest or by association, as
opposed to describing re-
search. 2) The term refers to the investigation of
past events.54
3)
Some Fathers took the term differently, referring it to Luke as a
self-description of his role as an
apostolic follower. They argue it
means to accompany, a meaning that is close to the
first sense found
here, but that stresses Luke's direct involvement
more than the first
view would (Irenaeus Ag. Her. 3. 10; Justin, Dial. with Trypho 103). If
this third sense were the meaning, one wonders why
Luke would ap-
peal so strongly to the testimony of others as
eyewitnesses, since he
would have been one himself. Why would Luke be so
obtuse about
his own direct involvement?
Haenchen
argued strongly for the second view against Cadbury.
Haenchen asserted that the meaning "to
investigate" was present in
Josephus
and that Cadbury's interpretation did not fit the Lucan
context.55 A check of Josephus
will show that he meant "to follow,"
but with a catch. The idea was to follow an account
or events so as to
understand them. If Luke's meaning' parallels that
of Josephus, then
the gospel writer is asserting here that he gave
careful attention to
the events, something that implies investigation,
since he did not ex-
perience all the events.
Haenchen
continues his case against Cadbury by noting one can-
not be intimately associated "carefully,"
which is what Cadbury's
51 Ka]moi< is crasis
for kai< plus moi. It means "and to me" or "also to me."
52 Fitzmyer, 296.
53 So Cadbury, "'We'
and 'I' in Luke-Acts," NTS 3
(1956-57) 131, who argues the
meaning "to investigate" is unattested
in Greek, so also Luce, 82. Cadbury's argument
has roots in an earlier article, "The Knowledge
Claimed in Luke's Preface," Exp Tim
24
(1922) 401-21, where he notes the six
possibilities for the verb. So translates RSV.
54 So most take it
including Fitzmyer, Creed, Ellis, Schweizer,
Marshall, and
G.
Kittel. TDNT l.215-16, who cites Polybius 3.
32. 2; and Josephus Ag. Ap. 1. 10. 53; Life 357.
55
Josephus Ag. Ap. 1. 10. 53 and 1 23. 218; E. Haenchen,
"Das 'Wit' in der Apostel-
geschichte und das ltinerar," ZTK
58 (1961) 263-65.
194
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
linking his sense of the term to a]kribw?j (akribos)
would mean. Also
a@nwqen (anothen) is unlikely to mean
"a long time" which is what it
must mean for Cadbury's definition of the term to
stand.56 Now Luke
is not an eyewitness, so his ability "to
follow" the events carefully can
only be the result of investigation.57
Robertson also entered the dis-
cussion, noting that the choice
for "investigation" is contextually gen-
erated because of the perfect
participial form of the verb, since the
meaning is that Luke "followed along"
before he wrote.58 So Luke de-
clares first of all that his
work is the fruit of investigation.
The second description applies to
the extent of the investigation.
It
is tied to the term a@nwqen (anothen) in the phrase a@nwqen pa?sin
a]kribw?j (anothen pasin akribos), which could
be translated "from the
beginning all things [or events] carefully."
However, a@nwqen can mean
either from the beginning59 or for a
long time.60 If the latter
translation is chosen, Luke refers to the length of
his personal study.
The
solution comes from Lucan usage. The parallelism of
the expres-
sion a]p
] arxh?j; with Luke 1:1 and Acts 26:4-5 suggests the
first mean-
ing here.61 An
emphasis on the length of the study would make the
later reference to the care of the study somewhat
redundant. So Luke
makes a temporal reference back to the earliest
events.
Fitzmyer
raises the question if the beginning referred to here is
the start of Jesus' life (with the birth of John
the Baptist) or the begin-
ning of the apostolic
tradition. He opts for the latter but gives no clear
reasons.62 The first option
remains the best.63 If one notes the empha-
sis on fulfillment in the infancy material and also
the unique contri-
bution of Luke to this period
of Jesus' life, then it would seem natural
that Luke intends to say that his inquiry goes back
to the very begin-
56 Cadbury takes a]kribw?j with gra<yai (grapsai, to write) in order to
solve the
contextual problem of his view. So in his view,
Luke writes carefully. But word order
makes such a connection grammatically unlikely, as
Creed makes clear, 5.
57 See Plummer, 4, for a
defense of the term with this meaning; BAGD 619 cites
other ancient texts; also Bauer, 6th ed., col. 64.
Among them are the already noted texts
Josephus' Ag. Ap.
1.10.
53; 1. 23 218; du
Plessis, 267.
58 A T. Robertson,
"The Implications in Luke's Preface," Exp Tim, 35 (1924) 319-
21.
Robertson believes that Luke may have been an eyewitness to the events, but the
language of the earlier verse makes this unlikely
for the events in Luke's Gospel. The
we sections of Acts are another matter.
59 So hold most including
Buchsel, TDNT,
1.378. So read NKJV (from the first),
NIV, NASB, Neu Luther, Zucher, and the Einheitsubersetzung.
60 So Cadbury and
Marshall; for options, see BAGD, 77; Bauer, 6th ed., col. 153, 2a.
So
reads RSV:
61 Luce, 82-83. Even
though aa@nwqen
in Acts 26:5 means a long time, it looks back
to
the earliest point in Paul's ministry, where it is paired with a]p ] arxh?j in v 4.
62 Fitzmyer, 298.
63
Schneider, 39, Plummer, 4, Creed, 4.
Darrell L. Bock: UNDERSTANDING
LUKE'S TASK 195
nings of this life.
Therefore, though Jesus' ministry does not begin un-
til after John the Baptist,
the fulfillment starts with his coming to
earth, a coming that is paralleled to and contrasted
with that of John
the Baptist in Luke 1-2. As such, Luke may well
have viewed his new
material on the infancy to be a contribution to
the church's informa-
tion about Jesus. So his
material goes back to the start of the story.
The reference to
"everything" (pa?sin, pasin),
gives a third charac-
teristic of Luke's work. It
tells what he studied. He not only investi-
gated the accounts and went back to the beginning,
but he also looked
at everything. A question exists whether
"everything" is masculine,
referring to the study of all the sources, or is
neuter, referring to the
study "events.64 If "from the
beginning" refers to the events starting
from the infancy narrative, then it is most natural
to see a reference
to events here as well. Fitzmyer
seems inconsistent in taking the pre-
vious phrase to refer to
apostolic tradition, while referring this phrase
to events; Luke examined all the events going back
to Jesus' birth.65
Given
Luke's associations in the church, he could make such inquiries.
Given
his personal acquaintances, we should not think of Luke as a
student locked up in a library, especially since
written material was
so rare in the ancient world. Here is an inquiring
student who took in
whatever he could, oral or written.
]Akribw?j (akribos) describes a fourth
characteristic of Luke's
study. It tells how Luke did his work.66
He investigated the material
"carefully." Some commentators try to place this
description on how
Luke
wrote his material rather than as a description of his investiga-
tion. But the word order of
the sentence makes this connection less
likely. So, Luke's study is the fruit of a careful and
thorough investiga-
tion going back to Jesus'
birth.
Luke describes his undertaking with kaqech?j
soi yra<yai
(kathexes soi grapsai, "to write an orderly account for
you"). The con-
nection of kaqech?j; could be disputed. 1) Does it describe the manner
of study and go with parhkolouqhko<ti?
If so, it means "having investi-
gated in an orderly manner." 2) Or does it
describe the nature of the
account? If so, it goes with gra<yai and means, "it
seemed good to
write an orderly account for you." The parallel
structure of the pro-
logue argues for kaqech?j describing what Luke wrote for Theophilus,
or view 2.67 Luke writes an orderly account
of these events.
64 Fitzmyer,
297, opts for the latter.
65 So agrees Klostermann, 3.
66 Josephus liked this
term to describe his work, Ag. Ap. 1. 10. 53; J. W. 1.2.6. 17;
du Plessis,
268 n. 50.
67 Fitzmyer,
298, who correctly notes on the other view the parallel line starting
with soi would be very short.
Almost all translations go this way.
196 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
But to what does kaqech?j, "an orderly
account," refer? Is the order
1)
"broadly chronological,"68 2)
"a literary systematic presentation,"69
3)
"a salvation-historical linkage."70
4) "a complete presentation,"71
5)
"a continuous series,"72 6) the
presentation that follows the pro-
logue,73 or 7) a presentation without gaps?74
One can only determine this question
by what Luke has done. It
would seem that the first three views all have some
merit; but each by
itself is inadequate. Luke is broadly chronological in
its flow, but not
strictly so. There is some rearrangement of
material (e.g., Luke 4:16-30
from Mark 6:1-6; Luke 4:1-13, where the temptations'
order differs
from Matthew; and the placement of John the
Baptist's imprisonment
before Herod, Luke 3:19-20). These rearrangements and
others rule
out a strictly chronological arrangement though a
general chronology
is present in the Gospel.
There is a literary, geographical
arrangement to the material as
well. This movement goes Galilee,
and then
the broad geographical sweep of Jesus' ministry and
the church's
growth. However, the organization of
this material with this clear em-
phasis is Luke's work.
The order also is salvation
historical in that it shows the growth
of the faith under God's direction. This growth
starts from its founder
and works to one of the most representative
messengers of the faith,
Paul.
This salvation-historical focus runs from
moves from promise in the infancy material to
fulfillment in Jesus'
ministry and in the church. This two-part promise
fulfillment struc-
ture for God's plan has more
merit than the threefold division advo-
cated by Conzelmann
(promise, Jesus, church), since it is not entirely.
clear that Luke separates the Jesus period from the
church period as
68 So argue Marshall and
Plummer.
69 So argues Fitzmyer, who cites Acts 11:4 as a parallel.
70 So Schneider, both in
his commentary and in an article (see n.73 below).
71 G. Klein, Lukas 1,1-4 als theologisches
Programm," in G. Braumann,
Das Lukas-
Evangelium (Weg der Forschung
28;
1974) 194-96.
72 M. Volkel,
Exegetische Erwagungen zum Verstandnis des Begriffs kaqech?j im
lukanischen Prolog," NTS 20 (1973-74) 289-99.
73 J. Klirzinger,
Lk 1,3:... a]kribw?j kaqech?j soi gra<yai," BZ 18 (1974) 249-55.
74 F. Mussner,
Kaqech?j im
Lukasprolog" in Jesus und Paulus
(ed E. E. Ellis and E.
Grasser;
of views 4-7 can be found in G, Schneider, Lur Bedeutung von kaqech?j im lukanischen
Doppelwerk,"
ZNW 68 (1977) 128-31. It is hard to determine
the difference between
views 4 and 7, except that view 4 says the account is
full, while view 7 might suggest it
is exhaustive.
Darrell L. Bock:
UNDERSTANDING LUKE'S TASK 197
greatly as Conzelmann
implies.75 Thus, the order of Luke's account
works on many levels.76 It is broadly
chronological, geographic, and
salvation historical.
Now Schneider correctly argues that
the focus of the account is
salvation historical. Luke does not just link the
events but shows that
what has been fulfilled gives assurance about what
is still to be ful-
filled: worldwide proclamation of the gospel and
Jesus' return.77 He
appeals especially to Acts 3:17-24 and 11:4 for
this concept. Schneider
has put his finger on a significant part of Luke's
concern, but his re-
striction of assurance to future
events is too limiting when one looks
at Luke 1:4 in light of the whole of Luke-Acts.78
Luke is also inter-
ested in Christology and Gentile
mission.
The recipient of the book comes next
with kra<tiste Qeo<file
(kratiste Theophile,
"most excellent Theophilus"). The identity
and
spiritual status of Theophilus
are unknown. Some have suggested that
the name is symbolic
of "pious Christians," since the name means
beloved of God.79 However, the address to him in
the vocative kra<-
tiste, "most
excellent," seems to indicate a specific person of high so-
cial standing (Acts 23:26;
24:3; 26:25).80 This greeting could suggest
that Theophilus is the
patron or monetary backer of Luke's work (so
Ellis),
but there is no clear way to determine this point.
Caird, and Fitzmyer
mention traditions and speculation about his ex-
act identity.81 Is Theophilus
a believer or an interested unbeliever?
This
question turns on v 4 and the meaning of kathxh<qhj
(kate-
chethes, "you were
instructed" or "you were informed"). Caird
argues
that an unbeliever is present because the dedication
is too formal for
a reference to a believer and because Luke's work
is apologetic in
character.82 But these arguments are
not convincing. Luke's prologue
is formal because it purposely has taken on a
literary character. As
75 Marshall, Luke: Historian and Theologian, 77-83;
D. Bock, A Theology of
Luke-Acts,
in A Biblical Theology of the Bible,
vol. 2 (ed. R Zuck, E. Merrill, and
D.
Bock;
76 Tiede,
37, who alludes to Lucian's comparison of a historian's work to a work of
a fine sculptor.
77 G. Schneider,Zur Bedeutung,
128-31.
78 See Luke 1:4
discussion.
79 Plummer, 5, seems to
waver between a symbol and a real person.
80 This is the polite
form of address, BDF 60. 2. However, that Theophilus
is of
high rank is not guaranteed; Bovon,
39, n. 64. See Theophrastus Charatares 5, who says
that the address is usimple
flattering speech. Nonetheless, Luke's usage does strongly
suggest a person of high standing.
81
82 Caird,
44; So also argues H. W. Beyer, TDNT, 3.639. Bovon, 41, also prefers a
pro-
fane sense, to know.
198
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
such the formality need not indicate the audience
beyond suggesting
someone of high culture. Luke's goal, as stated
in the preface, is to
give knowledge or assurance (see below a]sfa<leian, asphaleian in v 4).
The
characterization of the Gospel as apologetic is not the best de-
scription of the work. The
contents of the Gospel and Acts do not rep-
resent a defense but a proclamation of Jesus, a review
of his teaching
and that of the church about which Theophilus has already heard
(v 4). So, edification and encouragement better describe
Luke's goal. If
this description is correct, then Luke is probably
addressing a new be-
liever, or at least one whose
faith needs bolstering. Since Theophilus
is a name used both by Greeks and Jews, the name
does not indicate
the nationality of Theophilus.83
However, "his social station suggests
that he is probably a Gentile, as does the amount of
energy Luke
spends in Acts defending the Gentile mission.
Nevertheless, just be-
cause the work is dedicated to Theophilus
does not mean that Luke
intended his work for just one individual. Other
ancient writers dedi-
cated their works to
individuals knowing full well that they were
writing for a larger audience (Josephus Ag. Ap.1.
Luke's
Purpose: 1:4. Luke 1:4 covers the purpose of Luke's work.
Luke
wants Theophilus to realize something about the
material.84
What
is realized is a]sfa<leian.
However, the meaning of a]sfa<leian
("truth," "trustworthiness,"
"assurance") is disputed. Is its meaning
vouching for the message's 1) correctness; 2)
reliability, or 3) is it giv-
ing certainty-assurance to
the reader? Is Luke interested in accurate
facts (view 1) or more (views 2 and 3)? The Greek
word's position at
the end of the sentence is emphatic, so it is a key
term for Luke. Lu-
can usage again answers the question. In Acts 2:36;
21:34; 22:30; and
25:26,
he consistently uses the term of assurance or of determining
the facts with certainty.85 Thus, Luke
wishes Theophilus, and those
who have questions like him, to be certain of the
teaching's truth (ie.,
either view 2 or 3).
The resulting assurance is probably
not of a political nature.
Luke
is not writing an apology to a Roman official who wonders if
Christianity
should be granted a legal status. Schweizer notes
these
volumes are too long and deal too little with
political issues to be
83 Fitzmyer, 299.
84 So one should read e]pign&?j
(epignos,
"you might know"). G. Bertram (TDNT,
1.704)
argues it means "to confirm," but this comes more from the context
than from the
term itself; Acts 22:24; 23:28.
85 Fitzmyer,
300; Creed, 5;
Lucan usage noted above. In the LXX the term normally
refers to something that is safe
or secure (2 Macc.
3:22), as it does in Acts 5:23. Its tie in Luke to a verb of knowing means
it looks to a psychological goal. It refers to
knowing the truth, but doing so securely.
Darrell L. Bock: UNDERSTANDING
LUKE'S TASK 199
written for that purpose.86 What
official, he asks, would wade through
all this information for just that point? Rather,
it seems that the assur-
ance is of a religious,
theological nature.87 Theophilus' question
would seem to be, "Is Christianity what I
believed it to be, a religion
sent from God?" Perhaps such doubt resulted
from the judgment suf-
fered by the church,
especially as a result of its inclusion of Gentiles.
Why
should a Gentile suffer frustration for joining what was origi-
nally a Jewish movement? Is
the church suffering God's judgment be-
cause she has been too generous with God's salvation?
Will the rest of
God's
promises come to pass? Questions like these seem to be Luke's
concern in Acts, where Gentile mission and
Paul's ministry receive
detailed review. Can one really be sure Jesus is
the fulfillment of
God's
promise and brings God's salvation both now and in the future?
By
the emphasis on fulfillment in Jesus (v 1), Luke intends to answer
these questions with a resounding "yes."
The gospel of Jesus is from
God
and is available for all, Jew and Gentile alike (Marshall, 43-44).
The phrase peri> w$n
kathxh<qhj lo<gwn (peri hon katechethes logon,
"concerning matters on which you were instructed") tells
us Theophi-
lus knows something about
Jesus. The meaning of this phrase is dis-
puted, but that meaning is
clarified once a]sfa<leian
is shown to mean
"certainty" or "assurance." Lo<gwn
(logon) can mean 1)
"matters" and re-
fer to the events of
salvation (Luke 7:17; Acts 8:21; 15:6). It can also
re-
fer to 2)
"instruction" (Luke 4:32; 10:39). Kathxh<qhj
(katechethes)
can
refer 1) to "a report of information" (Acts
21:24, so Cadbury, RSV) or 2)
to "receiving instruction," (Luke 1:20;
6:47; Acts 18:25; NKJV; NIV;
NASB;
Neu Luther, Einheitsiibersetzung;
and Zurcher).88
The differ-
ence in sense for the
options surrounding kathxh<qhj
is that the first
meaning could refer to a report of information
given to anyone, in-
cluding an unbeliever, while
the second sense looks more to received
teaching and would imply a believer is addressed.
Since the reference
to assurance suggests that a new believer is
addressed, a reference to
instruction is the most likely sense. More
importantly, the amount of
material in the Gospel pressing for commitment and
for remaining
faithful until Christ returns also suggests this
force. Luke's Gospel is
not pressing for decision, but for faithfulness.
Whether lo<gwn
means "events" or "teaching" is less certain, since
either meaning can fit the context. Fortunately, the
difference between
the two senses is slight. Whether they were taught
about the events or
86 Schweizer, 13.
87 G.
Schneider, Das Evangelium nach Lukas, 40.
88 For options, see also Fitzmyer, 301. This is not a reference to a formal cate-
chism, though this term can
refer to a catechism, but rather it means simple instruction
(Gal 6:6; Rom 2:18; 1 Cor
14:19).
200
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
simply given teaching, the result is virtually the
same. If teaching is in
view, then the events' significance may be included
in the remark. But
since the events are seen as "fulfillments"
(v 1) anyway, the difference
becomes almost meaningless. Luke's point is that
Theophilus recon-
sider the teaching that he
had previously received. He is to receive as-
surance about that teaching as
a result of reading Luke's account. Ellis
suggests that heretical teaching, perhaps of a gnostic-like flavor, was
circulating in the church, but it is more likely
that the assurance deals
with the pressures produced by a church suffering
rejection and per-
secution.89 Such concern about the nature and extent of God's
salvation
is the subject of the accounts in Acts. Luke's
goal is to give Theophilus
assurance concerning the events of salvation's
fulfillment tied to Jesus,
a salvation that even involves the Gentiles and
about which Luke's
reader has already received instruction.
Conclusion
The goal of Luke's prologue is to
place his work alongside other,
church materials that have recounted the eyewitness,
apostolic testi-
mony about Jesus. Luke's
contribution to this type of account is found
in a fresh presentation of this salvation history
starting from John the
Baptist's
birth and running through the extension of the church into
ful. In the orderliness of
the account and its careful, systematic pre-
sentation, Luke hoped to reassure
Theophilus and those like him
about the certainty of what the apostles taught about
Jesus. Jesus is
the fulfillment both of God's promise and
salvation, which are now
available directly to all nations.90
Many have suggested that because
Luke's prologue used a literary
convention in making claims about accuracy, it
proves nothing about
the real historical character of his work. The
argument goes, Luke
makes great claims for accuracy, as other ancients
did who in fact
were not very accurate.91 It must be
noted, however, that the goal of
what Luke wishes to accomplish, assurance, is
greatly affected by his
accuracy. Also, unlike many of the historians to
whom Luke is com-
pared, Luke writes within a period contemporary to
the events he de-
scribes. As a result, his ability to be careless
with the facts is limited.
Assurance
grounded in "propaganda" that can be readily exposed is no
89
Ellis, 66.
90 Bovon,
31, compares this emphasis on the account's trustworthiness to John
20:30-31;
21:24-25; Rev 1:1-3; 22:18-19. Note also 2 Pet 1:16-18.
91 So Cadbury, who is
very responsible for this view, and most recently, C. H.
Talbert, Reading
Luke (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 10-11.
Darrell L. Bock:
UNDERSTANDING LUKE'S TASK 201
great comfort to the doubting, For Luke to produce
false propaganda
in a period when people had experienced what had
happened would
be counter productive.
One could also question the morals
of a writer who believes in a
religion which stresses the telling of the truth,
and yet goes on in fact
to misrepresent the history he describes. Such moral constraints did
not exist for many ancient secular writers. Thus, the comparison of
Luke
to these other prefaces, though superficially compelling, does
not deal with the unique personal and religious
factors controlling
Luke's account. The
test of Luke's accuracy lies in the analysis of his
work, for he possibly did not execute his goal well.
However, a cava-
lier dismissal of the claims
of his preface is not possible either. Nei-
ther does a quick appeal to extrabiblical parallels do justice to the
statement of the author's goals. Luke's desire is
to assure Theophilus,
or anyone who reads his Gospel, of the truth of
the apostolic teaching
about Jesus. His claim is that he was careful about
his task in order to
achieve this goal. He had precedent grounded in
eyewitness testi-
mony, and Luke sought to
build carefully on that precedent. One must
examine the account to see if Luke met his own
standard with the
presumption that he tried to do so.
This material is cited with gracious
permission from:
The
www.criswell.edu
Please report any errors to Ted
Hildebrandt at: