Understanding the Sources Used and Structure of Luke’s Gospel

1484 Words3 Pages

Understanding the Sources Used and Structure of Luke’s Gospel

The Gospel according to Luke is the first part of a two-volume work

that continues the biblical history of God's dealings with humanity

found in the Old Testament, showing how God's promises to Israel have

been fulfilled in Jesus and how the salvation promised to Israel and

accomplished by Jesus has been extended to the Gentiles. In the

prologue Luke states that his purpose of the two volumes is to provide

Theophilus and others like him with certainty and assurance about

earlier instruction they have received.

Among the sources which were used by Luke were at least two written

documents, one of them the gospel of Mark in substantially its present

form, and the other a collection in Greek of sayings of Jesus,

incorporating some narrative details; known as ‘Q’; from the German

Quelle meaning source. The use by Luke of these sources can be

demonstrated because, in the case of Mark, the source itself is

available, and a comparison of the texts of the three gospels leaves

no reasonable doubt as to its employment in the two Gospels as Matthew

and Luke independently copied Mark for its narrative framework.

In the case of ‘Q’; a quarter of Luke is very similar to one third of

Matthew therefore it is suggested that there was a common source used

between them, although the original document has not survived, the

occasional verbal agreement in ‘non-Marcan’ passages of Matthew and

Luke is such as to show that a document existed, although its extent

can only partially be established and the possibility always remains

that more than one document was used. The date of Q’s composition
...

... middle of paper ...

... inaccurate to the extent that he makes up stories

to fit his theological purpose. However Luke’s interest in history is

so only that he can enhance, clarify or strengthen his theology

It was believed that something had to be chronological in order to be

historical; however Hellenistic recognises that just because something

isn’t chronological doesn’t mean it isn’t historical. The Rabbis went

even further and said that scripture doesn’t need to be chronological

in order to be historical.

In conclusion Luke is a theological historian. History and theology

are linked. But at times Luke teaches theology at expense of

chronology and this means symbolic alteration therefore, times dates

and places are changed but as the events aren’t changed this is

acceptable and the Gospel isn’t any less historical or any more wrong.

More about Understanding the Sources Used and Structure of Luke’s Gospel

Open Document