The questions related to the how and why of the Synoptic Gospels have been debated for millennia. The how helps us understand the relationship between the Gospels. Does Luke depend upon Mark? What about material unique to Luke, known as L? What about Q? Is Luke an independent work? Does the Lukan Prologue (1:1-4) help us understand those relationships?
Then there is the why. Why did Luke think it necessary to write what we now call a Gospel? The question is important as “why” is the essence of hermeneutics. I have stressed to students for over two decades that the goal of biblical interpretation is authorial intent. Understanding Luke’s overall purpose helps the interpreter get to authorial intent in any given passage within the Gospel. Does the Lukan Prologue help us understand his purpose and thus interpret the Gospel’s various passages?
Luke’s Prologue is widely held as among the best Greek literature of the first century.[1] By introducing his work, he is employing a well-known literary convention.[2] There is debate whether the prologue introduces both Luke and Acts. It likely serves as an introduction of the Gospel only as Acts has its own brief prologue that continues the story (1:1-2).[3] Also, the idea of traditions handed down (v. 2) probably refers more to the Gospel tradition than the Acts narrative.
In Greek, the prologue is one sentence. While that is a bit unwieldly, the structure is simple. First, there is a dependent clause (vv. 1-2) informing Theophilus of Luke’s predecessors and the prior transmission of Jesus traditions. An independent clause follows in which Luke presents his method (v. 3), followed by a purpose statement (v. 4).
While the prologue’s structure is clear, almost every word found in the four verses is debated. What follows is a verse-by-verse treatment, using my own translation of the Greek text. A summary of what one learns from the Prologue is then provided.
Verse 1
Since many have tried to write a narrative (produce an account) of the things which have been fulfilled among us.
“Since many have tried to write a narrative (produce an account)” – The first issue is the word ‘many.’ One would love to know how many had attempted to produce a narrative about Jesus. How many ‘lives of Christ’ were there? Here is where scholars often attempt to insert their favorite solution to the Synoptic Problem.[4] The fact is Luke is clear there were others. He is unclear, however, on the number.
A second important word in verse 1 is translated ‘tried.’ Scholars debate what Luke thought of those other ‘lives.’ Luke uses the word in Acts 9:29 and 19:13 in the sense of unsuccessful attempts. The context here, however, leans toward simply reporting a fact that Theophilus would know – there were other ‘lives of Christ’ out there. A censure seems out of place here. Besides, Luke portrays witnesses as positive in Acts (1:8, 22; 2:32; 3:15; 5:32; 10:39, 41; 13:31; 22:15; 22:20; 26:16).
“Write (produce) a narrative” – Are the other accounts written or oral? My translation leans toward written narratives.[5] While written accounts seem most likely, one still cannot rule out completely oral traditions.
“Of the things which have been fulfilled among us” – What are ‘the things?’ OT prophecies? Luke may not have specific OT prophecies in mind here but stating that Jesus’ life fulfilled the OT and its promise of a Messiah.
“Have been fulfilled” – Grammar matters. The perfect tense is used here to show that not only did these events happen in the recent past, but they have an effect in the present (‘they have been and still are fulfilled’). One can look no further than Luke’s second volume to see how the events fulfilled affected the early church.
“Among us” – Many scholars limit ‘us’ to first generation believers. Bock broadens it to second and third generation Christians: “Past and present believers, united by these events, share in their significance. The historical ground that produced this impact is the topic of Luke’s two volumes.”[6] Luke did not witness these events, but the consequences of the events were still very much in effect as Luke writes (and today as well!).
In verse 1, Luke writes that many have compiled a written narrative about Jesus’ life. There is no way to know how many. Did they include the other Synoptics? Maybe, but that cannot be ascertained from Luke’s statement. Thus, one wonders if the Prologue can help us at all with Synoptic relationships.
Verse 2
Just as the those who were from the beginning eyewitnesses and servants of the word handed down to us
“Handed down” – translates a verb that is a technical term for the passing down of tradition.
“To us” – this pronoun is obviously a group that was not an eyewitness to the events of Jesus’ life. The pronoun would seem to include Luke.
“Eyewitnesses and servants of the word” – Grammatically, Luke is telling us about one group. There is just one definite article used in the phrase, coupling the two nouns. This is a reference to the apostolic witness. They, the Apostles, were eyewitnesses and servants (proclaimers) of the Word.[7]
“From the beginning” – To what does the phrase refer? In Acts 1:21-22, we read about the Apostles replacing Judas. What was the requirement for that office? Peter is clear that the replacement must have been with them, “all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us – beginning with the baptism of John until the Day He was taken up from us.” So, the phrase means from the beginning of Jesus’ earthly ministry, starting with the forerunner. For Luke that would include the birth of the forerunner as the first chapter makes clear.
In v. 2, Luke identifies those who have handed down the Jesus tradition. He calls them eyewitnesses and servants of the word. The Twelve stand as the primary stewards of that tradition.
V. 3
It seemed good to me also having carefully investigated from the beginning everything from the beginning to write for you an orderly account, excellent Theophilus
The main clause begins at verse 3. Luke tells Theophilus about the method he used in writing the Gospel.
Luke joins others who have written ‘lives of Jesus.’ First Luke says he investigated the other accounts and eyewitness testimony. BDAG defines the verb used by Luke as ‘follow a thing,’ ‘trace or investigate a thing.’ Robertson agrees, noting the perfect active participle means to follow a thing in mind, to trace carefully.[8] Luke is claiming fullness of knowledge before he began to write. Robertson states, “Whether he was a personal contemporary with any or all of these events we do not know and it is not particularly pertinent. He had mentally followed along by the side of these events.”[9]
“From the beginning” – Does this word mean ‘from the beginning’ or ‘a long time.’ Luke uses it in both ways in Acts 26:5. There it means ‘a long time.’ It is difficult here to determine Luke’s use here. If he means ‘a long time,’ he is discussing how long it took to research or is discussing its scope? Translations are mixed on the interpretation. The NASB, for example, translates the word as ‘from the beginning,’ while the ESV states Luke had followed all things, ‘for some time past.’ While it is difficult to decide, I lean toward Luke’s concern as scope rather than length of time. He appears to be more concerned about the content of his Gospel than how long it took him to research it.
“Carefully” – Luke investigated his sources carefully and thoroughly.[10]
“To write for you an orderly account” – As with most of the Prologue, this phrase is debated. The adverb is used five times in the NT, all by Luke. It means “in order, one after another, of sequence in time, space, or logic” (BDAG). The idea is Luke is writing in an orderly sequence.
The question is, what kind of orderly sequence? Luke begins with the Infancy Narrative and ends with the Passion Narrative. That suggests chronological. However, in the Central Section (9:51 to 19:27), it is obvious that he is more thematic.[11] Luke is telling Theophilus that his ‘life of Jesus’ is an orderly account. It is organized and tells the story of His life and ministry.
In v. 3, Luke writes that he investigated Jesus’ life carefully from start to finish and produced an organized account, telling the story of Jesus.
V. 4
In order that you may know the truth about the things (words) which were you taught.
Verse 4 is Luke’s purpose statement.
“Truth” – The word in Greek appears at the end of the sentence. The emphatic position points to its importance. Does the word speak of correctness, reliability, or assurance? Why not blend ideas. Luke is writing correct, reliable history that is meant to provide Theophilus assurance about the Jesus tradition he had been taught. He can be sure of the apostolic witness.
In v. 4, Luke states that his purpose is to bring Theophilus assurance that what he had heard and learned about Jesus’ life and ministry from the traditions handed down were true. From the Prologue, it is clear that Luke is interested in accuracy. After all, what good are the traditions Theophilus has been taught if they are untrue? How does Luke accomplish his purpose if he bears false witness? Plus, anything untrue in his life of Jesus could be easily pointed out by those still alive who witnessed the events.[12]
Does Luke help us understand Gospel relationships? Not really. He writes that there were other ‘lives of Christ’ out there, but he does not reveal how many, and although I have argued above the accounts were probably written, there could have still been some oral tradition circulating of which Luke was aware. We all would like to know if Luke used the other Gospels, if there was something like Q,[13] and what other specific sources he used for his unique material. Luke was not concerned enough about sources to identify them.
Luke was concerned about truth. By writing his own life of Christ, based upon careful research, Luke was taking the mantle as a steward of those traditions. He was concerned about relating them accurately and in an orderly fashion to both edify and encourage Theophilus and the readers who would come after him. Modern interpreters should keep Luke’s overall purpose in mind as they work through the Gospel. His ‘life of Christ’ is meant to strengthen and encourage the believer. The traditions handed down are true! Jesus is the fulfillment of God’s promise and of His salvation – a salvation that was then and is now available to all who call upon Him (Romans 10:13).
[1] Robert Stein, Luke, NAC (Nashville: B&H, 1992), 62.
[2] Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral-proquest.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/lib/gcu/detail.action?docID=4860168.
[3] Most scholars see Luke’s work as one, not two books. For a discussion of how the prologues of Luke and Acts relate to each other, see Gary Habermas, Resurrection: Evidences (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2024).
[4] See Stein’s article, “Luke 1:1-4 and Traditionsgeschichte,” JETS 26, no. 4 (1983): 422 as an example.
[5] BDAG suggests a written account.
[6] Darrell Bock, Luke 1:1-9:50, BECNT (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), 57.
[7] Luke’s designation could include the 70 and perhaps even Paul. Luke reports that The Twelve were chosen from among His disciples (Luke 6:12-13). When Paul met Jesus on the Damascus Road, the Lord tells him he would be both a minister and a witness (Acts 26:16). Regardless, I think Stein is correct when he writes that for Luke, the Twelve stand at the forefront of this group (“Traditionsgeschichte,” 425). He would have them in mind primarily in v. 2.
[8] A.T. Robertson, “The Gospel According to Luke,” in Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville: Sunday School Board, 1930), 6.
[9] Robertson, “Luke,” 6. See above where the writer concludes Luke was not an eyewitness to Jesus’ life.
[10] According to Robertson, the word means going into minute detail (“Luke,” 6).
[11] Also called Luke’s Travel Narrative, the section shows Jesus heading toward Jerusalem and the cross. Morris writes that is inarguable that Luke has Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem in mind in this section as it is mentioned several times (9:51, 53; 13:22, 33; 17:11; 18:31; 19:11, 28). A problem, however, arises when one tries to trace its course (Leon Morris, Luke, rev. ed, TNTC [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988], 194). He quotes Kümmel who sees the section as “The Lord, who goes to suffer according to God’s will, equips his disciples for the mission of preaching after his death” (195).
[12] The writer holds that Luke was written in the 60s while Paul was under house arrest in Rome (Acts 28). The point is that there were many eyewitnesses still alive when Luke wrote his Gospel who could point out any inaccuracies.
[13] Material found in Matthew and Luke but not in Mark.
StevePattonOnline 