Luke's Opening Statement

Doubt has been cast over the reliability of Luke’s Gospel account.  At one time, it was argued that no census ever took place during the time of Quirinius, as governor of Syria, but recent archaeology has disproven that. It was also generally accepted, among critical scholars, that Pontius Pilate never existed. This has also been disproven. The new argument now is, just because Luke has all his events and places correct, it does not mean that he was writing a historical account. They likened it to a Tom Clancy novel. The author, Tom Clancy, writes novels based on real places, dates, and sometimes events, but this does not make his novels historical truth. Perhaps Luke’s own words might provide for us an understanding of the task he was undertaking and especially his purpose for writing.

“Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us,   just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught” (Luke 1:1-4).

A lot of things could be understood from this opening statement. But for us to begin acknowledging the reliability of Luke’s account, our attention draws us to the phrase “many have undertaken to draw up account of the things that have been fulfilled among us…” It is interesting and vital to know that other accounts, besides the four gospel accounts, were written and circulated at the time. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were not the only people who put to writing the works and ministry of Jesus. The author Luke testifies to this. This means that the life and ministry of Jesus was a generally accepted fact, and the early Christians were doing their job in spreading his good news.

The verb phrase “have undertaken” comes from the Greek word έπίχειρησαν (epikeiresan) and most of the time its usage suggests literary compositions (Plummer). So, more than likely, there were written accounts already in existence and circulation at the time of Luke’s writing. What Luke is saying is that 1) he is not the only one writing an account of Jesus but that, 2) there were others as well.

Secondly, these other accounts have undertaken “to draw up” this story of Jesus.  That phrase is another very vital language in assuming the reliability of Luke’s testimony. It comes from the word αναταξασται (anataxasthai) which means to compile or to arrange in a row, so as to show the sequence of events (Arndt). In other words, these other accounts were recording, in chronological order, the events of the life of Jesus.

Third, these accounts were from “eyewitnesses who were there from the beginning.” These eyewitnesses are Luke’s guarantee for a true report. It reflects the conviction of the Christian faith that it is not rooted in speculation but in historical reality (Ellis). And it is comforting to know that these eyewitnesses were there from the very beginning, that is, they were there from the very birth of Jesus, as a little baby.  Otherwise, Luke wouldn’t start his account at Jesus’ birth.

And fourth to the fact that these accounts were “delivered” to Luke (παρέδοσαν, paredosan). This corresponds to the Jewish idea of a student receiving, as a successor, the teaching of his rabbi, or that of a scribe transferring his work to the one continuing it (Wyatt). There is an element of reverence, trust, honor, and reliability implied.

The point to all of these was for Theophilus, the recipient of Luke’s writing, to have “certainty of the things he was taught.” It is interesting what the Greek word for certainty is: ασφαλεια (asphaleia), the very word where the English word asphalt comes from (Rienecker). That couldn’t have paint a clearer picture of what Luke is trying to convey. He is writing something true, concrete, and very much reliable.

This is beside the fact that Luke himself “carefully investigated” all of these accounts and eyewitnesses himself: παρηκολουθεκοτι (parekolouthekoti), to follow along, to trace, or investigate (Meyer). This implies that Luke was not just writing everything he heard or read, but he was making sure to follow up the truth of those accounts before relaying it to Theophilus. The adjective ακριβως (akribos) points to the painstaking character of researches (Arndt).

This opening statement of Luke’s Gospel account makes clear his purpose for writing and of his method. His purpose was to give an account to Theophilus the origin and development of the Christian faith, and to strengthen what Theophilus had already know. His method was a thorough and careful investigation of earlier accounts and eyewitnesses. Such an emphasis have led many scholars to conclude that the Lukan writings (including Acts) does have a historical form to it. And because Conzelmann and Lindemann, in reference to Acts, calls it a “historical monography” it is safe to assume the first volume to Acts, which is Luke, deserves such a title too (Wyatt).