who wrote the gospel of st.luke?
is st.luke of the disciple , i think he was not one of them correct me if i was wrong..
the first few verses in Ch.1 shows that someone else few people whom deliver the word to st.luke and he wrote the gospel.. so how st.luke know about all of this?
Comments
who wrote the gospel of st.luke?
is st.luke of the disciple , i think he was not one of them correct me if i was wrong..
the first few verses in Ch.1 shows that someone else few people whom deliver the word to st.luke and he wrote the gospel.. so how st.luke know about all of this?
lol......It is St. Luke. St. Luke wasn't on he wasn't one of the 12 disciples but he was one of the 72 apostles.
Those who doubt the truth of the Gospels always ignore this sort of consideration. It is not 'made up', it is the testimony of a Saint filled with the Holy Spirit who recorded what he and others had seen.
In Christ,
Anglian
lol......It is St. Luke. St. Luke wasn't on he wasn't one of the 12 disciples but he was one of the 72 apostles.
yes u r correct St.Luke wasn't one of the diciples. but he was an apostle. But isn't there 70 apostles? Yah!!! Right?
no there are 72. not 70.
NO!!! IT IS 70!!!
While I realize Church tradition attributes the author of both Luke and Acts to St. Luke, it would seem from the prologue of the Gospel that Luke (or the anonymous author) himself was not a witness to the events of the Gospel. Looking at the first 4 verses we find:
[quote=Luke 1:1-4]1. Since many have undertaken to set down an orderly account of the events that have been fulfilled among us,
2. just as they were handed on to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word,
3. I too decided, after investigating everything carefully from the very first, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,
4. so that you may know the truth concerning the things about which you have been instructed.
(bolding mine)
This seems to indicate that the author of the Gospel, was himself, not an apostle. Any thoughts?
John,
I realize you have attempted at an explanation, but verse 2 in particular seems to indicate that the author was not, himself, an eyewitness, but merely gathered the information from those who were eyewitnesses. But then, maybe I'm just resuming my role as devil's advocate as per usual. :D
[quote author=His Servant link=topic=5978.msg80152#msg80152 date=1197251265]
no there are 72. not 70.
NO!!! IT IS 70!!!
If you look at orthodox wiki... it says seventy were chosen by our Lord. But there is a total of 72. It is in the doxologies as well. "Pray to the lord on our behalf o my masters and fathers the apostles, and the 72 disciples that He may forgive us our sins."
I don't think there is a problem here. We know Luke was not one of the 12 original Apostles, so naturally, as one of the 70 (or 72) he takes on board what the 'originals' told him. We know he was a long-time companion of St. Paul, and that through him he had an acquaintanceship with the other Apostles. According to Eusebius St. Paul was in the habit of quoting from Luke's Gospel, calling it 'my Gospel'.
In Christ,
Anglian
[quote author=Biscutt link=topic=5978.msg80153#msg80153 date=1197254249]
[quote author=His Servant link=topic=5978.msg80152#msg80152 date=1197251265]
no there are 72. not 70.
NO!!! IT IS 70!!!
If you look at orthodox wiki... it says seventy were chosen by our Lord. But there is a total of 72. It is in the doxologies as well. "Pray to the lord on our behalf o my masters and fathers the apostles, and the 72 disciples that He may forgive us our sins."
oh ok!! thnx for explaining!!
and there are 72 cause both paul and athansius were taught (or at least thats what we believe) directly by christ himself, thereby making them apostles....