Rethinking Luke's Prologue, Part 11
Some argue that Luke was a second- or third-generation believer who recieved traditions about Jesus that had been "handed down" to him from others. But what does Luke really claim in his preface?
According to Australian NT scholar Michael Bird, “Luke acknowledges that he is a second- or third-generation believer in Jesus and is himself dependent on others in his narration.”1 Joseph Fitzmyer similarly argues that “Luke writes as a third-generation Christian, carefully marking his distance from the ‘events,’ and the eyewitnesses and ministers of the word…on whom he depends.”2 However, Joel Green challenges this interpretation of Luke’s prologue:
Some have seen in these verses evidence that Luke is a “third generation” Christian after the eyewitnesses and original compilers and narrators of the Jesus-story. Luke only reports that his time in writing comes after some accounts have already been attempted, however, not that he does not belong to that generation of Christian writers—or, for that matter, that he himself had not observed some of the events he narrated. Indeed, as the narrator of Acts, he explicitly claims to have participated in the events he recounts in selected passages. The prologue does, however, communicate Luke’s claim to being one of “us” — that is, a member of the larger community of persons whose lives were being shaped by the events he goes on to narrate.3
I completely endorse the above critique offered by Green. In my view, much of the problem stems from a misinterpretation of the first two verses in which Luke states that by his time, many had already compiled narratives about Jesus which the “eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered (παραδίδωμι) to us.” In some cases, the word delivered is interpreted to mean “handed down” over a great span of time, and often this gets intertwined with pre-existing beliefs about the late date of the Gospels.
Here’s how the logic works. If Matthew and Mark are to be included among the “many” narratives written by Luke’s day, since they are commonly dated by various scholars to sometime after 80 AD, it goes without saying that Luke must have been composed even later (i.e., some 50 years or more after the events originally took place). This is why it is often claimed that Luke was a second- or third-generation believer who was exclusively dependent upon the narratives of Jesus’ original followers.
The First Problem
Theories and assumptions about the late date of Matthew and Mark should not be read into the meaning of Luke’s prologue. That is not exegesis, but eisegesis. In fact, upon closer inspection, it seems that Luke makes clear in the very first verse that the events he is about to recount had been completely fulfilled “among us” (ἐν ἡμῖν).4 In other words, Luke is presenting himself, not as a second- or third-generation believer far removed from the events that took place around 30 AD, but as a member of the community who witnessed the fulfillment of at least some of these things.
The Second Problem
On its own, the Greek word παραδίδωμι does not indicate that the eyewitnesses “handed down” the Jesus tradition over a long period of time.5 For example, in Luke 9:44, Jesus warned his disciples about the fact that he was “about to be delivered into the hands of men,” which, if memory serves, did not take place over a generation. As it happens, Luke uses the word παραδίδωμι this way in many places throughout his two volumes (cf. Lk 12:58, 18:32, 20:20, 21:12, 22:4, 23:25, 24:7, 20, Acts 3:13, 8:3, 12:4, 21:11, 22:4, 27:1, 28:17), and also employs a similar word when telling the story of Jesus’ visit to the synagogue in Nazareth (Lk 4:20). When he finished reading Isaiah, Jesus “rolled up the scroll and handed it back (ἀποδίδωμι) to the attendant” (ὑπηρέτῃ).6
The Third Problem
Though Luke makes clear that he belonged to the community that received the official narratives about Jesus from the eyewitnesses and guardians (ὑπηρέται) of the word, he also goes on in verse 3 to state that he too had been “a follower from the beginning.” As I’ve demonstrated throughout this series,7 many competent scholars over the centuries have argued that Luke’s language (particularly his use of the word παρηκολουθηκότι) makes clear that he had not “investigated” or “inquired about” Jesus, but had actually been physically present during the time of his ministry. In fact, he claims to have been a follower from the very start (ἄνωθεν).
Here it’s worth recalling that Luke’s preface is presented in a unique parallel structure. That which the eyewitnesses and guardians had delivered to communities of early Jesus followers, Luke was preparing to deliver to Theophilus. Why was he qualified to do this? Because like them, he too had been there “from the beginning.” Commenting on these parallels, Joel Green writes that:
With respect to structure and style, Luke 1:1-4 is periodic, with one complete sentence made up of five clauses organized into a balanced unity.
many have undertaken — I too decided
to set down an orderly account — to write an orderly account
the events that have been fulfilled among us — everything
from the beginning — from the very first
just as they were handed down to us — so that you may know.Accordingly, one recognizes between vv 1-2 and vv 3-4 a balance of phrases that guide the interpretation of Luke’s prologue.8
I discussed many of these parallels in Part 8 and provided the following chart:
The way I see it, Luke was claiming to have precisely the same qualifications as “the eyewitnesses and guardians of the word” mentioned in verse 2.
In Part 1 of this series, Thomas Randolph wisely observed that “None of the Evangelists were eyewitnesses of everything which they relate.” If Luke became a follower of Jesus during his first year of ministry, why should we be surprised to find him relating some of the same stories about Jesus that were recorded by others? The fact that he was a follower from the beginning should not be interpreted to mean that he never left Jesus’ side or that he had seen and heard everything. But being a member of the early Christian community certainly would have given him access to Jesus’ closest disciples, who collectively witnessed all the key moments of his three-year ministry.
This is why it’s important to affirm both sides of the parallel. Because he was not one of the twelve, Luke was in some sense dependent on other “eyewitnesses and guardians” (1:2). But since he too had been there “from the beginning” (1:3), and was part of the community that saw the fulfillment of Israel’s messianic promises (πεπληροφορημένων ἐν ἡμῖν; 1:1), he was also able to include his own unique material when he decided to relate the story of Jesus to the most excellent Theophilus.
For earlier parts of this series, use the following links: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, and Part 10. To get a pre-release PDF of Shane’s book, Luke’s Key Witness, click here.
FOR FURTHER STUDY
Things Completely Fulfilled Among Us, Shane Rosenthal
His Excellency, The High Priest, Shane Rosenthal
The Implications of 70 AD on the Date of the Gospels & Acts, Shane Rosenthal
A Pre-70 Date for the Gospels & Acts, Shane Rosenthal
Outside the Gospels, What Can We Really Know About Jesus?, Shane Rosenthal
Is Luke a Trustworthy Historian?, Sir William Ramsay
Can We Trust Luke’s History of the Early Jesus Movement? Shane Rosenthal
On Faith & History, Shane Rosenthal
AUDIO
Who is Theophilus? Humble Skeptic #79 with Peter. Bolt
Luke, Theophilus & Joanna, Humble Skeptic #80 with Jim Sibley
A Forensic Approach to the Gospels, Humble Skeptic #81 with J. Warner Wallace
Why The Gospel Holds Up as History, Faith Lab with Craig Keener
Did Josephus Ever Mention Jesus? #77 with T.C. Schmidt
Jesus in Josephus & Other Ancient Texts, #78 with T.C. Schmidt
Lazarus, Humble Skeptic #84 with Richard Bauckham & T.C. Schmidt
VIDEO
Rethinking Luke’s Prologue: A Webinar by Shane Rosenthal for Paid Subscribers
Michael Bird, A Bird’s-Eye View of Luke and Acts (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2023), 55.
Joseph A Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to Luke, I-IX (New York: Doubleday & Company, 1981), 289.
Joel B. Green, New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel of Luke, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 36.
I discuss the implications of this in my article, “Things Completely Fulfilled Among Us.” Also, compare with the language of John 1:14, “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us (ἐν ἡμῖν), and we have seen his glory.”
For example, Darrell Bock argues that “The reference to ‘us’ in 1:2 alludes to the tradition’s transmission to a later generation of the church, to those of Luke’s time (cf. p. 59 of the book referenced in footnote 5).
The root of both words is δίδωμι, which means “to give.” According to the Cambridge Greek Lexicon (2021), the primary definition of παραδίδωμι is to “hand over (what is in one’s charge or possession) to another.” Though ἀποδίδωμι can be used in this sense, it typically refers to giving something back. In Luke 4:20, Jesus gave the scroll back to the synagogue attendant (ὑπηρέτης), and in Luke 1:2, the eyewitnesses and guardians(ὑπηρέται) gave the authorized narratives to the community of believers, which includes Luke himself.
Joel B. Green, p. 36. Darrell Bock also acknowledges the parallelism in his discussion of the meaning of ἄνωθεν from Lk 1:3. In his view, the word “can mean either ‘from the beginning’ or ‘for a long time.’ If the latter translation is chosen, Luke refers to the length of study. The solution comes from Lucan usage. The parallelism of this expression with ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς in Lk 1:2…suggests the first meaning here.” (p. 61). I discuss the parallel structure of the prologue in more detail here.