Maurice Casey, Jesus: Evidence and Argument or Mythicist Myths? (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014), p.104.
Who Wrote the Four Gospels? Critics contend that we do not know who really wrote the gospels. In fact, it is argued that the standard titles of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John weren’t added until a century later to give these documents apostolic authority. Does the evidence support the historical authorship of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John? Yes, we conclude that Luke wrote the gospel historically ascribed to him.
Evidence for an Early Dating of the Four Gospels: Many historians and commentators date the Gospels between AD 70 and AD 100. This subject is surely up for debate. However, based on the manuscript evidence, the citation from the Church Fathers, the dating of the Book of Acts, and the early citations from Paul, we think there is good evidence for an early dating of Luke. Indeed, in our estimation, we would date Luke to the late 50s AD.
Paul mentions Luke three times in his letters. (For discussion, one might ask what we learn about Luke from these passages.)
(Col. 4:14) Luke, the beloved physician, sends you his greetings, and also Demas.
(2 Tim. 4:11) Only Luke is with me. Pick up Mark and bring him with you, for he is useful to me for service.
(Phile. 23-24) Epaphras, my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, greets you, 24 as do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, Luke, my fellow workers.
Luke was a physician (Col. 4:14). He travelled with Paul on his missionary journeys, and likely attended to his medical needs in prison (2 Tim. 4:11; Acts 27-28).
Luke was a well-educated man. The first four verses of his biography are written in excellent, fine-style Greek (see comments on Lk. 1:1-4).
Luke was a first-class historian. In the first four verses, he emphasizes how much he wants to accurately capture the history of the events. Even critical scholar Maurice Casey writes, “[Luke] was an outstanding historian by ancient standards.” The former skeptic William Ramsay writes, “Luke’s historicity is unsurpassed in respect to its trustworthiness… Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy… this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians.” Furthermore, with regard to Luke’s second volume (Acts), Roman historian A.N. Sherwin-White writes, “The confirmation of historicity is overwhelming… Any attempt to reject its basic historicity even in matters of detail must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for granted.”
Luke wrote more than the other gospel authors. Luke is the only gospel with a sequel (i.e. the book of Acts), and he composed the longest gospel. Mark contains 678 verses, John contains 869 verses; Matthew contain 1,071 verses; but Luke has the most verses at 1,151.
Luke was likely friends with Mark. In all three passages above, Mark is mentioned with him (see Col. 4:10, 14). This makes sense of Luke using Mark as one of his sources, as almost all NT scholars affirm.
Luke loved the marginalized. He himself was a Gentile, emphasizes Gentiles, and has a Greek name (Loukas). Moreover, he mentions women 43 times. As you read through Luke, notice how many times women are pictured as spiritually insightful.
Maurice Casey, Jesus: Evidence and Argument or Mythicist Myths? (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014), p.104.
William Ramsay, The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953), p.222. For a more modern treatment of this, see A.W. Mosley’s article titled, “Historical Reporting in the Ancient World.”
A.N. Sherwin White, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament: The Sarum Lectures, 1960-61 (Oxford: Oxford UP, 1963), p.189.
Warren Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1996), p.178.
James is an elder at Dwell Community Church, where he teaches classes in theology, apologetics, and weekly Bible studies.
