Author of Acts

[JohnD]

The Holy Spirit.

2 Peter 1:20–21 (NASB95)
20But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation,
21for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

All scripture came this way. All scripture is to be interpreted this way.

 

[JohnD]

The books of Luke and Acts appear to be the trial documents of the Apostle Paul prepared by Doctor Luke (the "pen" in the hand of God and Paul's physician and companion on at least one missionary journey). Paul made an appeal to Cesar. One does not appear before Cesar without trial documents. It stands to reason that the documents were prepared and sent to either the legal representative or to someone in the court system named Theophilus.

Their preservation and wide spread dispersion suggest Theophilus was already a believer or became one. Tradition dates the writings around 60 - 66 CE.

 

[JLB]

The books of Luke and Acts appear to be the trial documents of the Apostle Paul prepared by Doctor Luke (the "pen" in the hand of God and Paul's physician and companion on at least one missionary journey). Paul made an appeal to Cesar. One does not appear before Cesar without trial documents. It stands to reason that the documents were prepared and sent to either the legal representative or to someone in the court system named Theophilus.

That's great info.

Thanks John.


JLB

 

[JohnD]

The Bible was written by 40 inspired authors (2 Peter 1:20-21 if I was not clear enough in post #1) on three continents over thousands of years... yet one story.... Jesus Christ.

Luke 24:44 (NASB95)
44Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.”

Luke 24:7 (NASB95)
7saying that the Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.”

John 5:39–40 (NASB95)
39“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;
40and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.

Acts 4:12 (NASB95)
12“And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.”

1 Corinthians 15:3–4 (NASB95)
3For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

BTW, the Old Testament was all the scripture that existed at the time.

2 Timothy 3:16–17 (NASB95)
16All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
17so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

2 Timothy 2:15 (NASB95)
15Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 (NASB95)
21But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good;

1 John 4:1 (NASB95)
1Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
Acts 17:11 (NASB95)
11Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.

 

[JohnD]

That's great info.
Thanks John.
JLB

My pleasure!

 

[th1b.taylor]

My pleasure!

Now if folks would just study, wouldn't that be awesome? But our LORD knew they were lazy.

 

[Stan1953]

The books of Luke and Acts appear to be the trial documents of the Apostle Paul prepared by Doctor Luke (the "pen" in the hand of God and Paul's physician and companion on at least one missionary journey). Paul made an appeal to Cesar. One does not appear before Cesar without trial documents. It stands to reason that the documents were prepared and sent to either the legal representative or to someone in the court system named Theophilus.
Their preservation and wide spread dispersion suggest Theophilus was already a believer or became one. Tradition dates the writings around 60 - 66 CE.

From my study of this issue, Luke was born in Antioch, so some say Theophilus of Antioch is this person, but as he only existed in the second century AD, that would be impossible for Luke to be addressing. Most think he was a benefactor of Luke during Luke's education. A Roman of some influence or stature.
Regardless, Luke is most definitely the writer of Luke and Acts, and from the following book I believe also the writer of Hebrews.
http://www.covenantoflove.net/book-reviews/lukan-authorship-of-hebrews-in-review/

As we are on this issue, I also believe that the author of the Gospel of John was not John but Jesus' cousin Lazarus.
Here is one link on that issue;
http://www.lazaruscomeforth.com/gospel-of-john-or-not/

 

[By Grace]

The books of Luke and Acts appear to be the trial documents of the Apostle Paul prepared by Doctor Luke (the "pen" in the hand of God and Paul's physician and companion on at least one missionary journey).

Sorry, but there is absolutely no New Testament Scripture that supports that sort of statement you made above. Please read the text:

LUKE !:1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
4 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed
​

For sure Luke was a physician, and for sure Luke accompanied Paul on his missionary journeys; if otherwise then Luke could not have used the word translated "eyewitness" because then, he would be lying

. Paul made an appeal to Cesar. One does not appear before Cesar without trial documents. It stands to reason that the documents were prepared and sent to either the legal representative or to someone in the court system named Theophilus..

Yours is an argument from silence. The only thing that silence proves about an issue is silence on that issue. The issue of "legal papers" is irrelevant because prisoners are never entrusted with their own legal papers, it is a common sense thing. Because Paul was accompanied by several Roman soldiers, and in the army, there are NCOs and officers to lead others, any legal papers would be entrusted to the leader of the group.

Their preservation and wide spread dispersion suggest Theophilus was already a believer or became one. Tradition dates the writings around 60 - 66 CE

Look again at verse 4 of Luke 1 for the answer to the state of the salvation of Theophilus. I won't quibble about the date because its date is not important to me.

 

[JohnD]

(Post removed; ToS 2.4, rude comments, and A&T Guidelines "Subsequent opposing responses should include references to supportive scripture relevant to the thread and offer explanation for the contrary understanding." Obadiah)

 

[By Grace]

(Post removed. Response to a deleted post. Obadiah)

 

[JohnD]

The Apostle Paul was contagious in his faith and won people over to Christ who were Gentile guards chained to him in prison. The possibility that Theophilus was a believer somehow in your opinion means:

1. he was not Paul's trial lawyer / lower court judge
2. despite the the biblical evidence that Paul did make an appeal to Caesar as a Roman citizen
3. despite the historic evidence that trial documents (of great detail) were required before such an appeal was heard...
... therefore there is absolutely no biblical evidence whatsoever that Luke and Acts (written to Theophilus) could be Paul's trial documents prepared by Doctor Luke...

I am not arguing from silence. You are.

Who was Theophilus?

Theophilus had not one but TWO accounts of this detail written to him in apparently rapid procession. Unless you have evidence to place the authorship of Luke and Acts at a great deal of time apart.

Do you? Even a year? Maybe 6 months?

And if he was not Paul's advocate / even a lower court judge, who was Theophilus to have received TWO detailed accounts like Luke and Acts and we have heard nothing else about him in Church tradition or history?

No, friend, you accuse me of doing what you are doing.

Sorry, but there is absolutely no New Testament Scripture that supports that sort of statement you made above. Please read the text:

LUKE !:1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
4 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed
​

For sure Luke was a physician, and for sure Luke accompanied Paul on his missionary journeys; if otherwise then Luke could not have used the word translated "eyewitness" because then, he would be lying


Yours is an argument from silence. The only thing that silence proves about an issue is silence on that issue. The issue of "legal papers" is irrelevant because prisoners are never entrusted with their own legal papers, it is a common sense thing. Because Paul was accompanied by several Roman soldiers, and in the army, there are NCOs and officers to lead others, any legal papers would be entrusted to the leader of the group.


Look again at verse 4 of Luke 1 for the answer to the state of the salvation of Theophilus. I won't quibble about the date because its date is not important to me.

 

[WIP]

Okay, this is getting too personal. Address the topic and not each other. Opinions come and go like the wind. Provide supporting evidence for the statements you make and please be nice. If we claim to be Christian let's act like it.

 

[By Grace]

(Edited, continuing with personal argument despite administrations request to stop. Obadiah)

Theophilus had not one but TWO accounts of this detail written to him in apparently rapid procession. Unless you have evidence to place the authorship of Luke and Acts at a great deal of time apart.

Do you? Even a year? Maybe 6 months?

The importance of the dating the two works of Luke is relevant because....?

And if he was not Paul's advocate / even a lower court judge, who was Theophilus to have received TWO detailed accounts like Luke and Acts and we have heard nothing else about him in Church tradition or history?

Why is the profession of Theophilus important to you? Because there is nothing in the Bible that says anything more about Theophilus , I am wondering why you are making so much of something on which Scripture is silent?

 

[JohnD]

(Post removed. Failure to follow administrations request to refrain from personal comments and failure to follow A&T guideline "Subsequent responses either opposing or adding additional information should include references to specific supportive scripture relevant to the thread and offer explanation of the member's understanding of how that scripture applies." Obadiah)