and possibly after his "Antiquities" (a.d. 94), though in his Geschichte Jesu (I. 71) he assigns
the composition of Luke to a.d. 90.
Scholten: Das Paulinische Evangelium, transl. from the Dutch by Redepenning. Elberf., 1881.
The Ancient Testimonies on the Genuineness of Luke, see in Charteris (Kirchhofer): Canonicity,
Edinb., 1880, pp. l54–166.
On the relation of Luke to Marcion, see especially Volkmar: Das Evangelium Marcions, Leipz.,
1852, and Sanday: The Gospels in the Second Century, London, 1876 (and his article in the
"Fortnightly Review" for June, 1875).
Exegetical.
Commentaries by Origen (in Jerome’s Latin translation, with a few Greek fragments), Eusebius
(fragments), Cyril of Alexandria (Syriac Version with translation, ed. by Dean Smith, Oxf.,
1858 and 1859), Euthymius Zigabenus, Theophylact.—Modern Com.: Bornemann (Scholia in
Luc. Ev., 1830), De Wette (Mark and Luke, 3d ed., 1846), Meyer (Mark and Luke, 6th ed.,
revised by B. Weiss, 1878), James Thomson (Edinb., 1851, 3 vols.), J. J. Van Oosterzee (in
Lange, 3d ed., 1867, Engl. ed. by Schaff and Starbuck, N. Y., 1866), Fr. Godet (one of the very
best, 2d French ed., 1870, Engl. transl. by Shalders and Cusin, Edinb., 1875, 2 vols., reprinted
in N. Y., 1881), Bishop W. B. Jones (in Speaker’s Com., Lond. and N. Y., 1878), E. H. Plumptre
(in Bp. Ellicott’s Com. for English Readers, Lond., 1879), Frederich W. Farrar (Cambridge,
1880), Matthew B. Riddle (1882).
Life of Luke.
As Mark is inseparably associated with Peter, so is Luke with Paul. There was, in both cases,
a foreordained correspondence and congeniality between the apostle and the historian or co-laborer.
We find such holy and useful friendships in the great formative epochs of the church, notably so
in the time of the Reformation, between Luther and Melanchthon, Zwingli and Oecolampadius,
Calvin and Beza, Cranmer, Latimer and Ridley; and at a later period between the two Wesleys and
Whitefield. Mark, the Hebrew Roman "interpreter" of the Galilaean fisherman, gave us the shortest,
freshest, but least elegant and literary of the Gospels; Luke, the educated Greek, "the beloved
physician," and faithful companion of Saul of Tarsus, composed the longest and most literary
Gospel, and connected it with the great events in secular history under the reigns of Augustus and
his successors. If the former was called the Gospel of Peter by the ancients, the latter, in a less
direct sense, may be called the Gospel of Paul, for its agreement in spirit with the teaching of the
Apostle of the Gentiles. In their accounts of the institution of the Lord’s Supper there is even a
verbal agreement which points to the same source of information. No doubt there was frequent
conference between the two, but no allusion is made to each other’s writings, which tends to prove
that they were composed independently during the same period, or not far apart.^987
Luke nowhere mentions his name in the two books which are by the unanimous consent of
antiquity ascribed to him, and bear all the marks of the same authorship; but he is modestly concealed(^987) Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome erroneously supposed that Paul meant the written Gospel of Luke when he speaks of "my
gospel," Rom. 2:16; 16:25; 2 Tim. 2:8. The word gospel is not used in the New Test. in the sense of a written record, except in
the titles which are of post-apostolic date; and the preface of Luke is inconsistent with the idea that he composed his work under
the direction of any one man.
A.D. 1-100.