Exploring the Authorship of the Gospel of Luke

WELCOME
PRAYER
WORD TO MUSIC
SILENCE

After silence play NEW CAMPUS SPOT!

The Speech of Stephen

Acts 7.1-3

March 27th 2016
Milk

Alright, to the speech of Stephan – sort of – because first I need to address three subjects related to this important New Testament speech.

First, how did Luke know what Stephan said – he certainly wasn’t there? How did he recite such a long oration? There are a few responses to this first point and you have to decide for yourselves how you want to believe that Luke gained access to the narrative. First, he could have been inspired completely by the Holy Spirit and recited the words of Stephan verbatim and without fail – that what we are about to read is a product of the Holy Spirit without the intervention of Man. While this is possible (for with God all things are possible) it is NOT the way the New Testament was put together as those who wrote either witnessed or relied on witnesses of an account and in conjunction with the Holy Spirit provided our content.

Secondly, because there were so many who were of the faith who must have witnessed this it is believed that they recorded what was said and Luke had access to their single or various accounts, made an assessment of the narratives and compiled this version – again, by inspiration.

Finally, Luke was the companion of Paul.

Relationship with Paul

Let me speak to this for a minute. In Acts 16:11-17 and 21 Luke describes himself as being a companion of Paul. Because of this many suppose that Lukes Gospel is really Paul’s Gospel, or the way Paul recited it to him. Early church “person” Irenaeus says:

"Luke, the companion of Paul, put down in a book the gospel preached by him."

He also said,

"Luke was not only a companion, but also a fellow-labourer of the apostles, especially of Paul."

Early Church person Origen, speaking of the Gospels, says,

"The third is that according to Luke, the gospel commended by Paul, published for the sake of the Gentile converts."

So the Gospel of Luke was regarded by the early church men as truly the gospel which Paul preached to the Gentiles. Now, Luke does not profess to have been an eye-witness of what he recorded or reported. It’s clear that he was not one of the seventy disciples, nor one of the two who went to Emmaus, as has been sometimes supposed. It’s also clear that he was not an apostle but the “Early Church Persons” uniformly called him the companion of the apostles and especially of Paul.

Luke's Authority

Because he was NOT an apostle the question arises by what authority his Gospel (and the Acts) have a place in the sacred canon or what evidence is there that he was divinely inspired? Of course there are responses we provide to this query – which include the fact that the Gospel of Luke and Acts were all received by all the churches on the same footing as the first three Gospels and we find no dissenting voice regarding their authenticity and authority. This response does NOT answer why Luke, a non-apostle (neither what was called an amanuensis (or scribe) but the actual author of two New Testament books, was accepted as a writer of New Testament canon. It supports that his writings were accepted but does NOT explain why he was able to write accepted narratives as a non-apostle.

(beat)

Another response it Luke works were published during the lives of the apostles Peter, Paul, and John, and were received during their lives as books of sacred authority. If the writings of Luke were not inspired, and had no authority, those apostles could easily have destroyed their credit, and we have reason to think it would have been done. A good support for them being acceptable but again NOT a good explanation of why Luke and his writings were accepted in the first place.

Again, scholars say that Luke’s writings “bear the same marks of inspiration” as the other books of scripture . . .simple, pure, yet sublime, that there is nothing unworthy within it. They justifications and supports for the existence of Luke’s writings go on and on but in the end all we can say is that Luke and his writings bore the stamp of approval of an apostle and in all probability that apostle was Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles.

Why does this matter? The original apostles were given a promise by Jesus of inspiration. Remember? To THEM He said in John 14:26

“But the Comforter, which is

The Role of Paul and Luke in Early Christianity

"The Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” Remember, these men were called to the House of Israel and to call them to repentance. What they said stood and what they wrote was acceptable. But with the introduction of Paul, a non-first hand personal witness of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, we have a “new order” presented, so to speak.

Special inspired witnesses were called to speak and reach, and teach, and write of Jesus with equal power but to another people group – Gentiles. It was in the hands of Paul that he, by virtue of the Holy Spirit, allowed, elected, chose, gave his stamp of approval to Luke.

I mention all of this because we typically appeal to the writings of Luke themselves to justify their existence. I am of the opinion that we have to justify Luke as a writer in a better way, or else we could take ANY writings that read well and add them to canon as well. But the best way to justify Luke and his Gospel (which was to the Gentiles) and Acts (which describes how the Gospel went from the House of Israel to the Gentiles) is to see him as an accepted historian who Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, gave total endorsement.

Luke’s Inspired Role in The New Testament

Was Luke inspired? All I can say is, “of course.” But he is actually and uniquely a writer of New Testament scripture who is three levels removed from the original source, Jesus.

So we have Jesus – the Word. We have His twelve first-hand witnesses. We have Paul, also trained by Jesus but in the Spirit. And then we have Luke now, inspired but not a witness at all. For me, this is VERY symbolic of what God was doing in and through His reaching the World by and through the Spirit.

MATERIAL Law and Witness in Stone and Flesh

MATERIAL SPIRIT

The Messiah – the Word made flesh.

His First-hand witness Apostles.

SPIRIT MATERIAL

Paul (trained and taught by Jesus)

Luke (inspired historian endorsed by Paul).

SPIRIT Us (living epistles).

So, as to reiterate, Luke’s writings had to have received the approval of an apostle – in this case, it was Paul himself who, as the apostle to Gentiles, deemed his work worthy of acceptance.

Errors in the Speech

Because of its early reception by the other apostles and churches, and because there is no evidence the writings were challenged by anyone of the apostolic church or the early church persons, Luke and his writings are seen as equal with the other evangelists and authors of scripture.

Secondly, and this is really important to observe and discuss: There are errors in this speech. It’s not a matter of scribal/language/translation problems. Manuscript evidence supports the errors either Stephen made in his speech OR that Luke made in citing Stephen’s speech.

Now, I cannot even begin to articulate all the attempts that have been made to explain these errors away or to justify them or to use them as evidence the Bible cannot be trusted. If you are interested in reading a very reasonable article that admits the problems and addresses them sensibly, go online and type in: Rex Koivisto Grace Theological Seminary Grace Theological Journal Stephan’s Speech: A Theology of Errors.

But let me hit on the errors first and then present some thoughts on how to first admit them and then understand their presence in the Word. There are three main problems.

In Acts 7:2-3 Stephan says (in the King James):

Acts 7:2 And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Harran, 3 And said unto him, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew thee.

The Problem?

According to Genesis 12:1-3 God spoke to Abraham in Haran and not in Mesopotamia. Abraham left his father’s household in Harran and not Mesopotamia.

In verse 4 Stephan says:

Acts 7:4 And after his father died, God removed him from there into this land in which you are now living;

The Problem?

According to Genesis 11:26 and 12:4 Abraham’s Father Terah was 145 years old when Abraham moved to Canaan and then he died when he was 205! (Genesis 11:32) THEREFORE, according to Genesis Terah was still alive when Abraham lived in Canaan.

Finally, jump down to verse 14 and we read Stephan say:

“And

Accuracy and the Spirit

Joseph sent and called to him Jacob his father and all his kindred, seventy-five souls;

The Problem?

Genesis 46:26-27 says that sixty six males came with Jacob plus Jacob and Joseph and Joseph’s two sons which totals seventy souls not seventy-five.

Admittedly, there are some very reasonable ways to explain this one away (like the fact that the Genesis account didn’t count slaves as souls or something like that) but nevertheless, problems one and two are pretty hard to explain away.

Do how do we deal with them and what can we say?

First of all, Luke is reciting a speech given by Stephan and providing the details to us. If He did this by the Holy Spirit I cannot see there being errors in his report, and since Paul is likely to have agreed with what Luke wrote (since He was there he would know what Stephan said) I have to believe that what Luke reports here IS what Stephen said – errors and all.

The question in scripture is NOT does the scripture teach correct doctrine in every place but does it represent the correct story. This is a perfect case in point – the story is properly reported even though Stephen’s role in the story is faulty. This observation and that fact that Stephan’s address had errors gives me personally MORE faith and trust in the Word as reliable.

But there is perhaps a more important lesson to learn here. Stephan was full of the Holy Spirit. His countenance was set with certainty that He was in-fact a messenger sent to preach. Did he have all of his facts straight. He did NOT. Was he full of the Holy Spirit? He was! How can this be possible?

Message and Spirit

LISTEN – This story and its errors from Stephan perfectly illustrate a number of VERY important points that cannot be forgotten in our approach and understanding of the Word of God: First, we can see that the book reports reality. How many times have you been in a discussion of Biblical matters and have gotten your facts mixed up but have, in the general gist of your presentation been dead on?

We see Peter do this as an apostle folks – he misquotes Old Testament scripture and though he cites passages as if they are verbatim his recitations are not supported by either the Hebrew or the Septuagint translations. Why? Because God, since His Son and Pentecost, operates by and through the Spirit and not on the details of what it written in ink. Details of pen and ink are all part of the Law and the Letter of the Law, which Paul plainly explains, “kills.”

Kills what? The Spirit, love, communication. When we allow ourselves to become scribes, to become lawyers of the written word, focusing and harping on every single jot and iota, catching and critiquing each other by what is strickly written in ink, we have slipped back into a mode of operation that kills.

This is why Paul wrote:

2nd Corinthians 3:6 “Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.”

Have you ever met a brother or sister who use the Word to kill. To correct your every word, to challenge your every thought? This is the Spirit of death not life. And right here in this example of Stephan we can see that even in his faulty presentation, where he misappropriated actual facts and words and chronologies he was dead on with the zeitgeist of his message, meaning the Spirit of the message.

This all hearkens back to our discussion a few weeks ago about being dead to the Law. Why? Laws are for the most part written. The laws of the Spirit though are written on our hearts and produce a fruit called love. This love allows for human error, for mistakes and misquotes but loves the heart that is a heart for God.

Paul said in Romans 7:6:

“But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.”

Lessons from Study

This presents us today with somewhat of a paradox. We read and study and learn the facts of the Word. Obviously it’s important to faith and growing spiritual maturity. But our studies MUST, MUST, MUST be seen as information relative to our Christian travels and NOT new laws written that all must strictly recite.

The Role of the Spirit Over the Letter

and obey! THAT is anathematic to the life of the Spirit.

I’m sorry for any division what I am about to say may cause but if or when a believer allows themselves to cite chapter and verse, and they allow their working knowledge of the Word to trump their patience, kindness, love and longsuffering, they are appealing to the Word in the wrong way – and are using it as a knife (to rip people apart) when the fight is by and with and through the Spirit (which GIVETH life through love)!

We are living in an age where believers are more and more taking the words of pen and ink as justification to malign and control and even hurt other believers. The Old Testament was certainly used for the purpose but the New cannot be appealed to in the same way or we will find ourselves missing its purpose and point. The Bible – our knowledge of it, our ability to recite it – cannot save anyone. Its contents can certainly direct us through the Spirit but if it becomes the New letter or the New law the spirit is quenched and spiritual progress lost.

A Glorious Living Map

We are so blessed by God for Him to have included these errors by Stephan the Diakonos in his speech in the New Testament because the point is we reach and teach and preach NOT by the letter but by the Spirit. So . . . instead of using the Bible as a knife to stab, and kill, and threaten we might see it as a glorious living map chocked full of lessons and insights that we learn as believers by the Spirit, and (listen) be MORE like Stephan, standing boldly and open to preach even though we may NOT have all the facts straight or perfectly aligned. Yes, the scribes and religious lawyers of our day will mock and challenge you and your failures, but not God – He will use your every heart-felt word to touch lives.

Speaking the Truth

Final and third point which we might as well approach now – and that is the lesson we might all take from what we see here through Stephan. The lesson I want to point out is that His stepping out, here and in a very literal sense, cost the man his life here on earth. Have you ever noticed this paradigm in scripture? That it’s the very things we choose to say (confess, admit, say, teach, preach) openly and to the world that determine our lot here and our relationship among its inhabitants.

Go all the way back to Noah. The Writer of Hebrews calls the Man “a preacher of righteousness.” When did he preach. While he was preparing the ark. And apparently it was much to the behest and mockery of those around him. How about Moses?

Examples from Scripture

In Exodus 3:9-12 we read God saying to him while He was in the desert:

9 Now therefore, behold, the cry of the children of Israel is come unto me: and I have also seen the oppression wherewith the Egyptians oppress them.
10 Come now therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh, that thou mayest bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Egypt.
11 And Moses said unto God, Who am I, that I should go unto Pharaoh, and that I should bring forth the children of Israel out of Egypt?
12 And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain.

That was the beginning of Moses and his tenuous difficult frustrating relationship with the Children of Israel and God commanding Moses to speak to them, and in so doing, having to face their rejection.

We have Peter, knowing the importance and power of words refusing to admit that he knew the Lord. We have Daniel in the Lions Den, John the Baptist for speaking to Herod about taking his brother's wife, Jonah and his troubles with doing what God told Him to do but aside from Christ Himself and His suffering for what He said (and not nearly as much for what He did) perhaps the greatest example of speaking and suffering loss comes from the Prophet Jeremiah. He suffered so much for his words to the COI that he is called the weeping or sorrowful prophet. Yet God called him to speak – and speak he did, sorrowful lamentations over the destiny of the

Jeremiah's Calling and the Spirit of Witness

At the onset of his ministry, we read in the first chapter of Jeremiah verse 4:

4 Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, 5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. 6 Then said I, Ah, Lord GOD! behold, I cannot speak: for I am a child. 7 But the LORD said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak. 8 Be not afraid of their faces: for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the LORD. 9 Then the LORD put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth. 10 See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant.

The Courage of Witness

What Stephan was doing here was in the same spirit as Jeremiah before him – and Noah, and Moses, and Jesus and Peter and Paul and the rest of the apostles – speaking truth and suffering loss. To us it might mean loss of religious affiliation, or friends, or job or even members of family. Perhaps Jesus said it best in Matthew 10:32-39.

32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. 33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. 34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. 35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. 37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. 39 He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

The Story of Stephen

And so we are about to embark upon the story of the first non-apostle in the New Testament who by losing his life actually finds it.

(Verse 1) So after being falsely accused in chapter 6 we read:

Acts 7:1 Then said the high priest, Are these things so? 2 And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran, 3 And said unto him, “Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew thee.”

Alright, some quick passages: Acts 7:1 Then said the high priest, Are these things so? Obviously (to set the stage) the high priest was presiding over this trial or counsel. And he addresses Stephan asking: “Are these things so?” (meaning the charges against him of blasphemy against Moses and the temple and God.

(Verse 2) 2 And he (Stephen) said, “Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran, Notice how Stephen, full of the Spirit began – it was polite! “Men, brethren and Fathers.” He was respectful so as to engage them. Toward the end of the speech it seems or appears that Stephan gets a little impassioned and we’ll get to that then, but right now he is courteous – something I am learning to do through examples like this.

Now we’ve already addressed some of the problems with this line (in comparison to the Old Testament) but there is a little more to consider. First of all, where Stephen says: “The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham,” there is no evidence of this in the story of Abraham and God. All we read there is that “God said to Abraham.”

Now, Exodus 6:3 does have God say to Moses: “And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.”

Understanding Biblical Appearances

The accounts involving Abraham directly saying that God appeared to Abraham we do have God saying to Moses that this was so . . . and so we can believe it was so. This is an important reality to point out because it shows us how vital it is to take the Whole Word of God into account when trying to assess the meaning and supports for single passages.

So, a critic COULD read Acts 7 verse 2 and say:

“This is false. Nowhere in Abrahams story does it say God appeared to him.”

And our response is either going to be, “really? Then the Bible isn’t reliable,” OR we could point out that in other parts of the Bible even God Himself says He appeared to not ONLY Abraham, and Isaac and Jacob. Additionally, to a Hebrew and their way of thinking, and according to the Hebrew language, to say that God appeared unto Moses could mean an ASSORTMENT of things as the Hebrew word translated appeared means “to see, “ (literally or figuratively) but it also means to “advise, appear, approve, behold, consider, discern, enjoy, experience, gaze, take heed, look on, one on another, one upon another, out, up, mark, meet, be near, perceive, present, provide, regard, respect, spy, stare, think, view, and vision.”

Principles for Reading and Understanding Scripture

And so in this second verse containing Stephan’s words we are met with several interesting principles when it comes to reading and teaching and understanding scripture.

1st The contents – even the individual terms – must be viewed contextually, in light of all of scripture, based on the original meaning and environment surrounding those who wrote. I cannot overly emphasize the fact that zealously taking the Bible and forcing our views and interpretations upon its contents is an error and will lead to unsound doctrinal views and practices. I want to emphasize and illustrate what I am saying by showing you a promotional clip from

(show clip from alan HERE)

2nd, we must examine what other translations have to say about specific passages in question. ESV or KJ only will NOT always present the best or clearest interpretation.

3rd, and finally, I strongly implore a revised attitude that we as believers take toward the Bible. That we certainly appeal to it and its contents to establish boundaries in faith, but that we stop viewing it as a manual of absolute directions and more as a living map available to every believer by the Spirit, that will serve to lead us to where God wants us to God. I like the idea of a map because we readily discover that when it comes to certain destinations there is only one way (like salvation) but in others there may be a number of different roads, highway and paths available – and it is up to the individual reader to decide which route to take.

The Call to Abraham

Whenever and however God appeared to Abraham, He (verse 3) said unto him, “Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew thee.” Verse three is a perfect example of how the Word of God can be read as a map to each individual believer today AND as a historical narrative of fact.

Just twelve chapters into the book of Genesis we read the following:

Genesis 12:1 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, “Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: 2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: 3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” 4 So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. 5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came.

Historically this is a most significant passage as it describes to us the beginnings of the Nation of Israel and God dealing with Abraham the Father of Faith in Judaism, Islam and Christianity. A very significant place for Stephan to start his speech. But for us today,

Spiritual Guidance

Sitting here in Salt Lake City, the passages serve as a wonder map through the Spirit where God, in some way or another that only you can discern and know, is directly speaking in your ear the words:

“Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:”

I can’t tell you what country you are in God wants you to leave, I can’t tell you who the kindred are He is speaking about, nor can I interpret for you what land He is going to show you –

It might be you're in some sin He wants you to abandon. Or some negative relationship, or job, or whatever. But He speaks in and through His living word to all who are seeking Him, by the Spirit.

Seeking God's Word

It is this portal we are seeking to open when we gather and hear the Word – to hear what God has for each of us individually.

Conclusion

Let’s stop here and we’ll continue next week.

Q and A
PLAY
NEW BOOK