The grace of God

realised in his righteous reign

(his setting all things right)

in justification

(in judging right / setting right a people before him),

out of FAITH

(based on Christ's faithfulness + our faith response),

establishes the RIGHTEOUSNESS of God's children

(covenant compliance),

facilitating God's promised covenant BLESSINGS

(the full appropriation of his promised new life through the Spirit),

and its fruit, the WORKS of the law

(the application of brotherly love).

cf. Rom.1:16-17

Jesus' teaching on salvation, as exegeted by Paul, may be represented as follows:

FAITH = RIGHTEOUSNESS = BLESSINGS = WORKS.

Paul explains Jesus' teaching on salvation as follows: faith (Christ's faithfulness + our faith response) brings with it a state of holiness before God (righteousness, right-standing, covenant compliance ....) and thus the full appropriation of the promised blessings of the covenant evidenced in the fruit of good living (works of the law).

Jesus' teachings, particularly as they relate to ethics, reflect the context of Second Temple Judaism and its pietism. Although it was generally accepted that Israel stood under the grace of God, it was held that the full appropriation of the blessings of the covenant necessitated a faithful attention to the works of the law. Religious Judaism, particularly evident in the Pharisees, was infected with this heresy, the heresy of nomism (as opposed to legalism, ie., salvation by works of the law). The Law of Moses does indeed serve as a guide to the life of faith, but primarily it reinforces the human state of sin and thus the necessity of faith, a faith like Abraham's, a faith that realises God's gracious promises.

Many of the early Jewish Christians were infected with this heresy, seeing themselves as saved by grace, but bound by law for the full appropriation of new life in Christ. The heresy of nomism can be represented as follows:

FAITH = RIGHTEOUSNESS + WORKS = BLESSINGS.

This heresy is different to the one Luther faced. He confronted the heresy of legalism, a heresy about getting saved, rather than staying saved:

FAITH + WORKS = RIGHTEOUSNESS = BLESSINGS.

As the exegete of Jesus, Paul makes it clear that salvation is by grace through faith apart from works of the law. The law but serves two ends:

Jesus' constant use of the law to expose sin, usually in the context of a discussion with self-righteous Pharisees, and sometimes disciples, can lead to a downplaying of the Law, a heresy confronted head-on by James (hedonism, libertinism):

FAITH = RIGHTEOUSNESS = BLESSINGS - (minus) WORKS .

James serves as the exegete of Jesus at this point by reinforcing the fact that the fruit of faith is good works, such that where there is no good works there is likely to be no faith - whoever has been forgiven much loves much, Lk.7:47.

FAITH = RIGHTEOUSNESS = BLESSINGS = WORKS.

For Jesus, and his exegete Paul, the issue is how a person (a descendant of Abraham and the Gentiles within his gate!) may appropriate in full the promised blessings of the covenant. It is not by law suppressing sin to promote holiness (nomism / sanctification by obedience / pietism), but by faith in the faithfulness of Christ. It is all of grace.

This then is the substance of Jesus' teaching / gospel as devolved by his exegete, the apostle Paul. These notes proceed on the basis that Luke (so also Matthew and Mark) understands that the gospel tradition must be read through the eyes of the apostle Paul. Matthew and Mark, but particularly Luke, aid this task by the arrangement of their received tradition, eg., linking Jesus blesses little children with The rich young ruler. Mark and Luke add The third Passion prediction, and Luke, in particular, adds The Healing of the Blind Man at Jericho; a brilliant grace, law and faith (Jesus faith + our faith) package, cf., 18:15-43.

Luke uses classical Greek expression, constantly altering the Hebraisms of Mark and his other sources, working to improve the style of his gospel. In general terms his "literary abilities were of a superior order" (Metzger).

Luke certainly comes at his subject in a scientific way. He roots the key events of his story in history, evidencing the events as history. Clearly he has researched his work, but it is difficult to see it as "an orderly account" (Lk.1:1-4), in the sense of a chronological listing of facts. The gospel writers don't just list the facts of Jesus life, they are into recording the keryguma, the proclaimed message of the early church, ie., the gospel. The gospel writers are into theology. None-the-less, Luke comes at his subject as researched history with the knowledge that his material is rooted in fact.

i] The gospel of salvation. Luke considers his Gentile readers when he exegetes the gospel in terms of salvation as an experience for the present age. A coming kingdom is not easily understood by Gentiles. For Luke, Jesus is in the business of proclaiming an important message from God ("preach the gospel"), it is a message of "salvation". "The Son of man is come to seek and save that which was lost", 19:10. It is not just a salvation from the "wrath to come", but a life-giving salvation in the present, a coming close to the life-giver himself.

ii] Salvation for all. Luke makes a point of defining "the lost", not as "righteous" Israel, but outcast Israel, the brokenhearted, the sinner...., and not just broken Israel, but also outcast Gentiles.

iii] Justification. Given that Luke partnered Paul in his Gentile missionary work, it is understandable that Luke would focus on Paul's "my gospel", ie., a gospel that focuses on a justification that rests on the atoning work of Christ and consequently produces in the justified believer the fullness of new life in Christ. Paul serves as the exegete of Jesus' gospel, and therefore Paul's gospel perspective influences Luke's selection and arrangement of the kereguma. Unlike the other gospel writers, Luke does not focus on the cross of Jesus, but rather on the resurrection life of Christ. He lives, therefore we may live also, and this as a gift of grace appropriated by faith. As already noted, Luke is also careful in exposing the central function of Law. Luke makes sure that no believer could ever think that their Christian life is progressed on the basis of faithful obedience. Luke stresses the cross-bearing discipleship of Jesus, not to push us into self-sacrifice, but rather to show us that only Christ's self-sacrifice can obtain God's favour.

iv] Church. Luke shows a keen eye for his missionary church in that he emphasises the task of gospel proclamation in the power of the Spirit of God, and this supported by prayer.

It is generally accepted that Mark was first to compose his gospel and that Luke and Matthew independently used it to compose their own gospels, along with another source document known as "Q" (now lost). Added to these two sources there is their own source material. Certainly, it seems that large slabs of Mark are quoted in Luke's gospel, yet Luke does not quote Mark word for word and this seems to fly in the face of his claim to record the Jesus story accurately. He seems to happily alter Mark's record when it suits his purpose.

It is very likely that an Aramaic oral record of the gospel took shape during the first few decades of the Christian church in Jerusalem. The telling and retelling of the stories by the apostles not only set a common story line, but as time went by, bundles of stories and sayings most likely became part of this oral tradition. Mark, or a proto-Mark, was likely the first attempt to document the oral tradition in a Greek text, although there are still some scholars who suggest that Matthew was first. As Luke set about researching available sources for his account of the development of the Christian faith from Jerusalem to Rome, he may well have had access to a copy of Mark's gospel, possibly even Matthew and other written accounts. Yet, given the existence of oral tradition and his access to some of the key players in Jesus' life, Luke probably relied on his own research of the extant tradition, rather than using Mark as his prime source, even though he may have known of it (Luke does indicate that he is aware of others who have written accounts "of the events that have been fulfilled among us", 1:1). Given the flexibility of oral tradition (localised variations, its "life situation", ie., preaching), the differences between Luke's record and that of Mark and Matthew, are quite understandable.

As for the assumed source document Q used by Luke and Matthew, it is likely that it is nothing more than extant oral tradition not used by Mark, but used in varying degrees by Luke and Matthew. This again explains the differences evident in Q passages found in both Luke and Matthew. The texts of the synoptic gospels align when quoting core tradition, but when they come to tradition around the edges (sources Q, L, M) they become increasingly divergent. This indicates a prime oral source for the gospel tradition of all three synoptic gospels.

If Mark is not used as a prime source by Matthew and Luke, then it is not possible to argue that Matthew and Luke are flexible in their treatment of gospel tradition. So, an assumed change of the Markan text by Luke does not necessarily convey theological intent, or any intent. It is likely that the synoptists treat the received tradition as divine revelation and are loath to alter it to suit their own theological whims. It is by the arrangement of the material that the synoptists reveal their theological intent. Other than that, they use their understanding of Greek to best convey the intended meaning of the received tradition, condense it if necessary, add notes on the setting, along with an occasional editorial comment.

A widely held theory, first proposed in the 1940's by the German scholar Sahlin, was that Luke prepared Luke-Acts as a backgrounding document for the legal proceedings against Paul and the charge that he was a political offender. This would date Luke-Acts during the period of Paul's two years imprisonment in Rome while he awaited trial, Acts 24. Such a narrow intent is possible, but is contested. Luke 1:1-4 makes the point that the author is intent on making a case for Christianity, not just Paul. Such is necessary, given the spread of Christianity within the Empire and the increasing possibility of conflict. The case has to be made that Christianity is a legitimate religious movement in the tradition of Judaism and is without political intent.

Yet, although the circumstances facing the Christian church at this time prompted the need for an apologetic work to allay the fears of Roman society, the spread of Christianity, the diverse nature of its source tradition, and the increasing age of the founding apostles, also prompted the need for an accurate documenting of the faith to clarify the basis of belief. To make this case, Luke uses the eye of a historian, and the theological perspective of the apostle Paul.

The literary evidence strongly supports the argument that the gospel of Luke is authored before, or at least in association with, the book of Acts. The main argument against this is the author's knowledge of the destruction of Jerusalem, an event which took place in AD 70, Lk.21:20. Of course, the argument assumes that Jesus is unable to predict the inevitable destruction of Jerusalem by an invading army, in like manner to its destruction by the Babylonians. Israel had rejected their messiah and as a consequence, its destruction was inevitable. Luke is simply recording a received prophetic tradition originating from Jesus.

As we well know, the book of acts abruptly concludes with Paul under house arrest in Rome around AD 60. Luke does not record the martyrdom of James the brother of Jesus in AD 62, nor Nero's persecution of Christians in AD 64. So, it seems likely that Luke, the "beloved physician" and friend of Paul the apostle, penned his gospel during Paul's imprisonment in Rome, and conjunction with his authoring of the book of Acts. This would date the gospel to the early 60's, and well before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

Level of complexity:

1, non-technical, to 5, requiring a workable knowledge of Greek.

Deceased: D. For publications no longer in print

Other identifiers: Recommended R; Greek Technical G; Theology / Themes / Background / Interpretation T