The purpose of this essay is to discover the historical basis that lies behind Luke's account of the resurrection of Jesus. The focus is on solving the historical question through an attempt to set down the historical evidence Luke supplies.
This article's main point is that if the Gospels of Matthew and Luke did use Mark, they also knew early non-Marcan traditions of the life and teaching of Jesus well. Matthew 24:10-12 functions as a case in point.
Luke presents the ascension as the climax of his gospel. He also presents it as the most striking element in the introduction to Acts. By using these ascension accounts to form the link between the Gospel of Luke and Acts, Luke seem to indicate its significance for a proper understanding of his theology and purpose.
This article is the second part of a two-part article. This article argues for the authenticity of the Areopagus speech in Acts 17 as Pauline rather than a reconstruction of Luke. It responds critically to the views of Dibelius.
What is the identity of Theophilus, for whom Luke composed his Gospel and Acts? This article makes a suggestion in this regard.
How does Luke represent Christian leadership in the early church? Giles finds it inappropriate to regard the ecclesiology of Luke as "early catholic." He emphasizes that those would lead in the Christian community are not rulers but servants.
Often Jesus called his disciples and followers to leave everything. What is the content of this call? There are also passages in Luke and Acts that seem to require voluntary poverty. Other passages require a right attitude to the continuing possession of wealth. What was Jesus' teaching on possessions?
This article considers the emphasis in the writings of Luke on the role of the Holy Spirit in the ministry of the Lord Jesus.
This article wants to consider the basic understanding of the Holy Spirit and its unity underlying the testimony of Luke and the apostle Paul.
The central section of the Gospel of Luke poses a problem as far as its purpose is concerned. The thesis of this article is that Luke 9:51-Luke 19:44 presents in sharp relief two conflicting ideological points of view—the view of Jesus and the view opposed to his. Luke 14:14-33 is selected as a test case to prove the thesis.
Is there a deliberate and discernable structure in the Gospel of Luke? Kistemaker traces the composition of the account.
Does the Gospel of Luke have a clear interpretation of the soteriological meaning of the death of Jesus? This paper reflects on the way Luke makes use of Isaiah 53:12.
This article attempts to demonstrate that the agreements between the Gospels of Matthew and Luke against Mark are widespread. This is discussed as a contribution to the synoptic problem.
