1.1 +It is generally accepted that Luke was
written before Acts and Acts must have
been written by 63AD as it ends abruptly
with Paul's imprisonment.
1.2 + Acts doesn't record the martyrdom of Paul
in 64AD and Emperor Nero's persecution of
Christians which suggests the two volumes
were written before 64AD.
1.3 + Luke doesn't record the martyrdom
of James, brother of Jesus in 62AD
1.4 + Luke's Gospel fails to mention the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in 70AD. The silence of Acts
regarding this is significant in the light of Luke's emphasis on Jerusalem and of the fact that
among the Gospels, Luke records the most specific prophecy of this event
1.5 + Acts focus on issues regarding Gentiles
admittance into the Church and fellowship
with Jewish Christians - Ecclesiology
1.6 + No mention of Nero's persecution in 64AD, yet mentions
Roman indifference and ignorance to Christianity
1.7 - 'It is speculative to state what the
author would or should have
included in his record' - Barclay.
1.8 - Luke may have known about Paul's martyrdom
in 64AD, but didn't refer to it because it wasn't
his purpose to write a biography on Paul
1.9 - Many scholars believe it was
reasonable for Luke to end his Gospel
and Acts where he did, as this fits with
the pattern of his whole work.
1.10 - Lack of reference to the fall of Jerusalem
may be due to the fact that this event was of
more interest to the Jews than the Gentiles.
1.11 - 'By 70AD Christianity had moved
beyond its Palestinian origin to largely
Gentile areas.' - Barclay
1.12 - One of the main sources for Luke's Gospel is Mark. This was written in 65-75AD and needed time to
have circulated. Streeter proposed that Luke wrote a draft of his Gospel known as 'Proto-Luke'
before Mark was written, and then later inserted sections of Mark into it to write his gospel.
1.13 - This theory is rejected on the grounds that when Markan material is
removed, we are left with a shapeless mass of material.
2 An intermediate date
2.1 + Luke's knowledge of the Fall of Jerusalem in
70AD as a past event is apparent in
comparison with Matthew and Mark.
2.2 + In Luke, there is a more specific reference to a military siege
against the city, such as occurred in 70AD.
2.3 + Barclay draws attention to the fact that later in the same passage, only Luke reports
Jesus Christ as saying that the city will be trampled on by the Gentiles and omits
reference to the 'winter,; which may reflect his awareness that the siege of the city
was during April-Sept.
2.4 + Luke was dependent on Mark's Gospel which is dated
between 65-75AD. The circulation of Mark's Gospel and
Luke's use of it would suggest a date in the 80's.
2.5 + In his prologue, Luke acknowledges his dependence on others who wrote
accounts of Christ before him. This suggests he used the disciples and Mark's
2.6 + Paul is portrayed in Acts as an heroic figure in the early church.
Such a portrayal of a controversial figure would have taken time
2.7 + Luke's theology shows signs of lateness and development, particularly in
relation to eschatology and ecclesiology. Therefore, the emphasis on the
immenint return of Jesus Christ had already been replaced by a 'Salvation
2.8 - Although Luke seems to have had knowledge of the fall
of Jerusalem, there is no direct reference to it in Acts.
2.9 - Dodd and Stuhlmeller argue that Luke's knowledge
of Jerusalem's destruction was composed entirely
from the language of the Old Testament.
2.10 It is merely speculative as to how much time needed to elapse for Luke to
have made use of Mark's Gospel and for Paul's influence to have grown
3 A late date
3.1 +It is suggested that John used Luke's Gospel and John's Gospel is dated 90-100AD, so
Luke had to have written his Gospel before this date. Some scholars believe that Luke
made use of a book, 'The Antiquities of the Jews,' written by Josephus in 94AD.
3.2 + In Luke 3:1-2, he refers to Lysanias who was put to death in 34BC and mentions Theudas and the
sons of Judas of Galilee who led uprisings; this suggests dependency of Josephus
3.3 Streeter suggests that Luke had heard Josephus
lecture in Rome before the publication of his book
and remembered the names from the lecture.
3.4 + The Gospel of Marcion was a text used by the mid-second century Christian teacher
Marcion to the exclusion of other gospels. Some scholars suggest that he used
Proto-Luke which was a draft of Luke's Gospel.
3.5 + Charles B. Waite was one of the first to propose that Marcion's
Gospel may have preceded Luke's Gospel. Knox also defends this
hypothesis. Some recent scholars have agreed with this teaching.
3.6 - Early Church Fathers wrote and the majority of modern scholars agree, that Marcion edited Luke to fit
in his own theology, Marcionism. This view is consistent with the way he altered other books in his
canon. It is also likely because Luke's Gospel was believed to be complete by Marcion's time.
3.7 - There is a difference between Luke's information on
Paul and what Paul has written about himself in his
own letters, indicating that a second-century date is
improbable as Luke is unaware of Paul's letters.
3.8 - Bishop of Ignatius of Antioch includes phases in his letters dated
between 97-177AD which suggests Luke-Acts was known to him.
3.9 - Luke's portrayal of churches such as Ephesus
seems to reflect a time of writing before or during
the reign of Emperor Domitian in 81-96AD.