What are the two New Testament books believed to be written by Luke?

Answer 1

Apart from various minor interpolations, the author we know as St Luke is believed to have written the whole of the Acts of the Apostles. However, Luke wrote the book at least 50 years after the events he described and therefore relied on various sources for input for Acts, as well as for his Gospel.

Answer

It is disputed whether Luke used Paul's epistles as his source on Paul, because of the many discrepancies, or whether he used oral traditions that had become distorted over time. If Luke did have access to copies of Paul's epistles, it is likely that Luke chose to change Paul's record.

There is also some evidence of borrowing material from the works of Josephus, a Jewish military leader and historian, particularly Antiquities of the Jews, published in 93 CE. In the book of Luke chapter one and verse 3 you can read where Luke wrote saying "It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most exellent Theophilus"

Then in the book of Acts you can read where Luke wrote in chapter one verse one "The former account I made O Theophlius, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach"

In this reading you can see where Luke did write the book of Acts.

Answer 2

Whereas scholars believe that the gospel is a later gospel, the vast majority of theologians regard Luke's gospel and the Acts of the Apostles as being written by the gentile Luke 'the beloved physician' and friend of Paul around the late 50s to the late 60s AD.

There are several reasons for this.

First, despite much of Mark's gospel (and a lost document 'Q') being used in Luke's gospel, the material added by Luke himself includes dates and specific details of events, indicating an analytical mind. Thus, by the style of the Greek, the gospel was written by a non-jew and by someone with what we would now ll a 'scientific' mind.

Secondly, much of Luke's own material is concerned with forgiveness and healing. At a time when sin and ill-health were traditionally linked, the emphasis on healing and forgiveness are signs of an author who is involved in such matters professionally.

Thirdly, in Acts, which no self respecting theologian or Bible scholar would argue was not written by the author of Luke, there are times when the Greek emphasis changes a great deal. In some instances the author talks of Paul and his companions as 'they' and then suddenly changes the emphasis to 'we'. For example, in Acts 28, the author changes to the 'we' form and reports as an eye-witness to events, "at the end of three months WE set sail on an Alexandrian ship..." He then goes into irrelevant details about the figurehead of the ship, he weather and so on, and even writes down much of a speech by Paul,. Unless the author's intention was deliberately to deceive, this passage, and many others like it, strongly suggest that the author was present with Paul on many of his journeys. Cross-referencing these passages with events Paul talks about in his letters, the companion of Paul, and the author of Acts could only have been Luke the Physician.

Fourthly, while the Church fathers did indeed spend time trying to attribute certain books to their authors, tradition strongly held that Luke had written both his gospel and Acts long before this. Origen, Irenaeus and Clement all independently confirmed Luke's authorship, and unlike many other documents, there was little argument as to who the author of Luke's gospel could be.

Therefore it is strongly likely, if not certain, that both Luke's gospel and the Book of Acts were written by Luke the companion of Paul and 'the beloved physician'.

Answer 3

A:

The third gospel, known as the Gospel of Luke, and Acts of the Apostles are two books traditionally thought to have been written by the physician Luke. Although biblical scholars no longer hold to this view, they continue for convenience to refer to the anonymous author of these works as 'Luke'.

Answer 4

Acts of the Apostles was originally anonymous and was not even attributed to the physician called Luke in Colossians and 2 Timothy, until later in the second century. There is no evidence in The Bible that Luke wrote anything in the book of Acts, although many Christians believe that he wrote Acts in its entirety.

The physician Luke would not have needed to rely on Antiquities of the Jews for historical background if he really had been a participant in the events the book describes.

Answer 5

Two books, the Gospel According to St Luke, and Acts of the Apostles have traditionally been attributed to the apostle Luke. However, they were originally written anonymously and only attributed by the Church Fathers to Luke later in the second century, when they were seeking to establish who probably wrote each of the gospels. Acts of the Apostles is clearly dependent of Antiquities of the Jews, published by the Jewish historian Josephus in 93 CE, placing a lower limit on the date of Acts. For this and other reasons, the majority of mainstream scholars date the books to the end of the first century or early in the second century, much too late to have been written by Luke, the physician and companion of Paul. This dependency very possibly applies to Luke's Gospel, although with less certainty. On this view, Luke did not write any book of the New Testament.

Answer 6

According to tradition, it is certain that Luke wrote two books, the book of Luke and the book of Acts of the Apostles.

Answer 7

Luke wrote the Gospel of Luke, and the book of Acts. Although other writers wrote more new testament books, Luke wrote the most in volume.

Answer 8

The Gospel according to St. Luke and The Acts of the Apostles.

Answer 9

two