What evidence is there for Luke as the author of Acts of the Apostles?

Answer 1

Lk:1:3: It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

Acts:1:1: The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,

AnswerThere is ample evidence in Acts of the Apostles that it was written by the same author as Luke's Gospel, but no evidence that this author was Luke, the physician and companion of Paul. Both books were originally anonymous and it was not until later in the second century that they were attributed to Luke. This attribution, which was purely speculative is the only evidence we have for Lucan authorship.

Answer 2

AnswerThe evidence is not strong, but it was enough to lead the second-century Church Fathers to believe that Luke was the most probable author of the gospel they ascribed to him as Luke's Gospel, and of Acts of the Apostles:

The author was not an eyewitness to the life and ministry of Jesus, as evidenced by the introduction to Luke's Gospel (1:1-4). Luke was not.

The author's apparent knowledge of Paul could suggest that the author was a companion of Paul. Paul mentioned Luke in his Epistle to Philemon. Luke is also mentioned in Colossians and 2 Timothy, two works written in Paul's name and accepted as genuine by the Church Fathers.

The author was obviously a well educated, highly literate man. Luke is mentioned as a physician.

Answer 3

Evidence for the existence of Luke is Paul's mention of him as a fellow-labourer in Philemon. Luke is also mentioned in Colossians and 2 Timothy, but as these are considered to be pseudonomous epistles written long after the death of Paul, they are not reliable sources.

We do not have evidence that Luke wrote the gospel that was later attributed to him. In fact, the accepted late date for Luke's Gospel makes authorship by Paul's fellow-laborour quite unlikely.