Criswell
Theological Review 5.2 (1991) 183-201.
Copyright © 1991 by The
UNDERSTANDING LUKE'S TASK:
CAREFULLY BUILDING ON
PRECEDENT (LUKE 1:1-4)
DARRELL
L. BOCK
Introduction
There
is only on~ Gospel where the writer spells out his purpose
and preparation in detail. That is the Gospel of
Luke. The introduc-
tion of Luke's Gospel is
significant because he not only tells us why
he writes and how he writes but also indicates the
state of the tradi-
tion about Jesus at the time
he writes. In addition, the meaning of the
passage is hotly debated, with virtually every
phrase a matter of dis-
pute. This article seeks to
examine the preface and its meaning.1
Structure, Genre, and Luke's Description of Narrative
Structure
Luke begins his work, as other
ancient writers do, with a preface.
The
entire paragraph is one long Greek sentence. Luke writes with
balance as he argues his connection to the past and
his desire to give
his readers assurance about the instruction they
have received. Luke
discusses the tradition he inherited in v 1. Then
he traces the origin of
that tradition to eyewitnesses and servants who
preach the Word in
v 2. Luke 1:3 is the main clause of the preface
and discusses how Luke
wrote his account. The purpose of Luke's writing is
found in the last
verse. He desires to give his reader, Theophilus, assurance about the
events surrounding Jesus. Theophilus
had prior knowledge of these
1 This article represents
a slightly reworked portion of a forthcoming two-volume
commentary on the Gospel of Luke by the author.
184
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
events, and Luke wishes to reassure his recipient that
Jesus is the
fulfillment of God's promises. Luke 1:1 speaks of
fulfilled events to
raise the note of God's activity at the very start.
History makes it clear
that Theophilus was not
the only one who benefited from Luke's la-
bor. The church is the major beneficiary of Luke's
work.
The structure of Luke 1:1-4 reflects
balanced Greek periodic style
with a protasis, vv 1-2
("Inasmuch as'' or "since"), and an apodosis,
vv 3-4 ("so also it seemed good to me").2
BDF describes how the peri-
odic parallelism works:
"many" is parallel to "also to me," while "to
compose a narrative" goes with "to
write for you," and "even as eye-
witnesses and servants handed down" is tied
to "in order that you
might have assurance." The parallelism in the
third unit is not as
clear as in the first two units.3 Tiede notes how the period lays out in
parallel lines.4 He parallels the
suggestion of BDF. So the parallelism
of Luke 1:1-4 goes as follows:
a) Inasmuch
as many have undertaken (v 1a)
b) to
compile a narrative of the things. . .(v 1b)
c) just as they were delivered to us by . . .(v 2)
a') it
seemed good to us also. . .(v 3a)
b')
to write an orderly account for you. . . (v 3b)
c') in order that you may know the truth (v 4)
The
balance of the passage provides an aesthetic touch to the intro-
duction. The parallelism also
reflects the effort Luke spent in trying to
create a culturally appropriate introduction to his
work.
Ancient Parallels: Other
Historical Prefaces
There are ancient parallels to the
prologue. Some are in
Hellenistic-Jewish
writings.5 Here one can note 2 Macc
2:19-31, which
parallels Luke in some particulars. The writer of
2 Maccabees cites a
predecessor and then explains what his own goal is
in writing a new
summary work (v 23). He compares his work to
painting an already
constructed house (v 29). He wishes to entertain and
provide facts for
the profit of the reader (v 25). Josephus' prologue
to
Ep. Arist 1. 1-8 should also be
mentioned. There also is the prologue to
Sirach,
where this writer also explains the rationale for his work.
2 BDF
464.
3 The main clause is in
Luke 1:3. A stylistic parallel to the period exists in Acts
15:24-25.
4 D. Tiede,
Luke (
5 W. Wiefel,
Das Evangelium nach Lukas (THKNT 3; Berlin: Verlagsanstalt,
1988)
38, n.l.
Darrell L. Bock: UNDERSTANDING
LUKE'S TASK 185
Josephus says that he writes to set
out events in which he took
part and to remove the prevailing ignorance that
exists about impor-
tant events. Josephus' introduction in Ag. Ap. 1.1. 1-5 even has a dedi-
catory line to "most
esteemed Epaphroditus" and describes the
quality of the witnesses on whom Josephus
relies. He writes this work
to convict detractors of falsehood, to correct
ignorance, and to instruct
all who desire to know the truth. Aristeas' prologue speaks of a "trust-
worthy" narrative of memorable matters (vv 1, 6).
The author of Sirach
has simply tried to present to the outside world
the legacy of
traditions of wisdom and discipline.
Greek parallels also exist for this
form. Tiede mentions a later
work by Lucian of Samosota
(c. AD. 125-180), who wrote in his treatise,
How to Write History 53-55 that unlike the
orators, he will not appeal
for a favorable hearing. He desires to interest his
audience and in-
struct them. Earlier, he had
said that the only task of an historian is to
tell the truth (39-40).6 Fitzmyer notes that the ancients knew how to
distinguish between fact and fiction.7
The goals in many Greek writers
are like those of the author of 2 Maccabees and the other Jewish
historian-theologians. Lucian argues if what
is said is important and
essential, it will receive attention. The goal is
to be clear, set forth
causes, and outline the main events. Luke is written
with similar goals.
Alexander
argues that Luke is a writer in the classic "ancient
scientific" mold.8 This places Luke
in the "middle brow" of classical
writing. In Alexander's view, such a work respects
tradition, uses
sources, but also has some reworking of tradition.
Luke's Term: Narrative
Account
Among the ancients, there are
various terms tied to writing his-
tory. The term, yuxagwgi<a (psychagogia,
"persuasion") is often nega-
tive.9 It refers to the goal
of some writers, while others refuse to adopt
it. Another term is u[po<mnhma (hypomnema, "records,"
"memorial,"
"commentary," or "minutes").10 Still a third idea is i[stori<a (historia,
6 Tiede,
34-35.
7 J. Fitzmyer,
The Gospel According to Luke (AB 28,
28a, 2 vols.; Garden City, NY:
Doubleday,
1981,1985) 16. .
8 L Alexander,
"Luke's Preface in the Context of Greek Preface-Writing," NovT
28
(1986) 48-75, esp. 60-63. F. Bovon (Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Lk 1, 1-9, #50
[EKKNT
3.1; Zurich/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Benziger/Neukirchener
Verlag, 1989], 30, n. 1)
notes that these comparisons with ancient prologues
date back to the 18th century with
G.
Raphelius and J. J. Wettstein.
C. F. Evans (St. Luke [TPI New Testament Commentar-
ies;
9 LSJ
2026.2.
10 LSJ
1889.2.4. These are often unpolished materials. Lucian On How to Write
History 47-48.
186
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
"inquiry,"
"information," "narrative," or "history").11 The
absence of
references to these other terms in BAGD show that
Luke chose none
of these terms to describe his work. His term is dih<ghsij (diegesis, "nar-
rative account").12
Buschel in
TDNT notes that the term dih<ghsij simply means "nar-
rative" and does not
refer to some form of an incomplete literary work
that one could compare to the individual, detached
traditions of mod-
ern form criticism.13
Luke has longer materials in mind than individ-
ual pericopes.
His note 3 gives some extra-biblical texts using the term.
Some
texts describe oral reports. Others refer to written reports or to
historical accounts: Sir 6:35 (oral); 9:15 (oral);
22:6 (oral); 27:11, 13 (oral);
38:25 and 39:2 (concerning discourses of famous
men); Ep. Aris. 1. 8.322
(written); 2 Macc 2:32 (written);
6:17 (historical narrative). LSJ adds
Plato Rep. 392d; Phaed. 246a, and LXX-Hab 1:5.14 The term in
the NT
speaks of both oral and written accounts: (oral)--Luke
8:39; 9:10; Acts
8:33;
9:27; 12:17; (written)--Mark 5:16; 9:9; Heb 11:32. So whatever type
of narrative Luke alludes to in v 1, it is not
clear whether the sources
are oral, written, or both. What is clear is that
these accounts are long
and that Luke's work is similar to them, as v 3
makes clear.15 This as-
sociation might suggest written
sources but does not guarantee it.
Major Themes
So Luke explains why he has written
and establishes that his
work has precedent. However, Luke makes other points
as well. He
highlights the eyewitness origin of tradition; he
points out his account
is the result of a careful consideration of the
events; and he notes that
the study was carefully done. In fact, the account
begins at the start
and is thorough. Luke's contribution is significant
not only because of
his careful work, but also because only he writes a
second volume in
which he ties fulfillment in Jesus to God's work in
the church.
So the basic outline of Luke 1:1-4
is as follows:
Carefully
Building on Precedent: Luke 1:1-4
A. The Precedent (1:1-2)
1. What Came Before (1:1)
2. The Source of Earlier
Accounts: Apostolic Eyewitnesses (1:2)
11 LSJ
842.2.
12 BAGD 195; Bauer, 6th
ed., col. 392; LSJ 427, defines it broadly as "recount."
13 TDNT 2.909.
14 F. Buchsel's
reference to Hab 2:16 is incorrect
15 R Tannehill,
The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary
Interpretation vol. I
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) l.lO.
Darrell L. Bock:
UNDERSTANDING LUKE'S TASK 187
B. Luke's Contribution (1:3-4)
1. Luke Describes His
Work (1:3)
2. Luke's Purpose (1:4)
Translation
(1) Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account
of
the things which have been fulfilled among us, (2) even as
those who
were from the beginning eyewitnesses and servants of the Word
de-
livered to us, (3) it seemed good also to me, having followed all
things carefully from the beginning to write an orderly account
for
you, most excellent Theophilus, (4)
that you might know certainty
concerning the things about which you were instructed.
Meaning: Luke Carefully Builds on Precedent
The Precedent (1:1-2)
What
Came Before (1:1). Luke's work is not novel. His
Gospel be-
gins by noting the precedent of others in recounting
what Jesus did.
The
term e]peidh<per (epeideper, "inasmuch as'')
gives a condition and is
usually causally related to the action in the
main clause, so "since
many have undertaken."16 The
accounts of others laid the groundwork
for why Luke writes. Ancient writers loved to show
how what they
were doing had precedent.
Luke also produces an introduction
with stylistic parallels in other
ancient writings. Fitzmyer
cites similar beginnings from Josephus J. W.
1.6.17
and Philo Legatio ad Gaium 164.17 No
LXX usage exists for the
introductory term e]peidh<per ("inasmuch as''), but this style of introduc-
tion is common. The causal
nuance is defended by
Schneider.18
So Luke is not the first to write
about Jesus. "Many" (polloi<, pol-
loi) refers to his literary
and or oral predecessors. For most scholars
today, this would allude, at least, to Mark and Q. Q
is a posited source
or set of sources that contained teaching material
from Jesus to which
both Luke and Matthew had access. Those who hold to
the existence
of Q usually think that Mark was the first Gospel.
For those who think
Mark
is first, Luke uses Mark, Q and a set of special traditions called
"L."
Others believe that Matthew is a source that precedes Luke, and
16 BDF
456.3.
17 See above for more
examples, also cr. Fitzmyer, 290-91.
18 I. H.
G.
Schneider, Das Evangelium nach Lukas (Okumenischer Taschenbuch Kommentar
zum Neuen
Testament 3; 2 vols.; Gerd Mohn:
Gillersloher Verlagshaus,
1977) 38.
188
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
some who hold to Matthew as a source do not think an
appeal to Q is
necessary. When scholars hold to the Griesbach or Augustinian hy-
pothesis, then Matthew is the
first Gospel, and Luke's sources depend
on which variation is preferred (Griesbach: Matthew, Luke, then
Mark;
Augustinian: Matthew, Mark, then Luke). Regardless of
the
view preferred, and good arguments exist on each
side of the debate,
Luke
does tell us that he had predecessors, even if he does not name
them for us.19
"Epexei<rhsan (epecheiresan,
"have set their hand," "attempted")
describes the work of Luke's predecessors. The
idea of "setting the
hand" to tell a story might well suggest
written accounts here, except
that other terms in the context can suggest
organized oral reports. So
Luke's
remark suggests the presence of written materials but need
not be limited to such sources. Is this term
neutral or pejorative? Did
Luke
think Jesus' story was well served by previous accounts? First,
the term is the natural term to use for composing
an account.20 The
use of ka]moi< (kamoi,
"and I also") in v 3 looks as if Luke joins himself
to his predecessors.21 But Fitzmyer argues that the stress on accuracy
and research shows Luke still thought work needed
to be done. Klos-
termann also views a critique
as implied.22
However, another fact complicates
the discussion. Luke's sequel
makes his task unique as he seeks to join Jesus tradition
and church
history together. Luke adds to the recorded
accounts of Jesus' ministry
with more detail and includes the additional
discussion of the
church's rise (a third of the Gospel contains
"L" material). He does so
without necessarily downgrading his
predecessors, who blazed a diffi-
19 G. Caird,
St Luke (Pelican Gospel Commentaries;
Baltimore: Penguin, 1963) 23-
27.
For evaluation of this issue, see the introduction and the excursus in the introduc-
tion to Luke 3:7-9 in D. L
Bock, Luke (forthcoming). See also
cism," in New Testament Criticism and Interpretation (D.
A Black and D. Dockery eds.;
Introduction (Grand Rapids: Baker,
1987).
20 BAGD 304; Bauer, 6th
ed., col. 617; H. J. Cadbury, "Commentary on the Preface
of Luke," in The Beginnings of Christianity, part 1, ed. by F. J. F. Jackson and
K Lake;
21 ARC.
Leaney, The Gospel According
to St Luke (2 ed.; Black's New Testament
Commentaries;
A
Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on the Gospel according to St
Luke (ICC; Edinburgh: T.
& T. Clark, 1922) 2, have good discussions, as
does G. Delling,
TDNT 8.32-33, esp. n. 3. Here Delling makes it clear that a censure of the predecessors
is not in view. He cites the 1st century B. C.
historian Diodorus Siculus
1. 1.1-3. as a par-
allel. To this H. Conzelmann (TDNT9:596) adds from the same work 1.2.7. and l.4.4-5.
22 E. Klostermann,
Das Lukasevangelium
(HNT 5; 3d ed.;
[Paul Siebeck], 1975)
2.
Darrell L. Bock: UNDERSTANDING
LUKE'S TASK 189
cult trail ahead of him.23 One can note
the neutrality in the term by
citing common usage from Moulton/Milligan.24
Acts 9:29 and 19:13
represent other NT uses, which are more negative,
but ka]moi< in Luke
1:3
is the key to the problem. The phrase is not as pejorative
as Danker suggests when he includes the
possibility of heretics in
this group.25 Along with Luke 1:3, the
connection of these accounts
with the apostolic eyewitnesses shows that they are
seen in a good
light (v 2).
Luke describes the previous
accounts. ]Anata<casqai dih<ghsin (ana-
taxasthai diegesin) means to "compile
an orderly account." Fitzmyer
has a detailed lexical survey of dih<ghsij, which refers to
historical
narrative.26
]Anata<casqai refers to an orderly account.27 Thus, others
had given accounts of the events surrounding Jesus.
Delling suggests
that the term refers to the movement from oral to
written tradition.28
Taken
with this sense, the Lucan reference is exclusively
to written
sources, but it is not guaranteed that this is
the point. The term itself
can refer to oral or written accounts, so the idea
that only written ac-
counts are in view cannot be defended merely form the
use of this
term.29 This term is a
technical expression of ancient historians for
different kinds of recounting.30
23 For a defense of the
unity of Luke-Acts and the prologue as serving both vol-
umes, Maddox, The Purpose of Luke-Acts (Studies of the
New Testament and its world;
24 Moulton and Milligan,
250-51; Cadbury (2:494), has a list of texts where the
term is both neutral and pejorative. As always,
context determines the proper force in a
given example.
25 F. Danker, Jesus and the New Age (2d ed.;
Bovon (34) the usage in Acts is decisive for a
negative sense, but he calls the criticism
"discrete."
26 Fitzmyer, 292. Note also the discussion above.
27 BAGD
61; Bauer, 6th ed., col. 122.
28 G. Delling,
TDNT, 8.32-33.
29 For more on dih<ghsij; as meaning oral and
written accounts, see key terms above
and TDNT
2.909, where Buchsel provides a nice summary of
usage. One parallel to note
is Polybius 5. 31. 4.
30 W. C. van Unnik, "Luke's Second Book and the Rules of
Hellenistic Histo-
riography," in Les Actes des Apotres: traditions, redaction, theologie
(BETL; ed.
J.
Kremer;
in De Acte conscribentae historiae (On
Writing History) 47-48, cf. esp. 42, n. 23. See also
W.
C. van Unnik, "Once More St. Luke's
Prologue," Neot 7 (1973) 7-26. It should be
said,
however, that when used in a prologue and tied
to a term like "setting down an orderly
account," the term suggests written or, at
least, well-organized reports. Also arguing for
written predecessors is L L
du Plessis, "Once
More: The Purpose of Luke's Prologue
(Lk I 1-4)," NovT 16 (1974)
262-63.
Written sources are still the most likely referent
here. Our point is that it is not guaranteed that
this is all that is meant.
190
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
These were not just any set of
events. They had a special charac-
ter. Peri> tw?n
peplhroforhme<nwn e]n u[mi?n pragma<twn (peri ton peplero-
phoremenon en hemin pragmaton) means "concerning
the fulfilled
events among us." The meaning of
"fulfilled" is disputed.31 Does
it
mean 1) "completed events";32
2) "assured events";33 or 3) "fulfilled
events"?34 The third meaning,
"fulfilled," is the best since Luke's em-
phasis in his volumes is on
the fulfillment of God's plan (Luke 1:20,
57;
2:6, 21-22; 4:21; 9:31; 21:22, 24; 24:44-47). The passive participle pep-
lhroforhme<nwn ("which were being
fulfilled") suggests God's acts with
its use of the "theological" passive.35
These fulfilled past events con-
tinue to color how one should
see the present. The effect of Jesus' life,
death, and resurrection lives on. Luke will chronicle
one of the imme-
diate effects, the rise of
the church, in his second volume. In Acts,
Luke
makes the point that Jesus continues to work in the world as the
exalted Lord (Acts 1:1-5).
These divinely wrought events did
not occur in a corner. ]En h[mi?n
describes "events fulfilled among us." At the minimum, the
first per-
son plural pronoun refers to those believers who
saw the time of sal-
vation history's initiation,
the "first generation." Both Fitzmyer and
Leaney stress the reference here is to those who
observed these
events.36 Leaney
is more narrow, taking "us" to refer to only this
original group. But Fitzmyer
correctly extends the reference to all
affected by salvation history, as does Marshall.37
Dillon argues that
this phrase moves away from a reference only to the
original events
to the effect of those events in a later time for
all who came to be-
lieve. It refers to the
"second" and "third" generations.38 He notes cor-
rectly that the perfect tense
of the participle "fulfilled" can include a
reference to a group that was not originally
present at these events.
Past
and present believers are united by these events and share in
31 Fitzmyer, 293.
32 So Cadbury, 2.495-96.
Cf. RSV, NASB--"things which have been accomplished."
Similar
translations are found in Neu Luther and Zurcher.
33 K. Rengstorf,
Das Evangelium nach Lukas (NTD 3;
und Ruprecht, 1937) 14.
34 Fitzmyer,
293,
(Atlanta: John Knox, 1984), 11. Du
Plessis, Luke 263-64. Cf. NN, NKJV--"things that
have been fulfilled." The German Einheitsubersetzung
speaks of events which occurred
among us and were fulfilled, combining meanings one
and three.
context suggests that God acts.
36 Fitzmyer, 293-94; Leaney, 77.
37
38 R Dillon, From Eye-Witnesses to Ministers of the Word (AnBib 82;
cal Institute Press, 1978) 271, n. 115. The perfect
participle suggests a broader time frame
for the remark.
Darrell L. Bock: UNDERSTANDING
LUKE'S TASK 191
their significance. The historical ground that
produced this impact is
the topic of Luke's two volumes.
The
Source of Earlier Accounts: 1:2. Luke 1:2 details the ulti-
mate source for these accounts. The conjunction kaqw<j (kathos, "even
as'') describes how the accounts originated by
comparing the previous
accounts about Jesus to their point of origin.39
The term stresses the
reliable basis on which these accounts rested (
counts of v 1 go back to traditions passed down to the
reporters by the
eyewitnesses and ministers of the
Word. There is a two step process
described here; but the nature of the sources
guarantees the quality.
Luke
still is discussing the other earlier accounts here, not his own
study, which he will describe in Luke 1:3-4.
The ultimate sources of the Jesus
tradition are described by two
terms, au]to<ptai
(autoptai,
"eyewitnesses") and u[phre<tai (hyperetai,
"ministers"). Here is a clear allusion to the original
oral level of the
tradition. This is the only NT use of this term
for eyewitness. These
servants served Jesus' cause as eyewitnesses who
preached the Jesus
they saw.40 Fitzmyer
notes that the word order favors a reference to
one group that holds a twofold role: early
witnesses who became min-
isters of the Word.41
The one article, oi[ (hoi, "the"), and the trailing
participial phrase, geno<menoi tou? lo<gou
(genomenoi tou logou, "became
of the Word"), argue for this view, though the
plural makes it less
than certain, since the Granville-Sharp rule does
not apply in plural
constructions. Fitzmyer
suggests the reference is to those disciples
who became apostles. Those eyewitnesses go back to
"the beginning"
(a]p ] a]rxh?, ap arche) of Jesus' ministry, a ministry
that started after
Jesus' baptism by John the Baptist (Acts
1:21-22; 10:37-41). One group
is referred to as they functioned in two stages of
church history: they
saw, and then they reported.42
Fitzmyer
argues that Luke is a third-generation Christian be-
cause before him there were 1) those present at the
beginning and
2)
those who ministered the Word.43 But if the
same group is present
39 Fitzmyer, 294; BDF 453.
40 K Rengstorf, TDNT,
8.543; also W. Michaelis, TDNT, 5.348, 373. Luke will call
these men "witnesses" later in Luke-Acts
(Luke 24:44-48; Acts 1:8). Such eyewitnesses
were important to ancient historians, Thucydides 1.
22. 2. Josephus Ag. Ap. 1. 10. 55, and
Lucian's parody in Varae Hist (True History) 1.4; Du Plessis, 265.
41 Fitzmyer,
294; J. Nolland, Luke
1-9:20 (Word Biblical Commentary 35a;
Word, 1989) 7.
42 So also E. E. Ellis, The Gospel of Luke, (New Century Bible;
Marshall,
& Scott, 1974), 65; For details, see Dillon,
270-71, esp. n. 114. The title of this
work alludes to the unified view of this phrase.
43 Fitzmyer, 294; also Goulder, 201.
192
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
in these two periods" then Luke could be a
direct descendent of the
original group. Even though Luke may be
"second generation," he is
describing three stages of history in the
tradition: 1) the experienced
events; 2) the witnesses' formulation of the events'
tradition; and
3)
the recording of that tradition and the reflection
upon those events.
Ellis'
description of Luke as second generation is more accurate than
seeing Luke in the third generation.44
The reference to the Word is to the
Christian message about
Jesus,
which was a message about divine events.45 The Word
preached as God's authoritative message is
powerful.46 The ministers
served not their own ends, but the cau