* The present writer has recently seen it on the mould of this sarcophagus at the Museum of St. Germain near Paris.
84
LUKE
LUKE, GOSPEL ACCORDING TO
is a city of Macedonia, tlie first of its district, a Human colony.' Tlie cliaracterization of Pliilippi might almost be styled gratuitous. Since ilie battle of B.C. 42 this place was well known to all persons of any education. Further, one might judge from this passage that it was the only Roman colony mentioned in Acts. This is far from being the case. Corinth, Lystra, I'tolemais, and risidian Antioch, to mention no others, were also Roman colonies ; yet the author affixes the title to Philippi only. Again, we know that Philippi was not regarded by all as the chief town of its district. The author is clearly taking a side as against those who regarded Thessalonica or Ampiiipolis as the chief town of that district. The rivalry between cities was a characteristically Greek quality, which finds a parallel in the more modern rivalry between Dole and Basanijon. An instance in Asia Minor was that between Smyrna, Ephesus, and Perga- nuim. We shall not be wrong in regarding the author as a native of Philippi. His fondness for the sea and all matters nautical, as well as his choice of a profession almost entirely confined to Greeks, already proclaim him a Greek. There are other indications that point to Philippi as his native place. V.i^ of ch. 10, ' where tve tlumght there was a place of prayer,' is quite natural, if the author, being a Gentile, had only a rough idea where the Jewish place of prayer in his native town was. Again, when Paul and Silas go to Thessalonica (Ac. 17i), Luke is left behind Philippi, and reappears in that afterwards (20*--').
3. Notes on his Life. — Of Luke's early life little can be said, and that little is inference derived from his two books. If he were the son of a Greek freedman of a Roman master, this would account both for his name and his history. From the character of the language of his writings it is evident that he had a good education, both rhe- torical and medical. It is impossible to say where
m neighbourhood
It is probable that he devoted himself mainly to medical and literary work, and not so much to evangelization. The Latin biography states that he never married, and that he ditd at the age of 74 in BcL'otia (some MSS., Bilhynia). Another tradition has it that he died at Constantinople, and his sarcophagus, siiid to have been brought from there, is now pointed out in the Church of Santa Giustina, at Padua.
LiTEHATURK. — Tlic .ibovp art. is lar};ely indebted to Sir W.M. llamsay's St.P(iii/theTrai'el/er and the lioinan Citizen^, the most .sympatlietic study of Luke in existence. See also his Wita Clui.st Born at Bethleliem? A study in the Credibility of St. Lnke^; cf. It. J. Knowling's Introduction to tlie Acts of" the Apostlet in The Esrpoxitor's Gr. Te>.t., vol. ii. (Lond. 1900); Ilobart, The Medical Language of St. Luke (Lond. 1882); Harnack, Lukas der Arzt (, Leipzig, 1906).
A. SOUTER.
**LUKE, GOSPEL ACCORDING TO.—
i. The Synoptic Problem.
1. Solutions offered in the past.
2. Priority of St. Mark.
3. The doctrine of a iiroto-Mark, of a deutero-Mark,
and of a trito-Mark. ii. Analysis of St. Luke's Gospel according to the sources used.
1. First Source — St. Mark. /
2. Second Source — St. Matthew's Logia. /
3. Third Source — a Pauline Collection.
4. Fourth Source — Anonymous Fraffinents.
5. Fifth Source— a Private Collection (from the Holy
Family ? ).
6. Editorial Notes.
iii. Points of contact with St. John. iv. St. Luke's characteristics. V. Date of writing.
Literature.
i. The Synoptic Problem. — To a student of the Synoptic Problem St. Luke's Gospel is the most interesting of the three. Indeed, we may confidently affirm that, but for St. Luke, the Synoptic Problem would never have existed. For the connexions between St. Matthew and St. Mark are compara- tively simple and are easily exjilained. It is only when we read St. Luke that the perplexing ques-
spread in the Greek world. About his cyspositior .something can be said. From the frequent ret^er^ ences to the poor in his Go.speL-aud his loving'j attJ^cJjinOTTto I*autpai5 weH-'as his seTf-effaceTrnmtr* iP§eems~noTr-teo-iAnciful to picture him as a man of modest, tender, sympathetic, and constant nature. His circumstances appear to have been
he was educated, as higher education was wide- "tions which constitute the Problem arise. We have ,„,i :„ ..!._ /-. 1 .1 A, ^ 1- -1. ... i^j,gj. ^p explain the fact of his omissions (a) of
Markan matter, [Ii) of Matthfean ; next, his addi- tions (a) of narrative, [h) of discourse ; thirdly, his variations from the other Gospels in arrangement {a) of Markan matter, (h) of Matthajan ; then we must examine his editorial work, which consists («) of prefaces to introduce a section, (Ji) of conclu- sions to wind it up, (o) of explanatory notes, (rf) of corrections, alike in fact, in style, and in grammar ; lastly, we must consider cases where he agrees with St. Matthew against St. Mark, and cases where he alone of tlie Synoptists has some contact with St. John. Anyone who attempts to solve the Problem"? by neglecting one or more of these factors, may I fascinate the reader by the simplicity of his pro- posals, but he does so at the expense of success. He has nf>t really grappled with the Problem, and therefore has not solved it. If, on the other hand, the reader thinks the proposals which are here offered too intricate ; if he accuses the writer of vacillation, because two or more solutions are fre- quently offered of the same difficulty, let him reflect that in mathematics — the most exact of sciences — a similar fact may be observed. For every quadratic equation has two solutions, and when the Radcliffe Observer published his calcula- tion of the distance of the sun from the earth, the answer came out as a double quadratic with four variations. Similar complications should be ex- pected in an intricate literary problem like this. Let the beginner cultivate patience and suspense of judgment. He will have made good progress, if he learns to suspect the man who is too simi^le or too confident.