(c) The authorship of the Third Gospel is bound up with the question of the authorship of Acts. Critics, like Jiilicher, who date Gospel and Acts about A.D. 100 and deny that the writer of the ' we ' sections in Acts can be identified with the writer of the whole book of Acts, cannot of course accept the tradition that St. Luke, a companion of St. Paul, wrote both Acts and Gospel. But recent criticism has moved decisively in the direction of affirming the truth of the tradition. Harnack, following on the lines of W. K. Hobart,t argues that the style and language of Gospel and Acts, in- cluding the 'we' sections, decisively prove that both works were written by one person and that he was a physician. J Moliatt says that the supposi- tion that both works did not come from a single pen may nowadays be ' decently interred ' [LNT, p. 298). It is probable that criticism, after long wandering in a labyrinth of speculation upon this point, will return to the traditional belief in the Lucan authorship of both books. It is accepted in such recent works as that of Peake. For a sum- mary of the linguistic argument, see Harnack, Luke the Physician, or Moftatt, LNT, p. 297 f.
Some of those who reject the Lucan authorship of the two books are inclined to think that Luke may have written the *we' sections (so Bacon, Introduction to NT, p. 211).
3. Characteristics.— (a) The Second Gospel is neither a history nor a biography. It contains no dates, and the writer is at no pains to give any details of time or place which would help to make the narrative intelligible to a reader previously unacquainted with it. The central figure of the book is introduced under the description 'Jesus Messiah, Son of God' (V), but nothing is said of His human parentage, His early life, or the period in which He lived. If we set aside the last live chapters, which describe in detail, disproportionate to the rest of the book, the last few days of the Messiah's life, the account of His doings in I'^-IO''^ is strangely disconnected and without sequence. No hint of the length of time occupied by the nar- rative is given, long periods are passed over with- out comment, whilst the events of a single day are recorded in detail.
Synoptic Problem) argues that he did so only to a limited extent. Harnack thinks that 'this assumption is nowhere demanded ' {Sayingi of .Jesus, p. 226 : so Mofifatt, LNT. p.
* The Sayings of Jesus.
t Tlu Medical Language of St. Luke, Dublin and London. 1882. '
I See also J. 0. Hawkins, Horce Synopticce\ Oxford, 1909. I
This incompleteness and fragmentariness sug- gest the writer's intention. He wished to put into permanent form such of the incidents of the Messiah's life as were well known from St. Peter's teaching to the community in which he lived. Behind the book there lies as the only explanation of it the Christian community (at Jerusalem ?) orphaned of its chief teacher. If this be lost sight of, the book remains as a mere narrative of disconnected incidents in the life of one Jesus of Nazareth.
If a keynote to the Gospel be wanted, it may be found in the phrase 'having authority' (1^^). Jesus is depicted as one whose words and deeds proved Him to be endowed with power, and so to be the Son of God, Cf. the following :— p2 : ' He was teaching as having authority ' ; \^ : 'a new teaching, with authority he commands ' ; 21" : ' the Son of Man hath authority ' ; 5*'^ : ' knowing the power which had gone forth from him ' ; 6^ : ' the powers (miracles) done by him.' In accord- ance with this is the emphasis in the Gospel upon the impression made by Him upon the peasantry. Cf. the following : — l^-* : ' the crowds were aston- ished at his teaching ' ; 2'- : ' all were astonished ' ; 5'*^ : ' they were astonished with great amazement ' ; 6^ : ' the populace were astonished ' ; 7^^ : ' they were above measure astonished ' ; 11'^ : ' the crowd were astonished at his teaching ' ; 1^^ : ' the whole city was gathered at the door ' ; 1*^ : ' He could no longer enter into a city, but Avas without in desert places, and they came to him from all sides ' ; 2^ : ' They were gathered together, so that the space about the door could no longer contain them ' ; 3" : ' He bade his disciples prepare a boat, because of the crowd ' ; 3^" : ' the crowd again gathers, so that they could not even eat ' ; 4^ : ' and there gathers to him a very great crowd, so that he embarked into a boat'; 6^': 'There were many coming and going, and they had no opportunity to eat.'
(b) If the Second Gospel is a book of remin iscences, or rather of notes of a great teacher's reminiscences of the life of his Master, the First Gospel is a theological treatise in narrative form. Its purpose is to prove that Jesus of Nazareth was, though rejected by the rulers of His people, the true Messiah, in whom were or would be ful- filled all the Messianic expectations of the OT. The phrase 'that it might be fulfilled' may be taken as the keynote of the book. Characteristic of the book are the following: (1) its apologetic aspect ; it is a defence of the Messiahship of Jesus against (i.) current slander (cf. esp. chs. 1, 2), (ii.) the hard fact that the Jewish authorities rejected Him ; (2) it#<!onsequent polemic against the recog- nized authorities of the Jews ; (3) its conception of the Church or Society of the Messiah as consisting of Jews or proselytes still under the authority of the Mosaic Law ; (4) its conception of the Kingdom as to be inaugurated shortly when the Messiah returned on the clouds of heaven. See on these points iSif. Mattheiv^, pp. 309 fi., .326 ft'. ; ExpT xxi. 439 ft'. ; and art. ' Matthew (Gospel) ' in DCG.