that the author of the Third Goepel was identical with the writer of the Acts, and that this pel"8on was th..e St. Luke well known in the days of the beginnings of Christianity &s the oompanion and friend of St. Paul. Most of these early referenoes in some form or other conneot St.. Luke's work "'ith St. Paul. Among the more interesting e.nd important or these, Irenll'lUI, writing in Southern Ge.ul circa .&.D. 180, says, "Luke, the companion of Paul, put down in e. book the gospel preached by him (Paul)" (' Adv. Hmres.,' iii. 1); and again, "That Luke was inseparable from Paul, his fellow-worker in the gospel, is shown by himself. . . . Thus the apostles, simply and without envying any one, handed down to all these things which they themselves had learned from the Lord; thus, therefore, Luke also . . . has handed down to us the things which he had learned from them, as he witnesses when he says, •Even as they delivered them to us whioh from the beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers of the Word'" (' Adv. Hmree;.,' iii. 14). Tertullian, who lived and wrote in Proconsular Africa in the last years of the second century, tells UB how "Luke's digest was usually ascribed to Paul" (' Adv. Marcion,' iv. 5; see too 'Adv. Marcion,' iv. 2). Eusebius, the Church historian, writing a little more than e. century later, and who spent much of his life in collecting and editing the records of the first beginnings of Christianity, relates that "Luke, who was e. native of Antioch, and by profession e. physician, for the most part a com- panion of Paul, and who was not slightly acquainted with the rest of the apostles, has left UB two books divinely inspired. . . . One of these is the GospeL . . . And it is said that Paul was accustomed to mention the Gospel according to him, whenever in his Epistles speaking, as it were, of some Gospel of his own, he says according to my gospel" (' Hist. Eccl.,' vi. 25; see al,;o St. Jerome, • De Vir. Illustr.,' c. 7). And this apparently g011.erally received tradition, which at all events very closely connects the Third Gospel with St. Paul, receives additional confirmation when the teaching and occasionally the very expressions of St. Luke's Goepel are compared with the teaching of the Epistles of St. PauL The very important section of St. Luke's Gospel which describes the institution of the Lord's Supper, closely even in verbal coincidences, resembles St. Paul's account of the same blessed sacrament ( comp. too 1 Cor. xv. 3 with eh. xxiv. 26, 27). 'l'hen in the teaching. It is universally agreed that there is a general affinity between St. Paul and St. Luke. It is in the Third Gospel tha.t e:;pecially those doctrines which are commonly termed Pauline are pressed with peculiar force. Both Paul and Luke, in their teaching, bring into special prominence the promise of redemption made to the whole human race, without distinc,-tion of nation or family, ignoring in the gracious offer all privilege whatsoever. "All flesh shall see the salvation of God." Many of the parables told only by St. Luke, notably that or the good Samaritan; in the parable-stories of the lost sheep, the lost coin, the lm;t MOn, illustrating the love of Jesus shown in seeking the lost-rea.d as TilE GOSPEL Af',OOilDTNG TO ST. LUKE. llVil
examples of the teaching preRscd home in the Pauline Epistles, homely, vivid illustrations taken from the everyday life of Syria and Palestine. The appearances of the risen J osus after the Resurrection almost exactly correspond with those related by St. Paul (1 Cor. xv.). Thu.t a olose connection existed between Paul and Luke we know from several allusions to Luke in the Epistles of Paul: "Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas, greet you" (Col. iv. 14-); "There salute thee, Epaphras, my fellow-prisoner in Christ Jesus. . . . LucaB, my fellow - labourer" (Philem. 24); "Only Luke is with me" (2 Tim. iv. 11). Some expositors have thought that this friendship of Paul and Luke only began at Rome, a city in which Luke was residing as a physician, and that he met the great apostle during his first imprisonment there, a.nd waB con- verted to Christianity during Paul's captivity, in which we know that many persons had access to him. This supposition would not be contra.dieted by the three special notices of Luke in the Pauline Epistles, two of them-that to the Colossians and the letter to Philemon-ha.ving been written from Rome during that imprisonment, and the third notice, in the Second Epistle to Timothy, occurring in a letter written some years later, when the apostle was confined a second time in Rome. But the intimacy between Paul and Luke, we confidently believe, began much earlier. A very general and absolutely uncontradicted tradition, which dates from the early days of Christianity, ascribes the antborship of the Acts to St. Luke. Now, in this very writing, in three passages, two of considerable length, the author of the Acts passes abruptly from the third person to the first person plural. Thus the narrative changes from "and as they went through the cities," etc. (Acts xvi. 4), to" loosing from Troa.s, toe came with a straight course to Samothracia," etc. ( Acts xvi. 11 j, as though the writer-universally, as we have seen, acknowledged to be St. Luke-had joined the little band of missionaries who accompanied St. Paul at Troas (Acts xvi. 10). If this be, as is most probable, the case, then he must-having at some previous (unknown) date become acquainted with St. ·Paul-as early certainly as A.D. 53, have joined himself to St. Paul's company when the apostle was at Troas. With Paul, still following the A,·ts narrative, St. Luke journeyed as far as PhilippL Then, in Acts xvii. 1, when the apostle leaves Philippi, the third person is again used in the narrative, as though St. Luke was left behind at Philippi. After some six or seven years, again at Philippi, where we lost sight of him, in the course of what is termed the third missionary journey, the use of the first person plural-" These going before tarried for ua at Troas, and we sailed away from Philippi"-indicates that the writer, St. Luke, had again joined St. Paul (Acts xx. 5). With the apostle he passed through Miletus, Tyre, a.ud Cmsarea to Jerusalem (Acts xx. 5; xxi. 18). During the two years or more of St.Paul's imprisonment at Coosarea(whither he was sent from Jerusalem after hie arrival at that city with St. Luke), St. Luke was probably with or near him, for when the apostle was sent under guard as a prisoner of INTnODUCTION TO