St. Luke: Part Two

St. Luke: Part Two:

In this introductory speech to the Gospel of Luke, he talks about his sources like a good historian. He also deals with other works that have been compiled. He also relates to eyewitnesses and servants of the Scriptures through whom these things reached him. This is not his own invention. 3 According to Luke, Luke wrote “these things, having discovered from the beginning” and researched. He is inclined to record the actual date. And according to the 4th he emphasizes the truth and maturity of these things. This introductory speech is therefore of great importance in proving Luke as an authoritative author. When we consider introductory speech. Let me tell you again that Luke is not mentioned anywhere in this evangelical statement nor in the introductory speech. But still we will try to learn whatever we can related to it. If you say that his name appears in the "Gospel of Luke" before the first verse, let me tell you that it was not part of the original text. It was written with the consensus of the church that its author was actually Luke. However, the physician Luke himself has not written his name as an author anywhere in his Gospel account or anywhere in the book of Acts. This is an interesting thing. But let's explore its amazing history. Luke's name is not mentioned anywhere, but it is clearly written "Luke's Gospel". How was this conclusion reached? Let us first consider Luke the physician. With regard to Luke, we find only one passage in verse 3 that says, "I also went to the proper place." We have nothing but this "I". Now the question arises, who is the person behind this "I"? The answer to this question lies in two areas. The first section is tradition and the second section takes us to the text of the Word of God. And I'll try to answer both of these questions about who this "I" is. We believe the people who called it the Gospel of Luke. But if we go through the process of teaching, understanding, and come to the conclusion that they did it, it will be much better and more constructive to understand. According to early tradition, the third Gospel has always been attributed to Luke, it has always been called the Gospel of Luke, it has never been given another name, nor has it ever been said that its author was anyone else. Was. If any narration is not close to its original event, then its authenticity should not be relied upon. When you talk about the Gospel of Luke, then you go to the first century and then to the second century, which was one generation after the Gospel of Luke was written, and they all said that it The Gospel was written by Luke. And they said that because they were there. This is not a new age invention. This Gospel is attributed to Luke from the beginning. Even the heretic Marconi admitted in 175, almost seventy years after the Gospel was written, that Luke was the author of the third Gospel. This was also the unanimous declaration of the early church. As I said earlier, no other proposal was made. The earliest Greek manuscript, dating to the second century and the oldest Greek manuscript ever, is also entitled "The Gospel of Luke." And there is a strong possibility that this will be true because it is just the beginning. There is a canon. When we talk about the canon, it means a collection of scriptures. The earliest compilation of the New Testament scriptures is called the Maureen Turin Cannon. It covers the period from 170 to 180 and according to it is also called the "Gospel of Luke". There are also many ancient sources that confirm that Luke was the author of the Gospel, but we will not go into details. According to tradition, there is no doubt that Luke is the author of this Gospel. Tomorrow we will confirm this from the textual side.