THE PERSONALITY OF THEOPHILUS IN LUKE 1, 3

INTRODUCTION

Generally, four Gospels were accepted into the Church’s Scriptural canon and among them, three were considered to be synoptic in the sense that they bear great resemblance. The Gospel of Luke is among these. In this essay, much concentration will be focused on the preface or prelude of Luke to this Gospel, that states: (Lk. 1,3). There is always the tendency to sideline author’s prelude of preface to books or skip them as just tips. The Lucan Gospel preface is an exception because this preface is the substratum on which his entire gospel account stands.

GENERAL NATURE OF LUKE’S GOSPEL

The numerical position which Luke occupies in the Sacred Canon, supplies a sure key to its interpretation. It is the third book in the New Testament, and the forty-second in the Bible as a whole. Each of these numbers is profoundly significant and suggestive in this connection. Luke is the only Gospel writer who begins with such a preface. Other synoptic Gospels, Matthew and Mark began with a genealogy and john Baptist’s preparation of the way for Jesus respectively.

Luke certainly comes at his subject in a scientific way. He roots the key events of his story in history, evidencing the events as history. Clearly he has researched his work, but it is difficult to see it as “an orderly account” (Lk.1:1-4), in the sense of a chronological listing of facts only. The Gospel writers did not just list the facts of Jesus life; they were into recording the keryguma, the proclaimed message of the early church, that is, the gospel. The gospel writers were attempting a theological understating of the. This not withstanding, Luke comes at his subject as researched history with the knowledge that his material is grounded in fact. 1

Luke considers his Gentile readers when he exegetes the gospel in terms of salvation as an experience for the present age. A coming kingdom is not easily understood by Gentiles. For Luke, Jesus is in the business of proclaiming an important message from God (preach the gospel); it is a message of “salvation”. “The Son of man is come to seek and save that which was lost” (Lk 19:10). It is not just a salvation from the “wrath to come”, but a life-giving salvation in the present, a coming close to the life-giver himself. This salvation is for all. Luke makes a point of defining “the lost”, not as “righteous” Israel, but outcast Israel, the brokenhearted, the sinners and all such people; not just broken Israel, but also outcast Gentiles.2 In the same relation, the Gospel of Luke was written for the precise purpose of confirming the accuracy of the oral instruction Theophilus had already received. The glimpse presented to us here, is all that is really known, as distinguished from what is guessed about the sources of the synoptic Gospels.

One other implication of vast significance is obvious in this Gospel. Whereas the oral instruction received by Theophilus was admitted by Luke to have been absolutely correct, and whereas the “many” writers had written of the things Luke recorded, this Gospel was composed for the purpose of greater “certainty” (Luke 1:4) than could have been held in respect of oral teachings, and with a design of giving an account of “all things” (Luke 1:3) that were pertinent to the holy faith, as contrasted with implied inadequacy of the “many” written accounts, this latter implication of inadequacy, or incompleteness, being the sole fault of the “many” writers before him. There is not the slightest hint that Luke was writing to correct false teachings of other Gospel writers.

Analysis of Luke 1, 3

In this kind of scriptural study, it is always penitent to return to the original text for more meaningful examination. Consequently, the original Greek version of this preface to the Gospel reads: Ἐπειδήπερ πολλοὶ ἐπεχείρησαν ἀνατάξασθαι διήγησιν περὶ τῶν πεπληροφορημένων ἐν ἡμῖν πραγμάτων, καθὼς παρέδοσαν ἡμῖν οἱ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς αὐτόπται καὶ ὑπηρέται γενόμενοι τοῦ λόγου, εδοξε καμοι παρηκολουθηκοτι ανωθεν πασιν ακριβως καθεξης σοι γραψαι κρατιστε θεοφιλε. Which means:

To understand this particular portion of Luke’s Gospel, one would examine this preface in a chiasimus beginning from the very first verse: εδοξε καμοι παρηκολουθηκοτι ανωθεν πασιν ακριβως καθεξης σοι γραψαι κρατιστε θεοφιλε. This particular verse cannot easily be understood in isolation of the first two verses. Thus, a little observation of these other verses will be significant.

This preface is not a statement of what Luke proposed to do, but a record of what he had already done. The tense of the verbs shows that he wrote these verses after he had completed the body of the Gospel. Then, this “introduction of Luke’s Gospel is like that of the Greek classics style like Josephus and Aristeas. Notably, Luke avoids the use of Mark’s euangelion (Good news). Instead of that more theological term, he prefers one that lays more stress on the historical genre of his composition”.3

Ἐπειδήπερ πολλοὶ ἐπεχείρησαν ἀνατάξασθαι διήγησιν – Many have taken in hand to draw up a narrative…

This indicates that Luke’s written sources were numerous. “Many” is incapable of meaning only five or six. Even as many as eight are called “few” in Scripture (1 Peter 3, 20); and we are therefore presented with the declaration which reveals a much larger number, perhaps as many as a score, or even more. This is an indication that Mark is not the only source for Luke but there could have been many other sources which he consulted in writing his account. It is also in this sense that scholars talk about the Q source.

περὶ τῶν πεπληροφορημένων ἐν ἡμῖν πραγμάτων, – Matters which have been fulfilled among us…

By these words, Luke affirmed that his record dealt with nothing that was new or novel in the faith of the very extensive Christian community already established. The word for “fulfilled” in this clause means “fully established” (English Revised Version (1885) margin); and this means that the total content of Luke’s Gospel was already the faith of the whole church at the time he wrote in 60 A.D.

καθὼς παρέδοσαν ἡμῖν οἱ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς αὐτόπται – Who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word …

Luke's mention of eye-witnesses of the things he recorded “from the beginning” and “from the first” (Luke 1:3), along with the conspicuous birth narrative in the first two chapters is very nearly the equivalent of saying that he had interviewed the Virgin Mary herself, a conclusion that will appear mandatory in the narrative itself. This is devastating to the wild, subjective theories with regard to Luke's source for the first two chapters. This is also the end of all attempts to late-date the Gospel; for, even at the time Luke wrote, the Virgin Mother was not less than eighty years of age, even allowing for the annunciation to have occurred when she was fifteen years old.

ἔδοξεν καμοὶ – It seemed good to me also ...

This removes any doubt that Luke disapproved of previous writings on the Christian faith, for he here plainly placed himself on the same platform with previous authors.

παρηκολουθηκοτι ανωθεν πασιν ακριβως… – Having traced the source of all things accurately from the first ...

The first word that is prominent in this phraseology is the verb “to follow”, “παρηκολουθηκοτι”. The idea behind the use of this term, according to scholarly conception, is that Luke intends to demonstrate that he has followed the development of this ongoing event (of the life of Jesus). Similarly, the words, “from the first” are a translation of the Greek term “ανωθεν”, the same word which is rendered “from above” in John 3:3. G. Campbell Morgan insisted on the latter meaning here, which would make this an affirmation by Luke of the fact of his inspiration.4

καθεξης σοι γραψαι …– To write unto thee in order ...

There is no way to know exactly what Luke intended by this, other than the inherent evidence that his record is systematic. It does not seem to be strictly chronological in every instance; but it is not affirmed here that it is.

κρατιστε θεοφιλε…– Most excellent Theophilus ...

The use of “κρατιστε” illumines Theophilus as a man of outstanding rank, the term being used of such officials as the governor of the province (Acts 23:26). The name Theophilus means “one who loves God,” but there is no reason to suppose that Luke used this name otherwise than as the personal cognomen of his friend, who might also have been his patron. The omission of the title “excellent” in Acts 1:1 supports the speculation that Theophilus was governor of an unnamed province when Luke was written, but that he was no longer governor when Luke wrote Acts of the Apostles. This accounts for the absence of this title in the latter.

This pattern Luke uses to begin his Gospel reflects his contemporary scientific and systematic method of presenting history. “Thus, this formal scholarly precision suggests that it is important to the writer that this gospel be seen as credible by such an audience”.5 Through this, Luke avoids making this Gospel an academic enterprise.

THE PERSONALITY OF THEOPHILUS IN LUKE 1, 3

Before examining the personality of this figure, one fundamental fact must be underscored: the identity and spiritual status of this Theophilus is unknown. All that biblical scholars and exegetes attempt are efforts to explain who or what this individual could mean in the light of the Lucan style of writing.

Going back to the etymology of the name, Theophilus, one discovers that it is a Greek common name which ordinarily means “beloved of God” as earlier seen. This name was first mentioned in Luke1, 3 and then later again in Acts 1, 1, as Luke spoke of the treatise between them to report the things of Jesus Christ that He did and taught until His Resurrection (Luke 1, 3). Apparently, it seemed that Luke had respect for this man that had received instruction in the Christian faith, and that Luke wanted to add to his understanding by recording the events through the accounts of eyewitnesses.

From the name also, two possibilities can be deduced in terms of what he means for Luke – he could be a representative of members of Luke’s community of which majority may be Gentile “God-fearers” or it could be all godly people because it would be foolish for addressing one man, when the Good News of Christ was meant to be delivered to all men to believe and be saved.6 On another note, it could be a real person that probably had high social standing and a keen interest in increasing his understanding of the Christian faith.7

Luke’s business was to clear up points of misunderstanding or misrepresentation which had presumably arisen in the pagan world and even perhaps in the courts of Roman magistrates.8 Luke was able to write historical Truth in the midst of an atmosphere of amorphous understanding of the life of Jesus by focusing on one man that was well-respected by him to be a seeker of the Truth of God.

It is also unclear if Theophilus is this person’s real name, since the name means “Lover of God.” It may be that Luke is writing to a man who wishes to keep his identity secret, or that the name refers to a general group of Christians. Most scholars believe that Theophilus was an individual, and was probably a patron to Luke.9 “Nevertheless, that the work is dedicated to Theophilus does not mean that Luke intended his work just for him. Other ancient writers dedicated their works to individuals, knowing full well that they were writing for a larger audience.10 Similarly Luke may not oblivious of the fact that his work is meant for a wider community since his Gospel simply followed the classical ancient pattern of writing.

The format of the use of the term is suggestive of a specific individual of high social rank or status because this same title was applied to concrete persons by Paul in addressing Felix (Acts 23, 26; 24, 3), and Festus (Acts 26, 25). However, from all indications, Theophilus was already a believer in the faith. The use of the phrase: “κατηχηθης” in the forth verse of this preface demonstrates it clearly that Theophilus had already received the faith.

CRITICAL APPRECIATION

The gospel of Luke is just a part of a two work volume. To completely understand this work, it is significant to take a close look at the Acts of the Apostles, which is the second aspect of this Gospel. The same kind of preface is also evident in this Acts of the Apostles. In this preface to the Lucan Gospel. Luke sets out to accomplish a basic task which is to convince his audience seen here in the person of Theophilus. This short preface reveals in a spark what Luke intended in the Gospel he wrote. Scholarly evidences testified that Luke is a Gentile presenting history to Gentiles but this time he perceives history through a Hebrew telescope. This tints the colour of his Gospel. Thus, as a unique whole, his Gospel bears a greeting different from the normal Christian to Christian greeting, and maintains an unquestionable apologetic character.

One feels as though this is a very important verse in the bible, and it raises important questions as to the infallibility of the Scripture. It emphasis the fact that the Bible was written by human beings. This is evident from the Lucan statement: “it seemed good to me also, having traced the course of all things accurately from the first to write thee in order” (Lk 1, 3 ). Luke says to have had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, and but the nature of perfection this is not possible, unless Luke was Christ himself.

The word Theophilus, as we have already seen, means a friend of God, beloved of God or a pious man; and it has been supposed by some scholars that Luke did not refer to any particular individual, but to any person that loved God; but there is no reason for this opinion. Significant names were very common, and there is no good reason to doubt that this was some individual known to Luke. The application of the title “most excellent” farther proves it. It would not be given to an unknown man. The title most excellent has been supposed to be given to express his character, but it is rather to be considered as denoting rank or office. However, in the final analysis, the real identity or personality of Theophilus remains unknown. All we have are scholarly exegetical speculations concerning his identity or what he represents in Luke. In fact, Luke should be the only one who is in the proper position to explain this question of the person of Theophilus.

CONCLUSION

Luke opens his gospel with a single resounding sentence in the delicately balanced style of classical rhetoric. Artistic judgment and fidelity to tradition have prompted him to tell his story in the vernacular Greek with a strong Semitic accent, as it had been told and retold from the beginning by eyewitnesses. This very introductory aspect of Luke reveals a lot of things inherent in the entire book that may not be justifiably exhausted in a simple easy of this range.

Whether or not the identity of the person to whom Luke’s Gospel was addressed is known, the point remains that this book, like any scriptural text, is inspired and useful for the communication of truth and morals.

REFERENCE
1. Raymond Brown et al (Ed)., The Jerome Biblical Commentary, Prentice-Hall Inc, New Jersey, 1968. p 119
2. Gospel of Luke: Life of Jesus, in http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/gospel-of-luke.htm. (accessed: 10th May, 2010).
3. Raymond Brown et al (Ed)., The Jerome Biblical Commentary, Prentice-Hall Inc, New Jersey, 1968. p. 119
4. G. Campbell Morgan., The Gospel According to Luke, Fleming H Revell Co. 1986
5. Sharon Ringe., Luke, Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville, 1995, p. 16
6. Calvin John., Calvin’s Commentaries: Harmony of the Evangelists Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Vol. XVI. 22vols. Grand Rapids: Baker Books House Company, 2005, p.3
7. Sharon Ringe., Luke, p. 20
8. Grant, F.C. Current Issues in New Testament Interpretation. Edited by W. Klassen and G.F. Snyder. London: SCM Press, 1962, p83.
9. Darrell Bock., Luke 1:1-9:50 (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament), 1994: p. 63.
10. Ibid, p. 64.




BIBLIOGRAPHY
Brown Raymond et al (Ed).,The Jerome Biblical Commentary, Prentice-Hall Inc, New Jersey,
1968.
Buttrick George et al (Eds)., The Interpreter’s Dictionary of The Bible: An Illustrated
Encyclopedia, Abingdon Press, New York, 1962.
Caird B. G., The Pelican New Testament Commentaries: The Gospel of St. Luke, Penguin Books
Calvin John., Calvin’s Commentaries,: Harmony of the Evangelists Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
Vol. XVI. 22 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker Books House Company, 2005.

Darrell Bock., “Luke 1:1-9:50: Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament”, 1994.
Inc. England, 1963
Freedman N. David et al (Eds)., The Anchor Bible Dictionary Vol. 4, Doubleday, New York,
1992.
Klassen. W. and Snyder. G., Grant, F. Current Issues in New Testament Interpretation, SCM
Press, London; 1962.
Sharon Ringe., Luke, Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville, 1995.