Accuracy of c 14 dating
' [Luke ], even as I learned from the Memoirs of this fact also." These Gospels which were read every Sunday must be the same as our four, which soon after, in the time of Irenæus, were in such long established honour, and regarded by him as inspired by the Holy Ghost. About the same time the Gospels, together with their titles, were translated into Latin; and here, again, we meet the phenomena of variant readings, to be found in Clement, Irenæus, Old Syriac, Justin, and Celsus, pointing to a long period of previous copying.
We never hear, says Salmon, of any revolution dethroning one set of Gospels and replacing them by another; so we may be sure that the Gospels honoured by the Church in Justin's day were the same as those to which the same respect was paid in the days of Irenæus, not many years after. Finally, we may ask, if the author of the two books were not St. Harnack (Luke the Physician, 2) holds that as the Gospel begins with a prologue addressed to an individual (Theophilus) it must, of necessity, have contained in its title the name of its author. Luke were not the author, that the name of the real, and truly great, writer came to be completely buried in oblivion, to make room for the name of such a comparatively obscure disciple as St. Apart from his connection, as supposed author, with the Third Gospel and Acts, was no more prominent than Aristarchus and Epaphras; and he is mentioned only in three places in the whole of the New Testament.
Luke the authorship of the two canonical books ascribed to him, and has further proved that, with some few omissions, they may be accepted as trustworthy documents. He claims to have shown that the earlier critics went hopelessly astray, and that the traditional view is the right one. Paul is much more marked in those Epistles where we know that St. Summing up, he observes: "There is in fact sufficient ground for believing that these books.
The Gospel and Acts are both dedicated to Theophilus and the author of the latter work claims to be the author of the former (Acts 1:1). Every ancient testimony for the authenticity of Acts tells equally in favour of the Gospel; and every passage for the Lucan authorship of the Gospel gives a like support to the authenticity of Acts. John the Apostle, and in his numerous writings he frequently mentions other disciples of the Apostles. 130 (some say much earlier), is, therefore, a witness for the early tradition of Asia Minor, Rome, and Gaul.
The style and arrangement of both are so much alike that the supposition that one was written by a forger in imitation of the other is absolutely excluded. Besides, in many places of the early Fathers both books are ascribed to St. The external evidence can be touched upon here only in the briefest manner. He was priest in Lyons during the persecution in 177, and was the bearer of the letter of the confessors to Rome. He quotes the Gospels just as any modern bishop would do, he calls them Scripture, believes even in their verbal inspiration; shows how congruous it is that there are four and only four Gospels; and says that Luke, who begins with the priesthood and sacrifice of Zachary, is the calf.
Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. Luke and Timothy escaped, probably because they did not look like Jews (Timothy's father was a gentile). Luke accompanied him from Philippi to Troas, and with him made the long coasting voyage described in Acts 20. Mark; and in the Acts he knows all the details of St. Mark's mother, and the name of the girl who ran to the outer door when St. Plummer argues that these sections are by the same author as the rest of the Acts: The change of person seems natural and true to the narrative, but there is no change of language.
Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more all for only .99... When Paul departed from Philippi, Luke was left behind, in all probability to carry on the work of Evangelist. Luke is "the brother, whose praise is in the gospel through all the churches" (2 Corinthians ), and that he was one of the bearers of the letter to Corinth. He went up to Jerusalem, was present at the uproar, saw the attack on the Apostle, and heard him speaking "in the Hebrew tongue" from the steps outside the fortress Antonia to the silenced crowd. The characteristic expressions of the writer run through the whole book, and are as frequent in the "we" as in the other sections. Harnack (Luke the Physician, 40) makes an exhaustive examination of every word and phrase in the first of the "we" sections (xvi, 10-17), and shows how frequent they are in the rest of the Acts and the Gospel, when compared with the other Gospels. Luke (Gospels and Acts), and that in all parts of the work." When he comes to the end of his study of this section he is able to write: "After this demonstration those who declare that this passage was derived from a source, and so was not composed by the author of the whole work, take up a most difficult position. In regard to vocabulary, syntax, and style, he must have transformed everything else into his own language.A few are found in Aristotle, but he was a doctor's son. has now been converted by Harnack's argument, founded in part, as he himself confesses, on the researches of English scholars, especially Dr. The words with which Hippocrates begins his treatise "On Ancient Medicine" should be noted in this connection: (Plummer, 4).