U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-23-2013, 06:10 PM
 
535 posts, read 795,766 times
Reputation: 199

Advertisements

I've read multiple pieces and both make their case that Luke was either a Jew or a Gentile. Is there a definitive answer that I'm overlooking? It may not seem like a big deal, but when I consider how much he actually wrote in both Luke and Acts, it is extensive, more than any other NT author, even Paul. Would the Lord entrust the Word to a Gentile?

Arguments Luke was a Jew
1. The oracles of God Romans 3:1-2 Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. This was a rule, revelation from God was given to the Jews.
2. In Acts 21 when the Jews wanted to arrest Paul for bringing Gentiles into the Temple they named Trophimus and not Luke who was Paul's constant companion.
3. Luke had vast knowledge of the Temple. I've seen it argued he may have been a Levite because of his description in Luke 1:8-20 Luke 1:8-20 - Once when Zechariah
4. Luke appeared to have an intimate acquaintance with Mary. He wrote from her point of view and said she "hid these things in her heart." Would a Gentile have had that seeming closeness to Mary?

Arguments Luke was a Gentile
1. In Colossians, I think Chapter 4, Paul makes a list of those "of the circumcision." Luke was not included in the list but he was mentioned moments later. If he was a Jew wouldn't he have listed by Paul?
2. The name Luke was obviously not Jewish. However, neither was Paul (Saul) or Peter (Simon). Could it have been Luke was simply a Gentile name and his Jewish name was something else?
3. His profession. Luke being a physician cause some to believe he was a Gentile. Is there any evidence Jews were not physicians?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-23-2013, 07:09 PM
 
21,836 posts, read 16,682,806 times
Reputation: 8661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Priscilla Martin View Post
I've read multiple pieces and both make their case that Luke was either a Jew or a Gentile. Is there a definitive answer that I'm overlooking? It may not seem like a big deal, but when I consider how much he actually wrote in both Luke and Acts, it is extensive, more than any other NT author, even Paul. Would the Lord entrust the Word to a Gentile?

Arguments Luke was a Jew
1. The oracles of God Romans 3:1-2 Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. This was a rule, revelation from God was given to the Jews.
2. In Acts 21 when the Jews wanted to arrest Paul for bringing Gentiles into the Temple they named Trophimus and not Luke who was Paul's constant companion.
3. Luke had vast knowledge of the Temple. I've seen it argued he may have been a Levite because of his description in Luke 1:8-20 Luke 1:8-20 - Once when Zechariah
4. Luke appeared to have an intimate acquaintance with Mary. He wrote from her point of view and said she "hid these things in her heart." Would a Gentile have had that seeming closeness to Mary?

Arguments Luke was a Gentile
1. In Colossians, I think Chapter 4, Paul makes a list of those "of the circumcision." Luke was not included in the list but he was mentioned moments later. If he was a Jew wouldn't he have listed by Paul?
2. The name Luke was obviously not Jewish. However, neither was Paul (Saul) or Peter (Simon). Could it have been Luke was simply a Gentile name and his Jewish name was something else?
3. His profession. Luke being a physician cause some to believe he was a Gentile. Is there any evidence Jews were not physicians?
Hi Priscilla. As you pointed out, Colossians 4:10-14 does strongly suggest that Luke was a Gentile. As for his acquaintance with Mary, whether he was a Jew or a Gentile he would have sought her out in order to interview her about Jesus. Luke stated at the beginning of his gospel account that he investigated everything carefully. He interviewed those who were eyewitnesses, and Mary certainly was an eyewitness.

I am inclined to think that Luke was Gentile.

But regarding whether God would entrust His word to a Gentile, remember that the Church age believer is neither Jew or Gentile, but Church - a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17). In the church age the distinction between Jew and Gentile does not exist among believers (Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11). The church is the body of Christ and believers are all part of the body.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2013, 08:31 PM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
16,261 posts, read 7,650,467 times
Reputation: 1718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Priscilla Martin View Post
Arguments Luke was a Jew
2. In Acts 21 when the Jews wanted to arrest Paul for bringing Gentiles into the Temple they named Trophimus and not Luke who was Paul's constant companion.
Actually, this one works in the opposite direction as indicated in the bolded; there would be no case against a gentile if he were brought into the temple, but against the Jew who did so, apparently. If Luke was not named, he was not named as a Jew who brought gentiles into the temple QED.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2013, 09:20 PM
 
535 posts, read 795,766 times
Reputation: 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
Actually, this one works in the opposite direction as indicated in the bolded; there would be no case against a gentile if he were brought into the temple, but against the Jew who did so, apparently. If Luke was not named, he was not named as a Jew who brought gentiles into the temple QED.
Hi nateswift. Maybe I didn't phrase that quite right. Of course, they wanted to arrest Paul not Luke. The point I was making is why did they choose to name only Trophimus the Ephesian as the person Paul brought into the Temple and not also Luke the Gentile, unless Luke was a Jew? I realize Paul would have been the guilty one, had the accusations been true. Thanks for giving me the chance to clarify.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top