{{bgw| Lu 1:1 -4 }} Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,4 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

{{bgw| Lu 1:2 }} Even Luke declares that he is making a systematic record of the testimony of eyewitnesses to the life of Christ. He had access to both Mark and Matthew, as they delivered them unto us, which well as people who were still alive from the beginning time of Christ. There are a few things missing in Luke that are in Matthew. Of particular note are some of the parables. Since both Mark and Matthew were eyewitnessesstill in circulation, there was no compelling reason to be fastidious in recapitulation. His choice to include material from Matthew and Mark, therefor, has to do with and ministers editorial choice to fit his agenda. Particular differences in the handling of material can be attributed to the word;more mature proficiency in unpacking riddle.

{{bgw| Lu 1:3 }} It seemed good Notice that Theophilus had been instructed in things not yet contained in scripture. one of Luke's motivations is to me also, having had perfect understanding validate the oral teaching that was being spread and stave off errors introduced by oral tradition. He is perhaps one of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,'sola scriptura' proponents.

{{bgw| Lu 1:4 }} That thou mightest know The church, by this time had begun to play with words as found in the OT. All of the OT names have meaning which is significant to unpacking God's intended meaning. Luke knows that he is writing the third edition of "The Life of Christ" not merely a letter for one man. He uses the certainty man's name to address the larger audience. 'Theophilus' means 'God lover'. He wrote the book for all who love God. Matthew intentionally use word-play when explaining 'Yeshua' and it is inconceivable that Luke would not have recognized it in his use of those things, wherein thou hast been instructedTheophilus.

Luke declares has learned from the previous books that he is making a systematic record bit of intellectual humility is in order in declaring the testimony beginning of eyewitnesses to the life of Christgospel. He had access to both Mark and identified it at the preaching of John the Baptist; Matthew, as well as people who were still alive from the time calling of ChristAbraham. There are Though he now understands that the record of Adam to Abraham is also a few things missing in Luke that are in Matthew. Of particular note are some parable of the parables. Since both Mark and Matthew were still in circulationChrist, there was no compelling reason he is content to be fastidious place the genealogy in recapitulation. His choice to include material from Matthew and Mark, therefor, has to do with and editorial choice to fit his agenda. Particular differences a logical flow in the handling life of material can be attributed to Christ, rather than at the more mature proficiency in unpacking riddlebeginning of his book.

Notice that Theophilus had been instructed It may seem undignified to paint the NT authors in a friendly competition in teaching the cool things not yet contained they have been discovering in scripture. one But these are some of Luke's motivations is the same guys who were in a not-so-friendly competition for a seat next to validate Christ in the oral teaching that was being spread kingdom. They are goaded in friendly theological banter not only by the nature of childish word-play, but by the proverb "iron sharpens iron" making it a good thing to encourage one another to dive deeper in scripture and stave off errors introduced by oral traditioncommunicate the mystery better.