WHEN DID LUKE’S WRITE HIS GOSPEL? Andrew Larkin
When did Luke write his gospel? The suggestions range from between AD 60 and 130 although most would date it within the first century. Why this range?
The issue is tied up with why Luke wrote his gospel and the book of Acts. If, for instance, Theophilus was an influential figure involved in Paul’s trial and Luke was effectively writing the defence brief, then we are looking at an early 60s date, with the end of Acts taking place around AD 62. It has also been observed that Luke presents Rome and Roman officials in a positive light throughout his two volumes. Would he have done so if he was writing after Nero’s persecutions (AD64) or the fall of Jerusalem (AD 70)?
Why would some suggest a later date? The first takes account of Luke’s aim in writing his gospel and Acts. Many see the structure of Acts following the words Jesus said in Acts 1:8:
“But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”
We see the gospel reach Samaria in Acts 8 following its spread throughout Jerusalem and Judea. From Acts 10 onwards, the gospel is proclaimed among the Gentiles and the story transitions from a focus on Peter to one on Paul. With Paul ending up on trial in Rome, the gospel has reached the heart of the Empire; Christ is being proclaimed and, although Paul is under house-arrest, the gospel is spreading. Luke has achieved his purposes.
The second reason concerns the crucial date of AD 70, the fall of Jerusalem. There is much debate as to whether Jesus is talking about AD 70; the end of the world; or both in Matthew 24-25; Mark 13 and Luke 21:20-21 and if (as seems likely) it is both, which verses refer to AD 70 which to the end times? Regardless of those issues, it is pointed out Luke gives a more detailed description of the events concerning the fall of Jerusalem in Luke 21 than Mark does in his gospel. For instance, we read in Mark 13:14:
“When you see ‘the abomination that causes desolation’ standing where it does not belong—let the reader understand—then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.”
Whereas Luke writes:
“When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city.” (Luke 21:20-21)
It is argued Luke give this detail because he has knowledge of the events of AD 70 and so is writing sometime after that.
It could be Luke is writing after AD 70 but there are two other things to consider around that idea. The first is the idea in academic circles that prophecy is “forth-telling” rather than “fore-telling.” The prophets in the Old Testament, for instance, are seen as covenant-enforcers, proclaiming the Law and applying it to their situation, rather than predicting the future. This seems to me correct in what it affirms and wrong in in what it denies. It does not need to be either/or – prophecy can be, and often is, both.
Linked to this can often be a scepticism of, or denial, of the supernatural. A scepticism, which can see Mark as pre-AD 60 with general predictions. A denial, which leads to any prophetic text being seen as written after the event, rather than before. This does appear a case of, “Heads I win, tails you lose” which turns prophetic fulfilment into prophetic reporting, robbing prophecy of its potency.
Of course, Luke could have been written post-AD 70 without being sceptical of, or denying, the “fore-telling” aspect of prophecy but I am sceptical of the scepticism around prophecy that exists within academic circles.
It seems the majority view among commentators is for a date between AD 70-80 with those of a more conservative perspective opting for an earlier date.