1:3-4 — Therefore, since I myself have carefully1 investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly2 account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

If there were many who had written their accounts of what had been fulfilled, Luke felt that he needed to write his own after having "carefully investigated everything from the beginning." This should not be taken to mean that Luke was disparaging what had been written. As Howard Marshall notes,3

. . . Luke appears to place himself alongside his predecessors . . . rather than over against them, and the way in which he speaks of Theophilus receiving fresh confirmation of the accuracy of what he has already learned suggests that he had a high regard for his predecessors. The force of the sonorous opening conjunction "inasmuch as" . . . should not be overlooked. It is casual rather than concessive, and the sense is that Luke is using the work of the previous writers positively to justify his own further attempt rather than stating that he is writing although they have already written.

Nonetheless, it is obvious that Luke found a need that has not been met by these other accounts. Perhaps, like Mark (which most scholars believe was already available by the time Luke wrote and probably had access to), they was too brief for his need. Mark was a reliable account and useful as a "beginner's Gospel." Perhaps Luke needed something more substantial for someone who "had been taught," someone who already knew the basics about Jesus and what he had done and needing to learn more. Perhaps, some were like Matthew, reliable but also reflecting a more "Jewish" way of seeing things. Luke needed something more 'ethnically open.' Others, like the apocryphal gospels were too fantastical in their depiction of Jesus, often to the point of being superstitious and ridiculous; that was why the early church did not see it fit to endorce them and they never found their way into our Scriptures. Luke had "carefully investigated everything" and he found many/most of them lacking in what he, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, felt was needed.

The 'homework' he did before he ventured into his writing was thorough; he investigated "carefully," he checked out "everything," and he left nothing out for he worked all the way back to "the beginning." This speaks of Luke's personal integrity, that he would not pass on what he had not himself checked and thought through. What a valuable example he sets for us preachers of the Word, who so often parrot without first investigating the reliability and credibility of what is passed on to us.

So Luke chose what any good missionary would do. Having "carefully investigated everything,"—checking out his sources and satisfying himself that what he would write would stand up to the acid test of the closest scrutiny—he prepared his own material for the "most excellent Theophilus," making sure that what his noble friend/disciple would learn from his work could be held "with certainty" (v4). As a physician Luke understood the value of life and how inaccurate diagnosis or poorly prepared prescriptions can harm or kill the patients under his care. He viewed those he would tell the gospel to with no less care; he intended his Gospel to be so carefully written that Theophilus (and we) may know with certainty the things we have been taught. And he determined that his work would be "orderly," point by point, without confusion or distraction. And what he produced is one of the best-written piece of literature to be found in the NT. We, preachers, have much to learn from Luke's model for our preparation of our sermons and teachings.

But who is this Theophilus? The truth is we do not know, though conjectures abound. He is mentioned only twice in the Bible, and on both occasions he was the audience for whom Luke wrote his works, the Gospel (1:3) and Acts (1:1). Luke greets him with great politeness; "most worthy" was a form of polite address for nobility. Theophilus may, therefore, have been a high official in Caesar's court or administration. It is certain that he was someone Luke was keen who should hear the truth of the gospel and, hopefully, make a decision for Christ if he had not already done so. It may be significant that the verb Luke used to speak of Theophilus having been 'taught,' katecheo; it is the verb used for the instruction of new believers (Acts 18:25; 1 Cor 14:19; Gal 6:6), from which also is derived the English word 'cathechism.' It is probable, therefore, that Theophilus was a young believer being prepared for baptism, as well as someone important enough in Luke's view to warrant the special attention of having two lengthy accounts of Jesus's acts written for his consideration. Beyond this we cannot safely go.

Further Reading & Resources:

Benjamin Fung, Aida Spencer & Francois Viljoen, "What does kαθεξῆς in Luke 1:3 mean? Discovering the writing order of the Gospel of Luke," In die Skriflig 51(1), a2218.

Darrell Bock, "Understanding Luke's Task: Carefully Building on Precedet (Luke 1:1-4," Criswell Theological Review, 5.2 (1991): 183-201.

Werner G. Marx, "A New Theophilus," The Evangelical Quarterly, 1 (1980): 17-26.

Previous Next