How Many Luke?: An Interpretation of Luke 1:1-4

Luke, the author of Luke and Acts, opens his first volume by claiming that "many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us" (1:1). Commentators and preachers often race past this statement, wanting to move on to the identities and attributes of Luke and Theophilus. This is a grave mistake because the identity of the “many” ties Luke's work to the Old Testament and says a great deal about how the author thinks of himself. Furthermore, Luke's first sentence is a powerhouse statement for the continuity of the Old and New Testaments.

One popular take is that "many" refers to not only Matthew, Mark, and John but maybe even additional writings from the other Apostles, plus the biographical accounts written by various disciples and even perhaps accounts of Jesus's earthy life written by non-believers. As the argument implies, bookstores were teaming with biographies of Jesus, and Luke joined the stack in the shop window. However, unlike the others, Luke wanted to get the facts correct through careful study and interviews with the eyewitnesses. This view raises many questions that it fails to answer. Did none of these other accounts survive except for Mathew, Mark, and John? How were there so many authors willing to write a positive account of the "criminal" whose followers the Romans and the Jewish religious leaders were persecuting, jailing, and even executing? Assuming Luke's gospel was the last of the four, why would he not simply point Theophilus to any of the other three if he merely wanted Theophilus to get the facts correct? Is it possible that Luke didn't think Matthew, Mark, or John were correct?

Continuing this line of thought, verses 1 and 2 raise more questions. To whom is Luke referring in verse 1 by saying "us"? What "things" have been "accomplished" or fulfilled? Is he only speaking of things during Jesus' earthly ministry or pointing to something more? As Luke moves to verse 2, he says what he is attempting is just like "those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word and delivered them to us." If what he is doing is like "those people," it would be helpful to identify who those people might be. Does he mean people who were eyewitnesses of Jesus' earthly ministry from the beginning or someone else witnessing something more? These witnesses and ministers of the word delivered their writings to "us." Luke opened with the same word John opened with--λογοσ (logos), which is translated as "the word," and of those who delivered this word, Luke calls “ministers of the word.” Is what Luke is referring to inspired Scripture, breathed out by God? If that only includes Matthew, Mark, and John, is "many" accurate? Why would God allow Scripture to be lost if it refers to additional inspired manuscripts?

There is another way to think about Luke's opening statement. If "us" refers to the people of God (which, by conversion, Luke had become), then he could be pointing to all the ministers of the word from the Old Testament who documented all that God had been accomplishing among his people. This approach significantly agrees with Luke's comparison in verse 2, just like those who, from the beginning, could include Moses, the prophets, and many more. They were eyewitnesses of God's works, and Luke says he's writing an account of the eyewitnesses in his generation. Many delivered the accounts of the Old Testament, written down for others to have certainty, and just like that, Luke is writing an account and delivering it to Theophilus. Luke saw himself as continuing the account that started long ago and was continuing and being fulfilled in his time. Luke 24:27 and 44 lend tremendous credit to this interpretation of Luke 1:1-2.

If the latter view is correct, Luke opens with a strong tie to the Old Testament. Given how many Old Testament quotes and allusions Luke depends on, it's only fitting that he sees his work as an articulation of the accomplishment of Old Testament promises. Luke tells of all that fulfills what the Old Testament anticipates in the Savior. Knowing this reality, he states it up front so Theophilus can be sure of everything he learned from the Old Testament, which, incidentally, also finds strong support from Luke 24:27 and 44. Taking this approach to Luke 1:1-4 makes a strong argument for the account of Jesus' earthly ministry and also for what the Old Testament says about Jesus. This view is a far more robust understanding of what it means to be an eyewitness of all that God has done and is still doing.