There is a theory that the first two chapters of Luke (birth narrative) were added to address the Adoptionist position. This is consistent with Chapter 3 beginning like a beginning.
Question: under this theory, was the “Dear Theopolis, I decided to tell you the true story” part also an addition, or original?
Thanks
Thanks- so both “Dear Theopolis” comments were added along with the census/manger story and all of Acts?
But it seems many (including professor Ehrman?) say Acts was written soon or immediately after Luke. And the census/manger story is thought to come long after Luke, especially if a strategic response to Marcion (see BE blog post about Luke manuscripts).
So why do you think that? Thanks for your thoughts…
Thanks Robert. One more question for you (or anybody) – if the original Luke was written by one person and the Nativity scene and Acts were added later, does that erode or destroy the common belief that “Luke and Acts had the same author”? Or are there literary or other clues that show it was the same author?
I’m not a specialist so I can’t get too far into the weeds but the general scholarly view is because of the literary and theological similarities. It’s the same kind of evidence that scholars use to identify the Pauline forgeries.
Here’s my own pet wild-eyed hypothesis. Instead of being a seperate gospel perhaps so-called Proto-Luke was simply another version of Mark?
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)