Luke, the “embedded” correspondent

Joyce Voysey

In quietly pondering Luke and his writings, I’ve come to think of him as a reporter who was “embedded” with Paul in a way similar to war correspondents of our day.  Which begs the question, “Could we consider Paul’s travels and work among the Gentiles as taking part in warfare?”  It seems we can. 

In II Corinthians we find Paul explaining, “For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;” II Cor. 10:3-5.

And Science and Health has several references under “warfare.”  For example:
“The way is straight and narrow, which leads to the understanding that God is the only Life.  It is a warfare with the flesh, in which we must conquer sin, sickness, and death, either here or hereafter, – certainly before we can reach the goal of Spirit, or life in God.”  324:13

If we could consider our Christian work of defeating error more in the light of the urgency of warfare, perhaps we would have a more correct viewpoint.  Like a good news correspondent, it seems that Luke interviewed everyone who had been eyewitnesses to the events of Jesus’ life.  How satisfying it must have been for him. 

Apparently Luke was already a follower of Christ when he met Paul, having come from Antioch in Syria.  And travel in those days was so slow there was plenty of time for Paul to impart his knowledge of events as they walked or sailed.  The writings tell us that he was not constantly with Paul on his travels around Greece, but he accompanied him to Rome, and supported him there in those days of peril.

Regarding Luke’s introduction:  Does everyone else query his statement that he had “perfect understanding of all things from the very first” (Luke 1: 3)? I can accept that this must have been very close to the truth of Paul’s immediate grasp of Truth after his conversion.

Was Theophilus (see Luke 1: 3) a student of Luke?  And was Luke addressing one of his students as beloved of God? (Dummelow's Bible Commentary translates Theophilus as 'beloved of God'; Cyclopecid Bible Concordance has 'loved of God'; Pelobet’s  Bible Dictionary has 'friend of God'.)  Or was he addressing all who follow those teachings, as Theophilus?  There is much debate about just who Theophilus was.

This gospel was written for Greek Christians, while Matthew was written for the Jews, and Mark for the Jewish Christians.