God's not the right answer no?....![]()
Sure God is "behind" it but what does Luke say is his inspiration?
God's not the right answer no?....![]()
Sure God is "behind" it but what does Luke say is his inspiration?
The 'holy spirit' gave them utterance...![]()
I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus
Okay.....I'm just an ordinary disabled woman who lives in the south (God's Country) but my way of looking at the Apocalypse of Peter is this.........
Almighty God parted the Red Sea and allowed His children to walk on dry ground. He gave them water and put food on the ground for them everyday. (Hey....no going to Piggly Wiggly!) He led them by cloud in the daytime and a column of fire at night. I believe it, just as sure as I'm sitting here in Mississippi. These miraculous feats happened through the power of God. But, I don't think He's powerful enough to put a book together. HOGWASH! The Books of the Bible were compiled by God.....Divinely inspired.....and put together just how God wanted them to be.
Now you guys know how I just love Peter.....Mr. open mouth and insert both feet as he's known by the other disciples. I am not going to try to figure out why these papers were not inserted into the Holy Bible, but I believe God has His reasons......otherwise, these papers would be there.....period. There are some things that we will not know until we meet our Saviorface to face, and by then, it won't matter.
![]()
and Theophilus be?
most excellent_likely a government official Acts 23:26, 24:3, 26:25
Theo=God
Phileo=Love
Theophilus literally means lover of God
Book written to Theophilus to convert him and Acts written likely to confirm his faith
Luke did not know Jesus. He was too young and Revelation was not the last book written. Only 2 Gospel writers were eyewitnesses.
Luke interviewed Mary, so he couldn't be THAT much younger. Half of the gospel writers were apostles (Matthew and John). Mark was known before as "John Mark". He was the son of the woman who let Jesus use the upper room. In Mark 14:51-52, Mark is the only gospel writer to include that little tidbit. Although Paul wrote most of the epistles, (he met Jesus after the resurrection), other writers of the epistles knew Jesus---Peter for example and Jesus' half brother, James. And I suppose that you want to tell us what the last book of the Bible was that was written.
Peter and James and other apostles did not write Gospels. Mark was a young man when he turned back in Paul's first missionary journey. His immaturity is what most believe caused him to go home, enough so that Paul did not want to use him anymore. Certainly John Mark could remember some events from his childhood but that does not mean he was an "eyewitness" nor at an age to be a "follower" of Jesus. There are some who "say" Luke interviewed Mary but there is no proof. Luke would have actually been a 3rd generation Christian. The likelihood that Mary was still alive is possible but not likely. John, Timothy, Titus, Apollos and others were still alive. Luke's gospel does contain some discrepancies from other accounts. Luke clearly denotes that his information was second hand.
I went back and looked. In no place did I say that Peter or James wrote gospels. Matthew and John were the only two apostles who wrote gospels. Peter and James wrote epistles. I also didn't say that John Mark was a "follower" at the time of Jesus' death and resurrection. He was still a young boy. And I don't "buy" the Luke being a 3rd generation Christian. He relayed more the circumstances of Jesus' birth than any of the other gospel writers. Do you think that He asked someone about the conversations that Mary had with God 3 generations later?
And just because Timothy, Titus and the others were still alive doesn't mean that they hadn't already written those epistles.
So you are of the assumption that Luke was perhaps 140-160 years old when he died?
Sigh,come on people! Jim authorized it.