Who was Luke?
When they lived First century, a travelling companion of Paul
In short
Luke is the author tradition assigns the third Gospel and the book of Acts — together, more than a quarter of the New Testament. Paul’s letters mention him three times, once calling him a physician, and stretches of Acts are narrated in the first person plural.
- Written by
- Raphael Navarro Schmitt
- Reviewed by
- Maria Luisa Navarro Schmitt
- Published on
- Reading time
- 8 min read
Luke is a curious case: he wrote more pages of the New Testament than any other author and appears in it least. Three mentions in Paul’s letters, always in passing, always inside a list of greetings. No biography, no scene, no line of speech.
On the other hand, he is the only evangelist who explains what he is doing. His Gospel opens with four verses of method — whom he writes to, what he draws on, by what standard and to what end — and it is the closest thing to a methodological introduction anywhere in the New Testament.
What the New Testament says about him
There are three mentions, and they fit in a paragraph. In the letter to the Colossians he is greeted as the beloved physician. In the letter to Philemon he appears in a list of co-workers. In the second letter to Timothy, written in a tone of farewell, he is the only one still there.
The mention in Colossians carries a subtlety that has generated a great deal of discussion: a few verses earlier, Paul marks off a group and identifies them as those of the circumcision. Luke is named after that division, which is the main argument for taking him as someone from outside Judaism. It is a reasonable inference, and it remains an inference.
That is all. There is no birth date, no home city, no conversion story and no account of his death in any book of the New Testament.
23Greet Epaphras, my fellow captive in Christ Jesus,
24and Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, my helpers.
A list of names at the end of a very short letter, and Luke is on it. Worth noting who else appears: almost the same names as in Colossians, which helps place the two letters at the same moment.
11Luke alone is with me. Take Mark and bring him with you; for he is useful to me in the ministry.
The bleakest of the three mentions. The context of the chapter is abandonment — other names appear as having left — and this short sentence is what remains of company.
The stretches where the narrator says "we"
There is a strange and much-discussed detail in the book of Acts. In four passages, without warning and without explanation, the account switches from the third person to the first person plural. The narrator had been reporting what Paul did, and suddenly starts reporting what we did.
The switch happens at the crossing into Macedonia, and happens again in other travel passages, including the shipwreck and the arrival in Rome. Then it disappears, and the text goes back to "they".
The simplest reading is that the author was present for those stretches and used a travel record of his own. That fact, added to the mentions in the letters, is what supports the traditional attribution to Luke. There are alternative explanations — that it was a literary convention for sea-voyage narratives, for instance — and it is worth knowing they exist.
9And a vision in the night was revealed to Paul of a certain man of Macedonia, standing and pleading with him, and saying: “Cross into Macedonia and help us!”
10Then, after he saw the vision, immediately we sought to set out for Macedonia, having been assured that God had called us to evangelize to them.
11And sailing from Troas, taking a direct path, we arrived at Samothrace, and on the following day, at Neapolis,
The exact point of the switch. Read carefully: verse 9 speaks of Paul in the third person, and verse 10 is already in the plural. The change happens in the middle of a sentence about a decision, with no comment from the narrator.
The prologue, and what it declares
The first four verses of Luke’s Gospel are a single sentence, written in a careful Greek that stands out from the rest of the book. In it the author says four things.
First: that many had already written accounts before him — that is, he is not a pioneer and knows it. Second: that the material comes from those who saw from the beginning, not from himself. Third: that he investigated everything carefully and set it in order. Fourth: that the addressee has a name, Theophilus, and a stated purpose — to have certainty about what he had already been taught.
It is the most explicit statement of method in any New Testament text. And it contains, in passing, the fact the section below develops: the writer places himself in the second generation, not among the witnesses.
The book of Acts opens by taking up the same addressee and calling the Gospel the first book. Which is to say, the two works were conceived as parts of one project, and reading either without the other cuts the thing in half.
What exists only in Luke
A good part of what people consider most characteristic of Christianity is only in this Gospel. The good Samaritan, the prodigal son, Zacchaeus in the tree, Mary’s song, the shepherds on the night of the birth, the walk to Emmaus, the criminal beside the cross receiving a promise.
There is also a visible editorial trait: Luke gives more room to women, to foreigners, to the poor and to people of bad reputation than the other Gospels do, and he builds pairs of stories with a man and a woman in equivalent situations. This is not a forced modern reading — it is a structural pattern you notice by reading the whole book in one go.
The Emmaus scene, in the second-to-last chapter, is an example of what he does best: two unimportant characters, an afternoon walk, a long conversation, and a recognition that happens in a gesture at table.
33But a certain Samaritan, being on a journey, came near him. And seeing him, he was moved by mercy.
34And approaching him, he bound up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them. And setting him on his pack animal, he brought him to an inn, and he took care of him.
The central passage of the good Samaritan parable, which exists in no other Gospel. Note how much room the text spends describing practical care — bandaging, transport, an inn — rather than describing feelings.
20And rising up, he went to his father. But while he was still at a distance, his father saw him, and he was moved with compassion, and running to him, he fell upon his neck and kissed him.
The moment of reunion in the parable of the prodigal son. The decisive detail is that the father sees him a long way off and runs — that is, he had been watching the road, and the movement starts with him before any apology.
How his name reached the book
All four Gospels are anonymous in the body of the text. None of them signs, and the titles that now sit at the top of the page were added later, by copyists.
The attribution to Luke is early and remarkably stable: it appears in Irenaeus at the end of the second century and in the Muratorian fragment, an early list of accepted books. There is no record of any competing tradition assigning these two books to somebody else, which counts in its favour — inventing an author with no prestige, who never saw Jesus and is not an apostle, would be a strange choice for anyone trying to lend a text authority.
That does not turn the attribution into a claim made by the book itself, and the distinction between those two things is what separates information from supposition.
What the text does not say
Biblical figures gather layers of tradition that Scripture does not support. Telling the two apart does not diminish the story — it gives back what is actually written.
What is commonly said
Luke knew Jesus and wrote down what he saw.
What Scripture says
The prologue says the opposite. The author states that the material was handed on to him by those who saw from the beginning, and presents himself as someone who investigated and arranged — not as a witness. He never claims to have been present at anything he narrates in the Gospel.
What is commonly said
The Gospel of Luke carries the author’s name.
What Scripture says
It does not. None of the four Gospels signs itself in the body of the text; the titles were added by copyists. The attribution to Luke is early, stable and has no known competitor — but it is tradition about the text, not a statement by it.
What is commonly said
Luke painted the first portrait of Mary, and that is why he is patron of painters.
What Scripture says
None of this appears in the New Testament, which mentions no artistic activity of his at all.
Where it comes from: It is a tradition attested in the Christian East from the sixth century onwards, tied to icons of Mary said to have been painted by him. The association spread westward and ended up making him the patron of painters and of artists’ guilds in the Middle Ages.
What is commonly said
We know from the text that Luke was Greek and not Jewish.
What Scripture says
The text does not report his origin. The main argument is indirect: in the letter to the Colossians, Paul identifies a group as those of the circumcision and names Luke outside it. It is a solid and widely accepted inference, and it is worth knowing that it is an inference — the New Testament never says where he was from.
Where this person appears
1Since, indeed, many have attempted to set in order a narrative of the things that have been completed among us,
2just as they have been handed on to those of us who from the beginning saw the same and were ministers of the word,
3so it seemed good to me also, having diligently followed everything from the beginning, to write to you, in an orderly manner, most excellent Theophilus,
4so that you might know the truthfulness of those words by which you have been instructed.
The prologue, and the most explicit statement of method in the New Testament. Notice how much information fits into one sentence: that earlier accounts existed, where the material comes from, what the author did with it, whom he writes for and to what end.
1Certainly, O Theophilus, I composed the first discourse about everything that Jesus began to do and to teach,
2instructing the Apostles, whom he had chosen through the Holy Spirit, even until the day on which he was taken up.
The opening of Acts, which takes up the same addressee and calls the Gospel the first book. It is the internal proof that the two works are a single project, and the reason scholars speak of Luke-Acts as one unit.
14Luke, a most beloved physician, greets you, as does Demas.
The only place the New Testament reports his profession. Read the passage from verse 10: it is the proximity to the marking-off of those of the circumcision, a few verses earlier, that supports the argument about Luke’s background.
9And a vision in the night was revealed to Paul of a certain man of Macedonia, standing and pleading with him, and saying: “Cross into Macedonia and help us!”
10Then, after he saw the vision, immediately we sought to set out for Macedonia, having been assured that God had called us to evangelize to them.
11And sailing from Troas, taking a direct path, we arrived at Samothrace, and on the following day, at Neapolis,
The first of the stretches where the narrator starts saying "we". The change happens between two consecutive verses, with no transition, and it is the main internal indication that the writer was present for part of the travels.
30And it happened that, while he was at table with them, he took bread, and he blessed and broke it, and he extended it to them.
31And their eyes were opened, and they recognized him. And he vanished from their eyes.
The end of the Emmaus walk, unique to this Gospel. The recognition does not happen during the explanation of the Scriptures, which had lasted the whole road: it happens in a gesture at table, and the text marks that deliberately.