Customer Reviews

The Gospel of Luke

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

E. Earle Ellis' commentary, The Gospel of Luke, is probably my favorite commentary on Luke. Originally written in 1983, Ellis revised recently published a revised version in 2003. Though not the most extensive treatment of the Gospel of Luke, Ellis writes with a clarity and flow that is persuasive and engaging. He also writes with an exceptional command of the issues. Combined, the writing style and informed nature of the discussion create a powerful commentary. Ellis simply does not waste a word.

My favorite part of the commentary is the 62-page introduction. It begins with the "Literary Character" of Luke, including discussions on the unity of Luke-Acts, the language and style, and Luke's theology. Ellis also devotes a few pages to examining the sources of Luke's gospel, including a helpful demonstrative separating out Q, Mark, and the L source. The gem of the introduction, however, is the discussion of dating and authorship. In perhaps the most lucid section of the book (which is saying much), Ellis flows through the material like a scholarly hot knife through warm butter. While engaging much contemporary scholarship, Ellis evaluates the earliest traditions, earliest witnesses to the text, the author's eschatological perspective, and the "we passages." He concludes, reasonably, that the Gospel of Luke was written not too long after 70 AD by Luke, a sometime companion of Paul. Objections to Lucan authorship are found unpersuasive.

Ellis' discussion of the text of Luke is also excellent. He moves through the text section by section, giving a discussion of the Background, Structure, and Teaching of each. Ellis then expounds on ideas or words in the text with notes at the end of the section. Some sections receive more detailed discussions and there are "Special Notes" on select subjects, such as the Nature and Date of the Last Supper and the Empty Tomb. The latter is a very informative discussion on why the empty tomb appears to have become more important as Christianity developed. Ellis convincingly explains that the empty tomb is just as primitive a tradition as the resurrection appearances, but became emphasized more as with the later development of gnosticism.

I give this commentary my highest recommendation.

This is the gospel of Luke from the aspect of the author -- what was he trying to accomplish. Might be one person, might be a team, but this is irrelevant in this book -- the point is-- what is the point of the gospel.

Great book