The Early Text of Luke

New Testament Manuscripts: Their Texts and Their World (eds Thomas J. Kraus & Tobias Nicklas; Texts and Editions for New Testament Study 2; Leiden: E.J. Brill; 2006), 105-120.

In: Craig A. Evans & Jeremiah J. Johnston, (eds.), SCRIBES AND THEIR REMAINS (Library of Second Temple Studies 94 = Studies in Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity 21; London / New York: T&T Clark, 2020), 224-280, 2020

A close examination of the readings of the 2nd and 3rd century papyri of the Gospels, along with an analysis of the neglected "gospel-parallel" variants, shows more textual fluidity in the early period than is often assumed.

Proceedings of the Computational Humanities Research Conference 2023, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2023

The literary sources behind the three canonical Synoptic Gospels, namely Luke, Matthew and Mark, have long intrigued scholars because of the Gospels striking similarities and notable di昀昀erences in their accounts of Jesus's life. Various theories have been proposed to explain these textual relationships, including common oral witnesses, lost sources or communities possessing each other's works. However, a universally accepted solution remains elusive. Leveraging advancements in statistics, data analysis, and computing power, researchers have begun treating this as a statistical problem and quantitatively measuring the likelihood of the di昀昀erent theories based on verbal agreements and stylometric features. In this paper, we rely on a very recent Machine Learning based approach to solve the synoptic problem. We use Machine Learning classi昀椀ers two-sample tests, a novel approach relying on the analysis of the success rate of binary classi昀椀ers to identify whether two samples are drawn from the same distribution, to detect di昀昀erences in sources within Luke's Gospel and variations in the edition patterns of Markan material between Matthew and Luke. This analysis is done on a pericope-per-pericope basis, de昀椀ned as thematic units encompassing teachings or narrative episodes. The results suggest signi昀椀cant dissimilarities in style and edit distance, indicating that the double and triple material within the Gospel of Luke likely originate from di昀昀erent sources. This suggests that Luke derived his triple tradition from Mark and not from Matthew. Despite the necessity of cautious interpretation due to the size of the dataset, our study thus o昀昀ers substantial evidence supporting the theory of Luke's dependency on Mark's material for his triple tradition and makes the two-source hypothesis, which suggests that Luke did not have access to Matthew's work, the most likely explanation based on our methodology.

Journal for the Study of the HIstorical Jesus, 2020

Research on Luke-Acts and the Gospels has largely overlooked the major distinction within ancient historiography between accounts written about events contemporary with the author (e.g., by Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, Polybius) and accounts written about non-contemporary events (e.g., by Diodorus, Dionysius, Plutarch, Arrian). As ancient authors writing about contemporary events represented their sources primarily in terms of autopsy and eyewitness testimony, so Luke's preface corresponds with this practice. I argue that a proper understanding of ancient historical method, epistemology, and the use of ἐπιχειρέω (Luke 1.1; Acts 9.29; 19.13) confirm that Luke represented as the sources for his account not the 'many' prior accounts but rather the 'eyewitnesses' and 'servants of the word'.

I have been consulted by many ordinary Christians which Bible is the best for them to read. Before I undertook further biblical studies, my answer was quick and easy-RSV Catholic edition. Presently, my answer is not so fast. I would inquire about the person’s reading interests before making a recommendation. I have come to understand that all Bibles and all translations are the result of choices painstakingly made by persons or groups of persons with varying degrees of specialization, different interests and different resources. This paper attempts to demonstrate how elusive is the quest for the ‘original text’ of the New Testament. We are on to NA28 and the work on the manuscripts is only just began!

Tyndale Bulletin, 2018

The Clergy Monthly, 1967

Part One of an article that analyses Luke's claim to his historical accuracy in his Gospel. We establish that contemporary Hellenistic writers did value reliable historicity in their accounts, but they had a different interpretation of detail.

The Clergy Monthly, 1967

Part Two of an article that analyses Luke's claim to his historical accuracy in his Gospel. We establish that contemporary Hellenistic writers did value reliable historicity in their accounts, but they had a different interpretation of detail.