Previous posts: Iconography Of The Gospels, Iconography Of The Gospels 2

Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

(Luke 1:3-4, NIV)

If we suppose that Luke “carefully investigated everything from the beginning” and intended to write an “orderly account,” why did he leave so much out?

There are no wise men from the East.  Nor does Joseph flee with his family to Egypt.  Jesus is not anointed at Bethany.  Jesus doesn’t appear before the Sanhedrin. There is no account of Judas’ suicide. 

Strangest of all to me is a great big gap in the middle of Jesus’ ministry.  If you read Luke’s account in chapter 9, Jesus feeds the 5,000 and then the next thing, he’s having a conversation with the disciples about, “Who do the crowds say that I am?”  Yet from John’s account we know that the feeding of the 5,000 occurred around the Passover Feast (John 6:4) while Peter’s confession is just before the Feast of Tabernacles six months later (John 7:2).

Such a juxtaposition of these stories makes sense if Luke was organizing his account thematically.  Jesus has just fed a huge crowd of people and then he asks, “Who do the crowds say that I am?”  But why leave out a major section of Jesus’ earthly ministry?

Matthew and Mark write pages and pages about that six month period.  For one thing, Jesus walks on water (Matt. 14, Mark 6, John 6).  Hardly a minor detail that a thorough historian like Luke would decide to leave out.  For another thing, Jesus makes a major tour of non-Jewish areas and an evangelistic push into Gentile territory.  That’s the kind of activity I would draw attention to if, like Luke, I was trying to show that Jesus had come to be savior of everyone not just Jews.

So I think I must have misunderstood Luke’s intention in writing his gospel.  I’ve accepted a priori that he wrote to show that God was reconciling Gentiles to himself through Jesus.  But if that’s so, why did he not mention Jesus’ tour through places like Tyre, Sidon and the Decapolis?  Second, I think I have misunderstood what Luke meant by an “orderly account.” He didn’t mean “exhaustive encyclopedic account.” There is still a selection of details going on for the purpose of developing certain themes that Luke wants to emphasize. However, I’m no longer certain what those themes are.