written, not by eye-witnesses, but by men who had listened to those who
had themselves seen. Luke leaves his readers to infer that he also drew
a large number of his facts from these earlier sources as well as from
the testimony of eye-witnesses. The implication of the prologue is that
he himself was entirely dependent upon written and oral sources for his
data. This is confirmed by the testimony of the _Muratorian Fragment_:

Luke the physician, after the ascension of Christ, when Paul had taken
him, as it were, as a follower zealous of the right, wrote the gospel
book according to Luke in his own name, as is believed. Nevertheless he
had not himself seen the Lord in the flesh, and, accordingly, going back
as far as he could obtain information, he began his narrative with the
birth of John.

His many literal quotations from it and the fact that he makes it the
framework of his own, indicate that Mark's Gospel was one of those
earlier attempts to which he refers.

[Sidenote: _Luke's motive in writing_]

The motive which influenced Luke to write is clearly stated. It was to
prepare a comprehensive, accurate, and orderly account of the facts in
regard to the life of Jesus for his Greek friend Theophilus, who had
already been partially instructed in the same. His Gospel confirms the
implications of the prologue. It is the longest and most carefully
arranged of all the Gospels. The distinctively Jewish ideas or
institutions which are prominent in Matthew are omitted or else
explained; hence there is nothing which would prove unintelligible to a
Greek. The book of the Acts of the Apostles, dedicated to the same
patron, is virtually a continuation of the third Gospel, tracing, in a