Luke among the Ancient Historians

“Peters has written a fresh and stimulating portrayal of Lukan historiography. . . . Peters argues his position with methodological clarity and rigor, and this is why this book makes a significant contribution to the quest for the sources, methods, and purposes of Luke-Acts, which deserves a broad and thorough discussion.”


—Michael Wolter, University of Bonn





“Peters makes a crucial distinction between Greek historians writing about contemporary events and those writing about noncontemporary events and places the author of Luke-Acts conclusively among the former. This distinction shows that the author does not rely only on isolated written accounts but primarily on autopsy, traveling, and inquiring eyewitnesses. Peters thus perceptively challenges some modes of form criticism and redaction criticism, pointing to Luke-Acts as an independent source for historical reconstruction.”


—Samuel Byrskog, Lund University





“Although I believe that Luke had some written as well as oral sources available, Peters has provided a detailed and masterful case by comparing Luke’s methodology with the most analogous ancient authors: historians of recent events. . . . Anyone interested in reading Luke-Acts as ancient historiography . . . needs to attend to and learn from Peters’ detailed work.”


—Craig S. Keener, Asbury Theological Seminary





“This is an important contribution to what should now be the central task of Gospels scholarship: to reassess the nature of the Gospels after the demise of form criticism. . . . Peters shows that Luke claims to have sourced his work directly from eyewitnesses, including some of the disciples of Jesus. It hardly needs saying that this must have a major impact on the study of Luke’s Gospel in particular, but also the Acts of the Apostles.”


—Richard Bauckham, St Andrews University, emeritus