Mogens Müller is Professor of New Testament at the University of Copenhagen, Denmark.Jesper Tang Nielsen is Professor of New Testament at the University of Copenhagen, Denmark.

• Preface AcknowledgementsAbbreviationsIntroduction: Mogens Müller and Jesper Tang NielsenPart 1: Luke Rewriting1. Luke Uses/Rewrites Matthre: A Survey of the 19th Century Research: Vadim Wittkowski, Humboldt University, Germany 2. Re-walking the “Way of the Lord”: Luke’s use of Mark and his Reaction to Matthew: Mark Goodacre, Duke University, USA2. Luke Rewriting and Rewritten: Francis Watson, University of Durham, UK4. Inclusive and exclusive agreements - towards a neutral comparison of the Synoptic Gospels, or: Minor Agreements as misleading category: Werner Kahl, University of Hamburg, Germany5. Acts as Biblical Rewriting of the Gospels and Paul’s Letters: Mogens Müller, University of Copenhagen, DenmarkPart 2: Luke Rewriting Old Testament Themes and Passages6. Rewritten Prophecy in Luke-Acts: Lukas Bormann, Philipps University, Marburg, Germany7. The Lord Elijah in the Temple as in Malachi 3.1: ‘Overkilling’ Elijah Tradition in Luke 2: Lotta Valve, Abo Akademi, Finland8. Luke’s Use of the Old Testament in the Sending of the Seventy(-Two): A Compositional Study: Joseph Michael Lear, University of Aberdeen, UKPart 3: Luke’s Rewriting Gospel Themes and Passages9. Luke’s Rewriting of the Markan Mélange of Christological Titles (Mark 8:27-33 par., 12:35-37 par., 14:55-64 par.): Daniel Gustafsson, Uppsala University, Sweden10. Re-written Stereotypes: Scripture and Cultural Echo in Luke’s Parable of the Widow and the Judge: Marianne Bjelland Kartzow, University of Oslo, Norway11. Luke's Portrait of Jesus and the Political Authorities in his Passion Narrative. A Rewriting of the Passion Narratives of the Other Gospels: Niels Willert, Aarhus University, DenmarkPart 4: Luke’s rewriting of Roman authorities12. Paul in the Presence of Power: Depictions of social interactions in Acts and in the Hellenistic historians: Martin Friis, University of Copenhagen, Denmark13. Luke’s readers and Josephus: Paul and Agrippa II as Test Case: Stefan Nordgaard, University of Copenhagen, DenmarkBibliographyIndexes

With this collection of essays, Müller and Nielsen (both, Univ. of Copenhagen) attempt to bring clarity to the origins of St. Luke's Gospel. Students of the synoptic gospels know that this problem of origin has a long and storied history. The premise of the book is that Luke used Mark and Matthew as his sources, a position generally associated with theologian/philosopher Austin Farrer and his seminal essay "On Dispensing with Q" (published in 1955). Farrer's hypothesis was later taken up by Michael Goulder and, more recently, Mark Goodacre. In continuing the course these writers charted, the contributors are potent in arguing that Luke was more than a redactor of earlier materials, he was a creative writer with innovative ideas and new perspectives on traditional materials. The contributors rigorously reject the idea of a hypothetical Q document. For them, the theory that Luke's use of Matthew was creative and innovative is more elegant and parsimonious than conjecturing that Luke used a non-existent source. Those who are unconvinced by the four-document hypothesis will find this treatment of an old topic stimulating and thought provoking. Summing Up: Recommended. Upper-division undergraduates and above.

Mogens Müller is Professor of New Testament at the University of Copenhagen, Denmark.Jesper Tang Nielsen is Professor of New Testament at the University of Copenhagen, Denmark.

• Preface AcknowledgementsAbbreviationsIntroduction: Mogens Müller and Jesper Tang NielsenPart 1: Luke Rewriting1. Luke Uses/Rewrites Matthre: A Survey of the 19th Century Research: Vadim Wittkowski, Humboldt University, Germany 2. Re-walking the “Way of the Lord”: Luke’s use of Mark and his Reaction to Matthew: Mark Goodacre, Duke University, USA2. Luke Rewriting and Rewritten: Francis Watson, University of Durham, UK4. Inclusive and exclusive agreements - towards a neutral comparison of the Synoptic Gospels, or: Minor Agreements as misleading category: Werner Kahl, University of Hamburg, Germany5. Acts as Biblical Rewriting of the Gospels and Paul’s Letters: Mogens Müller, University of Copenhagen, DenmarkPart 2: Luke Rewriting Old Testament Themes and Passages6. Rewritten Prophecy in Luke-Acts: Lukas Bormann, Philipps University, Marburg, Germany7. The Lord Elijah in the Temple as in Malachi 3.1: ‘Overkilling’ Elijah Tradition in Luke 2: Lotta Valve, Abo Akademi, Finland8. Luke’s Use of the Old Testament in the Sending of the Seventy(-Two): A Compositional Study: Joseph Michael Lear, University of Aberdeen, UKPart 3: Luke’s Rewriting Gospel Themes and Passages9. Luke’s Rewriting of the Markan Mélange of Christological Titles (Mark 8:27-33 par., 12:35-37 par., 14:55-64 par.): Daniel Gustafsson, Uppsala University, Sweden10. Re-written Stereotypes: Scripture and Cultural Echo in Luke’s Parable of the Widow and the Judge: Marianne Bjelland Kartzow, University of Oslo, Norway11. Luke's Portrait of Jesus and the Political Authorities in his Passion Narrative. A Rewriting of the Passion Narratives of the Other Gospels: Niels Willert, Aarhus University, DenmarkPart 4: Luke’s rewriting of Roman authorities12. Paul in the Presence of Power: Depictions of social interactions in Acts and in the Hellenistic historians: Martin Friis, University of Copenhagen, Denmark13. Luke’s readers and Josephus: Paul and Agrippa II as Test Case: Stefan Nordgaard, University of Copenhagen, DenmarkBibliographyIndexes

With this collection of essays, Müller and Nielsen (both, Univ. of Copenhagen) attempt to bring clarity to the origins of St. Luke's Gospel. Students of the synoptic gospels know that this problem of origin has a long and storied history. The premise of the book is that Luke used Mark and Matthew as his sources, a position generally associated with theologian/philosopher Austin Farrer and his seminal essay "On Dispensing with Q" (published in 1955). Farrer's hypothesis was later taken up by Michael Goulder and, more recently, Mark Goodacre. In continuing the course these writers charted, the contributors are potent in arguing that Luke was more than a redactor of earlier materials, he was a creative writer with innovative ideas and new perspectives on traditional materials. The contributors rigorously reject the idea of a hypothetical Q document. For them, the theory that Luke's use of Matthew was creative and innovative is more elegant and parsimonious than conjecturing that Luke used a non-existent source. Those who are unconvinced by the four-document hypothesis will find this treatment of an old topic stimulating and thought provoking. Summing Up: Recommended. Upper-division undergraduates and above.

Mogens Müller is Professor of New Testament at the University of Copenhagen, Denmark.Jesper Tang Nielsen is Professor of New Testament at the University of Copenhagen, Denmark.

• Preface AcknowledgementsAbbreviationsIntroduction: Mogens Müller and Jesper Tang NielsenPart 1: Luke Rewriting1. Luke Uses/Rewrites Matthre: A Survey of the 19th Century Research: Vadim Wittkowski, Humboldt University, Germany 2. Re-walking the “Way of the Lord”: Luke’s use of Mark and his Reaction to Matthew: Mark Goodacre, Duke University, USA2. Luke Rewriting and Rewritten: Francis Watson, University of Durham, UK4. Inclusive and exclusive agreements - towards a neutral comparison of the Synoptic Gospels, or: Minor Agreements as misleading category: Werner Kahl, University of Hamburg, Germany5. Acts as Biblical Rewriting of the Gospels and Paul’s Letters: Mogens Müller, University of Copenhagen, DenmarkPart 2: Luke Rewriting Old Testament Themes and Passages6. Rewritten Prophecy in Luke-Acts: Lukas Bormann, Philipps University, Marburg, Germany7. The Lord Elijah in the Temple as in Malachi 3.1: ‘Overkilling’ Elijah Tradition in Luke 2: Lotta Valve, Abo Akademi, Finland8. Luke’s Use of the Old Testament in the Sending of the Seventy(-Two): A Compositional Study: Joseph Michael Lear, University of Aberdeen, UKPart 3: Luke’s Rewriting Gospel Themes and Passages9. Luke’s Rewriting of the Markan Mélange of Christological Titles (Mark 8:27-33 par., 12:35-37 par., 14:55-64 par.): Daniel Gustafsson, Uppsala University, Sweden10. Re-written Stereotypes: Scripture and Cultural Echo in Luke’s Parable of the Widow and the Judge: Marianne Bjelland Kartzow, University of Oslo, Norway11. Luke's Portrait of Jesus and the Political Authorities in his Passion Narrative. A Rewriting of the Passion Narratives of the Other Gospels: Niels Willert, Aarhus University, DenmarkPart 4: Luke’s rewriting of Roman authorities12. Paul in the Presence of Power: Depictions of social interactions in Acts and in the Hellenistic historians: Martin Friis, University of Copenhagen, Denmark13. Luke’s readers and Josephus: Paul and Agrippa II as Test Case: Stefan Nordgaard, University of Copenhagen, DenmarkBibliographyIndexes

With this collection of essays, Müller and Nielsen (both, Univ. of Copenhagen) attempt to bring clarity to the origins of St. Luke's Gospel. Students of the synoptic gospels know that this problem of origin has a long and storied history. The premise of the book is that Luke used Mark and Matthew as his sources, a position generally associated with theologian/philosopher Austin Farrer and his seminal essay "On Dispensing with Q" (published in 1955). Farrer's hypothesis was later taken up by Michael Goulder and, more recently, Mark Goodacre. In continuing the course these writers charted, the contributors are potent in arguing that Luke was more than a redactor of earlier materials, he was a creative writer with innovative ideas and new perspectives on traditional materials. The contributors rigorously reject the idea of a hypothetical Q document. For them, the theory that Luke's use of Matthew was creative and innovative is more elegant and parsimonious than conjecturing that Luke used a non-existent source. Those who are unconvinced by the four-document hypothesis will find this treatment of an old topic stimulating and thought provoking. Summing Up: Recommended. Upper-division undergraduates and above.