(December 14, 2013 at 2:39 am)Aractus Wrote:(December 14, 2013 at 2:22 am)Drich Wrote: Do you want some more? Or do these references prove that Luke was not only a disciple of Paul, but luke was not known to consort with any of the other apstoles other than Paul. Luke was one of Paul's scribes Mean quite possibly Luke's Gospel was dictated by Paul or at the very least derived from the teachings of Paul. And conversely some of the letters paul was known for could have been penned down by Luke's hand.Yes, Luke could have written some of Paul's epistles - so what?
You're making it up as you go along. I never disagreed that they knew each other, this is established, however you need to contend with the hard fact that we don't have conclusive proof that Luke-Acts is written by Luke, all we know for certain is that it's written by the same author. You also need to contend with the fact that of course Luke knew other Apostles - he writes to Theophilus doesn't he?

Wasn't luke your pony? Didn't you bring him in to discredit my claim that Paul was responsiable for 2/3's of the works in the NT, and now your saying that luke was not the author?
So which is it? Are you using Luke to discredit my claim or are you saying luke was not the Author of the book of Luke?