Deist Critique of the Gospel of Luke

By Lewis Loflin

Luke’s Gospel and Acts tell one big story, meant to show God’s plan moving from Israel to the wider world, written for someone named Theophilus (Lk 1:4). The *New American Bible Revised Edition* sees it as a grand design. I’m not so sure. Luke never met Jesus. He might’ve been a Jew living far from Judea—or maybe not even Jewish—relying on a Greek version of the Old Testament, not the original Hebrew or firsthand accounts. His Jesus isn’t the rough troublemaker Mark describes, crucified for stirring things up, but a gentler figure, shaped for non-Jewish readers with a message of mercy. The idea that he “fulfilled” Old Testament promises? That doesn’t quite add up to me.

Luke likely wrote between 80-90 AD, after Jerusalem fell (Lk 19:43–44), possibly from Antioch (Col 4:14). He used Mark’s Gospel, a collection of sayings (called Q), and other bits he picked up—not as a disciple himself (Lk 1:2). Mark thought the world was ending soon (Mark 13:30), but Luke focuses on everyday church life (Lk 9:23). He ties Jesus to Roman history (Lk 2:1–2) and has Pilate say Jesus is innocent three times (Lk 23:4, 14, 22), maybe to appeal to Roman readers. In Acts, he presents Christianity as the next step from Judaism (Acts 13:16–41). But Luke’s view, shaped by Greek ideas and far from Judea’s reality, changes the story. Acts turns a Jewish movement into something Rome could accept—more Paul’s doing than Jesus’ original mission.

Luke’s Jesus cares about the overlooked: the poor man Lazarus against the rich (Lk 16:19–31), the lost son welcomed home (Lk 15:11–32). “Blessed are the poor” (Lk 6:20) feels stronger than “poor in spirit” (Matt 5:3), and Mary’s song (Lk 1:52–53) lifts up the humble. Women get a bigger role—like the angel’s visit to Mary (Lk 1:26–38)—in ways other Gospels skip. Luke softens Mark’s tougher tone, fitting a Greek style that’s far from Judea’s hope for a king to overthrow Rome (Isa. 11:1-5). Mark’s “The Lord our God is one” (12:29) shifts in Luke to a Spirit-guided leader (Lk 4:18), but the Old Testament promise of a ruler to free Israel doesn’t show up. Luke says it’s “fulfilled today” (Lk 4:21), quoting Isaiah 61:1-2, but it feels like a stretch to fit a new idea.

Then there’s a strange moment with swords (Lk 22:36). Jesus, who once sent his followers out with nothing (Lk 10:3-4), now tells them, “Sell your cloak and buy a sword.” They find two (22:38), and he says, “That’s enough.” Later, at his arrest (Lk 22:49-51), Peter—maybe a hotheaded rebel from Galilee (Acts 5:37), I think—cuts off a servant’s ear. Jesus heals it and stops the fight. Here’s my take: Jesus expected God to step in, arming his group for a big victory over Rome (Zech. 9:9-10). I’d guess Judas betrayed him (Mark 14:10-11) on Jesus’ own instructions, hoping to force God’s hand. It didn’t work. Pilate asks, “King of the Jews?” (Mark 15:2); Jesus answers, “You say so”—not really agreeing. The sign above his cross varies—Mark’s “The King of the Jews” (15:26), Luke’s “This is the King” (23:38)—but it marks him as a rebel. “Why have you forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34) shows he didn’t expect to die; the Old Testament Messiah was supposed to rule (Jer. 23:5-6).

The Old Testament pictures a king who beats Rome (Isa. 11:1-5), brings peace (Isa. 2:4), and rebuilds the Temple (Ezek. 37:26-28)—no dying savior or shift to non-Jews. Rome crucified rebels, not religious figures, and Jesus, labeled “King” (Mark 15:26), fit that role. Luke’s claim of “fulfillment” doesn’t hold; no kingdom came, Rome stayed strong. Christians point to Old Testament verses, but I don’t see the connection. Luke’s Jesus, built from secondhand stories and Greek scriptures, ends up a rebel let down by God’s silence—not the king Israel waited for.

Luke and Acts tell a story with a purpose—not the full truth. Jesus armed his followers, expecting God’s help; Judas’ betrayal was meant to start it, but nothing happened. Mark’s “one God” (12:29) makes sense to me; a God beyond this world doesn’t need Luke’s extras. The gentle Jesus and the Trinity idea drift from what I see as reasonable. To me, Jesus was a rebel Rome stopped—not the Old Testament’s promised king. Reason helps sort it out.