Talk:Theophilus (biblical)

Source of beliefs and traditions
What is the source for this belief? It is also believed that the Theophilus Luke is addressing served as High Priest from 37 to 42 A.D


 * See Wikipedia entry for Theophilus ben Ananus


 * Except for the Roman Official tradition, all the other traditions and beliefs are unsourced or unattributed. Who are all these "some" who believe or identify or who hold various and sundry traditions?  Please give specific identification.  I will insert an "This article does not cite its references or sources." header into the article to spur a bit of attention to this problem.  --SFDan 08:31, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi, the paper that is the source http://www.geocities.com/gospelofluke/theosub/THEOSUB.htm Theophilus: A Proposal - Richard H. Anderson 1996: Evangelical Quarterly,

It is a well-done paper and there is auxiliary material after it was written, especially ..

http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2004/11/who-was-theophilus-thoughts-on-preface.html Who was Theophilus? – Thoughts on the Preface of the Gospel of Luke - November 23, 2004

More links on this at .. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/message/13544

Praxeus 07:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Theophilus of Antioch
The section on Theophilus of Antioch needs citation or deletion. It doesn't really follow that Antioch is the Theophilus that Luke is referring to, since Antioch quotes from the Gospel of Luke himself. Theophilus of Antioch's contemporaries also refer to Luke specifically as an original Gospel. It'd be mighty strange for them to do so knowing that ToA's name was on the first page.Adrift* (talk) 03:26, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I disagree, as the author of Luke was writing these books, Luke and Acts, to the Bishop himself in the course of his teaching around 169 CE. If you will, please note that "most excellent" in Luke 1:3 is the acclamation of respect for Bishops that is still used today. If a citation is needed, it is easy to find at Forgery in Christianity (as well as many other places and forms, such as pdf, of which I have several saved) and text search for Theophilus. This is a reference to the book Forgery in Christianity by Joseph Wheless (1930). --BigBeachbum (talk) 09:51, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

A Lawyer
I've updated the citation for this section, but I'm not really certain the section is necessary. I know that John W. Mauck argues that Theophilus is a "special investigator" appointed to gather information, and he believes its Possible that Theophilus was a Roman lawyer (rhetor) because I own his book Paul on Trial. Mauck is the only one I've ever heard this from, but I'm not certain he's qualified to make this case. From what I can tell, Mauck cites no scholarly authority to back this claim, and Mauck isn't a Biblical scholar himself, rather he's an attorney with a B.A. from Yale.Adrift* (talk) 01:55, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I have found on remark numbered 188 in the Iliad:
 * [188] In exchange. These lines are referred to by Theophilus, the Roman lawyer, iii. tit. xxiii. § 1, as exhibiting the most ancient mention of barter.
 * Is it the very same lawyer? I've yet to find this "iii. tit. xxiii" book that was referenced. 77.124.169.59 (talk) 16:43, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Unsourced claim
As part of the Roman Official theory this article claims that, "Theophilus, the High Priest was, in fact, a “Roman official” because he was appointed by the Vitellius, the Roman legate of Syria [Ant.18.123]." Okay, let's assume that a Roman legate can appoint a Jewish High Priest, and let's also assume that being so appointed makes the priest a "Roman Official" (whatever that means). Where is the proof (required component of things which are facts) that the Theophilus so appointed is the same person to whom the book of Luke is addressed? I note that the tag requesting further citations for this article has been in place for five years with no result and I am therefore deleting this unreferenced and unsourced "fact".  Cottonshirt  τ   14:08, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Who has ears to hear
As in whoever is willing to listen, more recently authors who have written to the person in quest as "young Poet". Many, many people claim to be in earnest search for the truth. Many, many people continuously ask God -- all day, everyday -- but rare, very very rarely is even one person willing to listen so that they may hear the truth. I can understand how only pretending to desire to know, or only being willing to listen when the truth is the words you want to hear, isn't the same thing as genuinely desiring to known of The Truth.

Can You Hear Me Now, They of ileus? Dirtclustit (talk) 01:30, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Theophilus: When you call my Name.
Theophilus:

Greek Definition: In Biblical the meaning of the name Theophilus is: Friend of God. In Greek the meaning of the name Theophilus is: God-loving.

What if - in Luke and Acts - Theophilus is not a person, but an address to all people who love God? Perhaps a predecessor to calling someone a "Christian" and more inclusive - a really good idea when sharing a new and exciting idea.

http://biblehub.com/greek/2321.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnT453 (talk • contribs) 19:51, 24 May 2015 (UTC)