Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

I have been wondering why we should assume that the Theophilus to whom GLuke/Acts were addressed was any specific Theophilus?

The name Theophilus - meaning "male lover of god" - seems to me to be a useful literary construct so that GLuke-Acts's author could address an idealized male reader, described as a "male lover of god", who would be either a Christian or a person who, through devotion to a god, might be attracted to Christianity.

I am, however, an amateur, so I am wondering whether such thoughts have been considered or accepted by any scholar of the Bible. If so, are they a widely accepted conclusion in any way?

The enigma is easily resolved: Theophilus means lover of god. Which god is meant? The creator, obviously.

Contra Marcion.

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 7:10 am The enigma is easily resolved: Theophilus means lover of god. Which god is meant? The creator, obviously.

Contra Marcion.

With all due respect, you did not answer my question, because the Theophilus in your model could still have been a specific individual.

Theophilos o9f Antiochia, author of Autolyco.

schillingklaus wrote: ↑Wed Aug 10, 2022 5:58 am Theophilos o9f Antiochia, author of Autolyco.

Who has made such an argument, and how widely accepted is it?

ABuddhist wrote: ↑Wed Aug 10, 2022 5:49 am

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 7:10 am The enigma is easily resolved: Theophilus means lover of god. Which god is meant? The creator, obviously.

Contra Marcion.

With all due respect, you did not answer my question, because the Theophilus in your model could still have been a specific individual.

Too much divine coincidence, that the interlocutor of "Luke" (editor) had a name that honoured the exact object of rivalry between "Luke" and his/her source (=Mcn): the supreme God. Isn'it?