WHO WAS THEOPHILUS?

There are many names mentioned within the scriptures of the Judeo-Christian Bible that are unknown to the casual reader. Some of them have to be studied to find even a glimmer of their past lives. Spending time investigating their lives is not always rewarding, but there are a few who pay in great benefits. One such person was Theophilus.

In the scriptures, we read about Luke, who was a physician well educated outside the Jewish circles. Yet, Luke was a well-known figure among the first Christians. The scripture also records that he traveled with the Apostle Paul on parts of his missionary journeys for the gospel (Colossians 4:14; 2 Timothy 4:11; Philemon 24). Luke speaks twice to a man named Theophilus, once at the beginning of his gospel and once at the beginning of the book of Acts.

In Luke 1:3, he says, “It seemed good to me also, having traced out all things perfectly from the beginning, to write to you in order, most excellent Theophilus." He continues in Acts 1:1: “The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and to teach.”

Theophilus means “friend of God” or “beloved of God.” The term “most excellent” was a formal Roman honorific awarded to persons of rank, such as governors, high officials, or men of considerable social standing. We do not know for sure who this man was. Theories range from a Roman official, a wealthy Gentile convert, and a patron who defrayed the cost of producing and circulating the two volumes (which was substantial), to simply a representative “friend of God” standing for all who would later read the books.

Another theory suggests he was a Jewish high priest, Theophilus ben Ananus (Theophilus, son of Annas), who officiated in Jerusalem from AD 37 to 41. He belonged to the influential priestly family of Annas (Ananus). Annas himself had previously been high priest, and the family continued to dominate the high priesthood for decades. Theophilus was the son of Annas, the brother of many other high priests (Eleazar, Jonathan, Matthias, and another Ananus) and the brother-in-law of Caiaphas (the high priest at the time of Jesus' trial).

Some of the details that support this idea include Luke calling him “most excellent Theophilus” (Greek kratiste), a title of respect used for people of high official rank. That could admittedly be a high priest. We can note that the Gospel of Luke shows a particular interest in the temple, the priesthood, and events involving high-priestly families. Some note that the honorific “most excellent” is present in Luke 1:3 but absent from Acts 1:1. This could imply that the Gospel was written while Theophilus was still in office or of high status, and Acts was written after he had left office. These are only supporting possibilities, not certainties.

One thing is clear. Luke wanted Theophilus (and, by extension, every later reader) to have an orderly, carefully researched account so that he and we might “know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been taught” (Luke 1:4). And it is also reasonable to suppose that Luke sent these two treatises to preserve the record and to establish Theophilus and others like him more firmly in the faith.

Preservation of one's writings may not seem like a big issue to us today. But for those who lived in the early days when tablets, papyri, or parchment were used, it was harder to keep intact. In fact, we do not have the original handwritten manuscripts (autographs) of the book of Luke, Acts, or any other New Testament book. Those original physical documents have long since died, either from ordinary wear, persecution, or just the passage of time. What we have is a huge mass of copies of copies, far more numerous and closer in time to the originals than the manuscript evidence for almost any other ancient literature.

The translators of the King James Version, which most of us still use, worked mainly from the Greek New Testament text that was eventually called the Textus Receptus (Received Text), and this was derived from the manuscripts of the Byzantine type that were available at the time, along with the work of Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza, and others. For the Old Testament, they generally used the traditional Hebrew Masoretic Text, copied and preserved by Jewish scribes and scholars known as the Masoretes. Their work, mainly in three main centers, including Tiberias (in Galilee), the most influential school of its day; Jerusalem; and Babylonia (today's Iraq), was carried out mainly between the 7th and 10th centuries AD. We should be thankful we have a preserved diary that we can read today.

Theophilus may still be somewhat anonymous to us. But not the message Luke has prepared so carefully for him and us. Thoughts?