"

Student7  has reverted.  Jclsfx/Student7,  How do you know that a female author of Luke-Acts is false? I myself am not an adherent to the theory, but I think it's a notable opinion among those scholars who reject Luke the physician as an author?  It's much discussed  a simple google search can find plenty of notable academic discussions of the subject? A Global Bible Commentary, muliple theses and plenty of others. (obviously, the most notable discussion are on my shelf, not on google).  Why do you think this is a fiction?  Is it because  you accept the authorship of Luke the Physician as an article of faith, or simply because you, like me, find the argument unconvincing?   I can understand disagreeing with the argument, but I can't understand claiming it's not a notable argument. 
And what is the justification for deleting the genre section?  Keep in mind, the main debate is betweeen ""biography"" and ""history"" and ""historiography"".  The most controversial might best be describe as ""historic novelization"" but pure fiction is not even among the candidates.  "