For a long time I wanted to see what a decent argument of Luke being primary would be. (The norm is generally Mark plus a 'Q', and next would be Matthew as primary.)
David Flusser's 'Sage of Galilee - Rediscovering Jesus' Genius' takes on the tasking, if you're so inclined to consider the argument.
Logos carries several of Flusser's books. I had already gotten mad at him on a 2nd Temple volume. He writes from Israel (no longer living) and a jewish perspective (an assigned role he did not particularly like).
But his Luke-primary argument is argued from the details of jewish life surrounding the 1st century, and how such a narritive would have had to 'play out' later after the destruction surrounding Jerusalem. And he does argue the Pauline west vs the jewish-Christian east (which I think our forum 'Mark' disagrees with).
http://www.amazon.com/Sage-Galilee-Rediscovering-Jesus-Genius-ebook/dp/B001DW5P7W
