Slides: Authorship, Date and Genre
Slide 1
Lecture 1: Authorship, Date and Genre
The Book of Acts
Also known as Luke, Part II
Slide 2
Acts tells us the beginning of many of the churches.
Thus, it’s useful when considering background for Paul’s letters
e.g., Romans: to a mixed church once consisting only of Gentiles
Thessalonians: to a largely Gentile church persecuted for believing in “another King, Jesus”
Athenians: oops, didn’t make it into the canon
Slide 3
Authorship: “we” narratives
Most: companion of Paul
Narratives far more detailed in “we”
- More detail on weeks in Philippi than lengthy in Corinth, Ephesus
16:10- leaves off in Philippi
20:5- picks up in Philippi
Fictitious?
- Why introduce only here?
- And at such obscure places?
- A.D. Nock: at most one in non fictitious documents
Travel journal?
- Maybe- but whose? Author’s?
- Why else leave sources (nowhere else)
Slide 4
In other ancient literature…..
“We” normally means… “we”
Slide 5
Who was this companion?
Aristarchus went to Rome (Col 4:10; Phlm 24) – distinguished in Ac 27
Epaphras- but lack of interest in Lycus valley
Demas- but tradition says he didn’t persevere (2T 4)
Titus- strong
candidate, but not in Rome with Paul
Leaves Luke
Slide 6
Tradition: Luke
Anti- Marcionite prologue: doctor from Antioch, stayed single, died in Boeotia at age 84
Better: Irenaeus; Clement Alex.; Origen; Tertullian
Also p75 (175-225CE): “Gospel of Luke”
Not prominent in trad., yet authorship trad unanimous
Who would invent a non apostle and noneyewitness of Jesus?
Slide 7
Nothing against it
Fits what little we know about Luke
Many terms frequently found in medical literature (Hobart)
But most of these terms are also found elsewhere, too (Harnack)
Slide 8
Authorship
If by Luke
-Ancient physicians
· Some superstition
· But genuine empirical data also
· Various schools; no MCATS or accrediting
Slide 9
Same author as Luke’s gospel
Slide 10
Style
-Educated (but not highly rhetorical)
- Improves Mark’s grammar
Slide 11
PHYSICIANS
- Both men and women
- Often slaves
- Usually Greek
- Some education
- Some Jews opposed use of physicians, but urban Hellenized accepted
Slide 12
No professional historians
Physicians educated
Paul sometimes sick
Personal physicians usually among closest confidantes
Slide 13
Objections
Differences of detail from Paul’s letters
· Allowed for historians
· No more than for other historians vs. letters
· Paul also has apologetic agendas
Theological differences
· Luke more generalizing, less particular; matter of genre
Matter of emphasis
Slide 14
Author’s background
Geography
· Knows Aegean region quite thoroughly
· Knows coastal Palestine (fits traveling companion of Paul)
· Weaker on interior of Palestine, Galilee
Slide 15
Author’s background
JEWISH OR GENTILE?
· Not familiar with all Palestinian Jewish customs
-If Jewish, must be Diaspora Jew
· But traveled to Jerusalem among rep’s of Gentile churches
· Knows LXX backward and forward
-If Gentile, presumably God- fearer
-Much interest in God- fearers in Acts
Perhaps same for target audience
Slide 16
Target Audience:
Broader ancient audiences than redaction critics thought (Bauckham et al.)
Attacks on riches
Educated, well-to-do:
- Wide geographic knowledge assumed
- Theophilus
Slide 17
Style
Varies between Greek literary prose stlye
And Greek heavily influenced by LXX
Slide 18
Focus:
- Urban
- Often conversion of elites
- Greece, Macedonia, Hellenistic Asia, and heart of Empire
- Most detailed in Philippi; probably Phil. congregation in mind
- Jewish or Gentile?
· Gentile Chr’s still viewed as converts to Judaism
· Emphasis on conversion of Gentiles
· Jerusalem church still viewed as authoritative
· Knowledge of LXX
Slide 19
Earlier date
- Written by Paul’s companion
· Paul had many junior companions
· Paul martyred c. 64; if Luke outlived Paul only by a decade, mid 70’s of 1st century
- Does not close with Paul’s death
· But focus is mission not biography
· Positive legal precendent
- Jewish influence with Romans- only before 70
- No: in Asia Minor continued (Rev 2-3)
Slide 20
Later date (70-90)
Luke 21: after 70 CE
- Adjusts language (as in Matt 24 with Mk 13)
- Jerusalem’s destruction through template of Babylon
- Presupposition of plot development: Jerusalem’s last chance in Ac 21
Traveling companion still fits
Luke used Mark as a source; Mk prob. c. 64
Slide 21
Very late date
- Dependence on Josephus?
· Couldn’t both simply depend on earlier history?
- Related to Marcion (2nd century)? (Tyson)
Slide 22
Genre: History
All history with purpose
- Entertainment + information
- Must show rhetorical artistry
Slide 23
Accuracy
Slide 24
Other Proposals
Biography (Talbert)
- Focus on major characters
· Fits Gospel of Luke (G’s: Burridge)
· Jesus – Peter – Paul
- Biographic “succession narratives” (esp. in philosophic biography?)
Slide 25
But
Doesn’t end with Paul’s (or Peter’s) death
Biographic focus in much ancient history
· Biographic approach to history
· Multivolume histories sometimes included one or more volumes on a single character (e.g. Alexander)
Succession
· Not just in biography
· Philosophic lists of successors not as strong
Many helpful elements
-Biographic focus
- Parallel lives