Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:00:29.723Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Literary Unity of Luke-Acts: Questions of Style – a Task for Literary Critics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

J. Dawsey
J. Dawsey
Affiliation:
Auburn, Alabama, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Joseph Tyson's The Death of Jesus in Luke-Acts and Robert Tannehill's The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts, published in 1986, are good examples of the interpretive wealth being mined by scholars who are adopting literary-critical methods for approaching the Lukan writings. What most distinguishes these critics' approaches from older, more familiar ones is the claim that the Bible's historical narratives are imaginative re-enactments of history – thus, in form, more akin to fiction than to theology, biography, or history. Robert Alter called the Biblical stories ‘historicized fiction’, meaning in our case that the author of Luke and Acts employed the artifices of fiction-writing, among others, supplying feeling and motives and creating speeches and dialogue for his characters. Professors Tyson and Tannehill, and other literary scholars like them, are helping us better discern how these techniques were used in Luke and Acts, thus opening new windows to the characters, the way that the author ascribes intentions to them, the plot, themes, nuances, points of view, uses of irony, and word-plays and associations in the writings.

Type
Articles
Information
New Testament Studies , Volume 35 , Issue 1 , January 1989 , pp. 48 - 66
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 48 note 1 Tyson, Joseph B., The Death of Jesus in Luke-Acts (Columbia, S.C.: University of South Carolina Press, 1986)Google Scholar; Tannehill, Robert C., The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts, vol. 1 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986).Google Scholar

page 48 note 2 Alter, Robert, The Art of Biblical Narrative (New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers, 1981) 25, 34–5.Google Scholar

page 48 note 3 Tyson, , The Death of Jesus, 3–28.Google Scholar

page 49 note 1 Ibid., 4.

page 49 note 2 Tannehill, , The Narrative Unity, 2.Google Scholar

page 49 note 3 Talbert, Charles H., Literary Patterns, Theological Themes and the Genre of Luke-Acts (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1974)Google Scholar; Brown, Schuyler, Apostasy and Perseverance in the Theology of Luke (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1969)Google Scholar; Juel, Donald, Luke-Acts: The Promise of History (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1983)Google Scholar; O'Toole, Robert F., The Unity of Luke's Theology (Wilmington, Del.: Michael Glazier, 1984)Google Scholar; Talbert, Charles H., Reading Luke: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Third Gospel (New York: Crossroad Books, 1982)Google Scholar; Tiede, David L., Prophecy and History in Luke-Acts (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980).Google Scholar

page 50 note 1 Cadbury, Henry J., ‘Commentary on the Preface of Luke’, in The Beginnings of Christianity, vol. 2, ed. Fockes-Jackson, F. J. and Lake, K. (London: Macmillan, 1922) 489–510Google Scholar; ‘The Knowledge Claimed in Luke's Preface’, The Expositor 8, 24 (1922) 401–20;Google ScholarThe Making of Luke-Acts (New York: Macmillan, 1927; reprint ed., London: SPCK, 1968);Google Scholar‘The Purpose Expressed in Luke's Preface’, The Expositor, 2, 21 (1921) 431–41.Google Scholar More recently Schuyler Brown has suggested caution before using the prologues of Luke and Acts as evidence of theories concerning the purpose and unity of the two writings (cf. ‘The Role of the Prologues in Determining the Purpose of Luke-Acts’, in Perspectives on Luke-Acts, ed. Talbert, Charles [Edinburgh: T & T Clark Ltd., 1977 99–111).Google Scholar

page 51 note 1 Cadbury, Henry J., The Book of Acts in History (London: A. and C. Black, 1955) 144.Google Scholar

page 51 note 2 Cf. Cadbury, Henry J., ‘The Tradition’, in The Beginnings of Christianity, vol. 2, 209 64.Google Scholar

page 51 note 3 Clark, Albert C., The Acts of the Apostles (Oxford: Clarendon, 1933) 393–405.Google Scholar

page 51 note 4 According to Clark, τέ appears 158 times in Acts and only 8 times in Luke; μέν solitarium appears 15 times in Acts and only once in Luke; μέν ου appears 27 times in Acts and only once in Luke.

page 51 note 5 Knox, Wilfred L., The Acts of the Apostles (Cambridge: University Press, 1948) 1–15.Google Scholar

page 51 note 6 Argyle, A. W., ‘The Greek of Luke and Acts’, NTS 20 (1974) 441–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Argyle was rebutted by Beck, B. E., ‘The Common Authorship of Luke and Acts’, NTS 23 (1976–1977) 346–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 52 note 1 For a clear exposition of this attitude see Knox, Wilfred L., Some Hellenistic Elements in Primitive Christianity (London: Oxford University Press, 1944) 1–9.Google Scholar

page 52 note 2 Knox, Wilfred L., The Acts of the Apostles, 16–39Google Scholar; and The Sources of the Synoptic Gospels, 2 vols. (Cambridge: University Press, 1953–1957).Google Scholar

page 52 note 3 Knox, , The Acts of the Apostles, 7.Google Scholar

page 52 note 4 Although Hawkins, John C., Horae Synopticae, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1909) 177Google Scholar, did not specify a date for the composition of Acts, he did suggest that it could not have been written near the time of the gospel.

page 52 note 5 Many of the occurrences of ἂνθρωπος in Luke and άνήρ in Acts are formulaic (e.g., Son of man; men and brethren; men of Israel). Further, the characterization of the speakers and audiences within Luke and Acts would account for some difference.

page 52 note 6 Έπικαλέω is only frequent in the New Testament in Acts. Besides the instances enumer-ated above, the word appears in Acts 2. 21; 7. 59; 9. 14, 21; 15. 17; 22. 16; 25. 21. In all it appears 20 times in Acts out of 30 occurrences in the New Testament. It is interesting that Knox failed to deal with this word in his rebuttal to Clark.

page 53 note 1 Cadbury, Henry J., The Style and Literary Method of Luke (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1920) 154–6.Google Scholar

page 53 note 2 For a rather extensive listing see Clark's, Acts of the Apostles, 404.Google Scholar Again, Knox avoided answering this part of Clark's evidence.

page 53 note 3 Παρρησιάζομαι is almost peculiar to Acts in the New Testament. Παρρησία does not occur in Luke, but is present in Mk 8. 32.

page 54 note 1 For my view of the value of statistical studies of Luke's vocabulary see The Lukan Voice (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1986) 157–83.Google Scholar

page 54 note 2 Cf.Lk5.30; 6.1, 13, 17, 20; 7.11, 18; 8.9, 22; 9.14, 43; 11.1; 12.1, 22; 17.1; 20.45.

page 54 note 3 To my mind, the sound of the phrasing of Luke's formulas seems more important than we have allowed. For example, Lukan literary criticism would perhaps be helped by a metrical study of a formula such as of μαθηταἱαύτοἱ as it is present in the text.

page 55 note 1 Cf. Acts 6. 1, 2, 7; 9. 10, 19, 25, 26, 38;11.26, 29; 13. 52; 14. 20, 22, 28; 15. 10; 16. 1;18.23, 27; 19. 1, 9, 30; 20. 1, 30; 21.4, 16, 16

page 55 note 2 The άδελφοί of Lk 22. 32 most likely refers to the eleven (cf. Marshall, I. H., The Gospel of Luke [Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1978] 822Google Scholar).

page 55 note 3 Dawsey, James M., The Lukan Voice, 1–14Google Scholar; ‘What's in a Name? Characterization in Luke’, Biblical Theology Bulletin 16 (1986) 143–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 55 note 4 Cf. Lk 9.33/Mk 9. 5; Lk 8. 24/Mk 4. 38; Lk 9. 49/Mk 9. 38.

page 55 note 5 Cf. Lk 10.25; 11.45; 21. 7.

page 55 note 6 The narrator of Luke uses Ίησος approximately 75 times. For omissions see Mk 14. 67/ Lk 22. 56 and Mk 16. 6/Lk 24. 5.

page 55 note 7 Cf.Lk 19.34/Mk 11.6; Lk 5.12/Mk 1.40; Lk 18.40/Mk 10.51.

page 56 note 1 Mk 10. 51/Lk 18. 40.

page 56 note 2 Cf. Lk 22. 48/Mk 14. 45; Lk 24. 7/Mk 16. 7.

page 56 note 3 Cf. Lk 4. 41; M. 23. 2, 39. Some Markan manuscripts include the title at Mk 1. 34 which then parallels Lk 4. 41.

page 56 note 4 Cf. Lk 4. 41; 1. 1; 15. 39/Lk 23. 47.

page 56 note 5 Acts 9. 4; 22. 7; 26. 14.

page 56 note 6 Moule's, C. F. D. article on ‘The Christology of Acts’ in Studies in Luke-Acts, ed. Keck, L. E. and Martin, J. L. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980) 159–85Google Scholar helps distinguish the use of the titles of Jesus in Luke and in Acts. Cadbury drew special attention to the formulaic use of Jesus in Acts (‘The Titles of Jesus in Acts’, in Beginnings of Christianity, vol. 5, ed. Foakes-Jackson, F. J. and Lake, K. [London: Macmillan, 1933] 360 f.).Google Scholar

page 57 note 1 Dawsey, , The Lukan Voice, 75–8.Google Scholar

page 57 note 2 For instance, Dr. Abrams Spiro has showed many Samaritan characteristics in Stephen's speech in Acts 7 (‘Stephen's Samaritan Background’, in Munck, Johannes, The Acts of the Apostles, revised by W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann [Garden City, New York: Double-day & Company, Inc., 1981] 285–300Google Scholar). The context of Spiro's work, however, is the attempt to arrive at the sources behind Acts. What might be more helpful would be this same type of study, but made with the assumption that the speeches were more freely composed as advocated by Haenchen, Ernst (The Acts of the Apostles, trans. Wilson, R. McL. [Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1971] 103–10Google Scholar) drawing on the work of Dibelius, Martin (Aufsätze zur Apostelgeschichte [Göttingen, 1951]Google Scholar ‘Paulus auf dem Areopag’, Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften: Philosophisch-historische Klasse [Heidelberg, 1939]; ‘Paulus in Athen’, Forschungen und Fortschritte 15 [1939] 210–11Google Scholar) and Cadbury, Henry (‘The Speeches of Acts’, in The Beginnings of Christianity, v. 5 [1933] 402–27).Google Scholar

page 57 note 3 Dawsey, , The Lukan Voice, 43–71.Google Scholar

page 58 note 1 Ibid., 64–70.

page 58 note 2 Clark, , Acts of the Apostles, 401.Google Scholar

page 59 note 1 It appears some forty times in the narration of Luke and only once outside of the narration (Lk 19. 15).

page 59 note 2 The construction appears approximately 25 times in the narration of the Gospel.

page 59 note 3 Knox, , Acts of the Apostles, 7.Google Scholar

page 59 note 4 Horton, Fred C., ‘Reflections on the Semitisms of Luke-Acts’, in Perspectives on Luke-Acts, 1 ff.Google Scholar

page 59 note 5 Ibid., 6; Creed, J. M., The Gospel According to St. Luke (London: Macmillan, 1930Google Scholar; reprint ed. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1957) lxxx.

page 59 note 6 Wilcox, Max, Semitisms of Acts (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965)Google Scholar; Richard, Earl, Acts 6. 1–8. 4: The Author's Method of Composition, SBL Dissertation Series (Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1978)Google Scholar; see also Plümacher, Eckhard, Lukas als hellenistischer Schriftsteller, Studien zur Apostelgeschichte (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972)Google Scholar; also Sparks, H. F. D., ‘The Semitisms of Acts’, JTS n.s. 1 (1950) 16 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘The Semitisms of St. Luke's Gospel’, JTS 44 (1943) 129–38.Google ScholarPayne, D. F., ‘Semitisms in the Book of Acts’, in Apostolic History and the Gospel: Festschrift for Bruce, F. F. (1970) 134 ff.Google Scholar

page 59 note 7 Cf. Acts 12. 18; 14. 28; 15. 2; 17.4, 12; 19.23, 24; 27. 20.

page 59 note 8 Cadbury, , The Making of Luke-Acts, 120 f.Google Scholar

page 60 note 1 Blass, F. and Debrunner, A., A Greek Grammar of the New Testament, trans. Funk, R. W. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961) 228 f.Google Scholar

page 60 note 2 As examples, the incorrect έτέραις (Lk 4.43) has been added to Mk 1. 38; the incorrect είς (Lk 4. 23) has been added to Mk 6. 1–6; words on Phrynichus's list of vulgarisms not explained by recourse to source theories include αίχμαλωτίζω (Lk 21. 24/Mk 13. 19 f.), άποκρίνομαι (Lk 22. 68/Mk 14. 61 f.; Lk 10. 28/Mk 12. 31 f.); καθώς (Lk 5. 14/Mk 1. 44); the anacolouthon at Lk 9. 3 is not present in Mk 6. 8 f.; the missing copula (Lk 22. 20) is not by reason of Mk 14. 22; etc.

page 60 note 3 This is actually the subject of my book The Lukan Voice. See also Dawsey, James M., ‘The Form and Function of the Nativity Stories in Luke’, Melita Theologica 36 (1985) 41–8.Google Scholar

page 60 note 4 See Krister Stendahl's suggestion concerning the use of the names for Paul in the Book of Acts (Paul Among Jews and Gentiles [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1976] 11Google Scholar).

page 60 note 5 Talbert, , Literary PatternsGoogle Scholar; see also Tyson, , The Death of Jesus, 84–113.Google Scholar

page 61 note 1 Moulton, Geden, and Moulton list approximately 73 occurrences in the gospel and 19 occurrences in Acts.

page 61 note 2 Moulton, Geden, and Moulton list approximately 15 occurrences in Mark.

page 61 note 3 Καί νûν appears at Acts 3. 17; 5.38; 7.34; 10. 5; 13. 11; 16.37; 20. 22, 25; 22. 16; 23. 21; 26. 6. Τà νûν appears at Acts 4. 29; 5. 38; 17. 30; 20. 32; 27. 22. Νûν ον appears at Acts 10. 33; 15. 10; 16. 36; 23. 15.

page 61 note 4 Cf. Acts 11. 19; 19.26, 27; 21. 13; 26.29; 27. 10; John 5. 18; 11. 52; 12.9; 13. 9;17.20.

page 62 note 1 The most thorough treatment of Luke's editing style is still Cadbury's The Style and Literary Method of Luke.

page 62 note 2 Cf. Cadbury's, Henry J. ‘Four Features of Lucan Style’, in Studies in Luke-Acts, 89.Google Scholar

page 63 note 1 Cf. Lk 2. 20; 7. 22.

page 63 note 2 Lk 23. 51.

page 65 note 1 Τέρας always appears in the New Testament paired with σημεîον. This combination seems to have been common in the early church, being present in Matthew, Mark, John, Acts, Romans, 2 Corinthians, 2 Thessalonians, and Hebrews.

page 65 note 2 Ἅλλομαι only appears in Acts in combination with περιπατέω.