Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T07:42:50.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reframing Julius’ Kindness (Acts 27) as an Extension of Luke's Socratic Characterisation of Paul

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 December 2020

Michael Kochenash Open the ORCID record for Michael Kochenash [Opens in a new window]
Michael Kochenash*
Affiliation:
Yuelu Academy, Hunan University, Changsha, Hunan410082P.R. China. Email: michael.kochenash@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Acts narrative's characterisation of Julius evokes the circumstances of Socrates, specifically the end of his life, at which point his prison guard – who exhibits a fondness for Socrates – allows his friends to visit and care for him. The credibility of this reading is strengthened by situating Acts 27 amid other Socratic characterisations of Paul in Acts 17–26, 28. By understanding Julius’ characterisation in this way, readers can regard Paul as a Socratic figure even during his sea voyage and shipwreck. This reading is more credible than others that attribute the characterisation of Julius to the narrative's positive disposition towards centurions.

Keywords

Acts of the ApostlesJulius (centurion)literary modelsPaulRoman EmpireSocrates
Type
Articles
Information
New Testament Studies , Volume 67 , Issue 1 , January 2021 , pp. 73 - 84
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

1 Regarding his name and cohort, Warren Carter explains: ‘The identifiers not only evoke the Roman military power to which Paul is subject, but they also particularise that power in terms of its leading exponents, Julius Caesar and Augustus’ (‘Aquatic Display: Navigating the Roman Imperial World in Acts 27’, NTS 62 (2016) 79–96, at 91). See also Zeichmann, C. B., The Roman Army and the New Testament (Lanham, MD: Lexington/Fortress Academic, 2018) 89–91Google Scholar.

2 Walaskay, P. W. writes, ‘Paul was “saved” by Julius; the gospel was rescued by Rome’ (‘And so We Came to Rome’: The Political Perspective of St Luke (SNTSMS 49; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984) 62)Google Scholar.

3 Brink, L., Soldiers in Luke-Acts: Engaging, Contradicting, and Transcending the Stereotypes (WUNT ii/362; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014) 119–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Kyrychenko, A., The Roman Army and the Expansion of the Gospel: The Role of the Centurion in Luke-Acts (BZNW 203; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2014), esp. 152–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a review of these studies, see Kochenash, M., ‘Taking the Bad with the Good: Reconciling Images of Rome in Luke-Acts’, RelSRev 41 (2015) 43–51, at 48–9Google Scholar.

4 Translations of biblical texts are my own.

5 Brink, Soldiers in Luke-Acts, 124. For her review of provincial soldiers in literature, see esp. 74–82.

6 This conclusion, of course, is also informed by her analyses of other centurions in Luke and Acts, especially those in Luke 7 and Acts 10.

7 For the narrative's use of the book of Jonah, see Rackham, R. B., The Acts of the Apostles (London: Methuen, 1904 2) 477Google Scholar; Kratz, R., Rettungswunder: Motiv-, traditions-, und formkritische Aufarbeitung einer biblischen Gattung (EHS 23.123; Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 1979) 320–50Google Scholar; Barrett, C. K., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles (2 vols.; ICC 34; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1994–8) ii.1197–8Google Scholar; Alexander, L. C. A., ‘“In Journeyings Often”: Voyaging in the Acts of the Apostles and in Greek Romance’, Acts in its Ancient Literary Context: A Classicist Looks at the Acts of the Apostles (LNTS 298; London: T&T Clark, 2005) 69–96, at 84–5Google Scholar; Börstinghaus, J., Sturmfahrt und Schiffbruch: Zur lukanischen Verwendung eines literarischen Topos in Apostelgeschichte 27,1–28,6 (WUNT ii/274; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010) 183–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Keener, C. S., Acts: An Exegetical Commentary (4 vols.; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012–15) iv.3558–9Google Scholar; Beresford, J. M., ‘The Significance of the Fast in Acts 27:9’, NovT 58 (2016) 155–66Google Scholar; Kochenash, M., ‘You Can't Hear “Aeneas” without Thinking of Rome’, JBL 136 (2017) 667–85, at 683–4Google Scholar. For its use of Homer's Odyssey, see especially MacDonald, D. R., ‘The Shipwrecks of Odysseus and Paul’, NTS 45 (1999) 88–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also F. Blass, Acta apostolorum sive Lucae ad Theophilum liber alter, editio philologica (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1895) 282; F. J. Foakes-Jackson and K. Lake, The Beginnings of Christianity, Part i: The Acts of the Apostles (5 vols.; London: Macmillan, 1920–33) iv.339; Praeder, S. M., ‘Acts 27:1–28:16: Sea Voyages in Ancient Literature and the Theology of Luke-Acts’, CBQ 46 (1984) 683–706, at 701Google Scholar; F. F. Bruce, The Book of the Acts (rev. edn; NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988) 474; R. I. Pervo, Acts: A Commentary (ed. H. W. Attridge; Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2009) 666; Zeichmann, C. B., ‘Ulyssean Qualities in The Life of Josephus and Luke-Acts: A Modest Defence of Homeric Mimesis’, Neot 53 (2019) 491–515Google Scholar.

8 L. C. A. Alexander, ‘Acts and Ancient Intellectual Biography’, Acts in its Ancient Literary Context, 43–68, at 62–8. See also Reis, D. M., ‘The Areopagus as Echo Chamber: Mimesis and Intertextuality in Acts’, JHC 9 (2002) 259–77, at 271–2Google Scholar; D. R. MacDonald, Luke and Vergil: Imitations of Classical Greek Literature (New Testament and Greek Literature 2; Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015) 67–123.

9 See E. Benz, ‘Christus und Sokrates in der alten Kirche: Ein Beitrag zum altkirchlichen Verständnis des Märtyrers und des Martyriums’, ZNW 43 (1950–1951) 195–224; Betz, H. D., Der Apostel Paulus und die sokratische Tradition (BHT 45; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1972) 38 and n. 182Google Scholar; E. Plümacher, Lukas als hellenistischer Schriftsteller: Studien zur Apostelgeschichte (SUNT 9; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972) 97–9; Sandnes, K. O., ‘Paul and Socrates: The Aim of Paul's Areopagus Speech’, JSNT 50 (1993) 13–26Google Scholar; Barrett, Acts of the Apostles, i.828–9; Stegemann, E. W., ‘Paulus und Sokrates’, Der fragende Sokrates (ed. Pestalozzi, K.; Colloquium Rauricum 6; Stuttgart: Teubner, 1999) 115–31Google Scholar; Reis, ‘Areopagus as Echo Chamber’; Alexander, ‘Acts and Ancient Intellectual Biography’, 64; M.-F. Baslez, ‘Un “nouveau Socrate” dans la tradition chrétienne’, Le Monde de la Bible, special issue (2008) 22–5; A. A. Nagy, ‘Comment rendre un culte juste au dieu inconnu? Le Socrate chrétien entre Lystre et Athènes’, Kalendae: Studia Sollemnia in Memoriam Johannis Sarkady (ed. G. Németh; Hungarian Polis Studies 16; Budapest: Phoibos, 2008) 241–64; Jipp, J. W., ‘Paul's Areopagus Speech of Acts 17:16–34 as Both Critique and Propaganda’, JBL 131 (2012) 567–88Google Scholar; D. Marguerat, Paul in Acts and Paul in his Letters (WUNT i/310; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013) 70–4; C. K. Rothschild, Paul in Athens: The Popular Religious Context of Acts 17 (WUNT i/341; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014) 81–107; MacDonald, Luke and Vergil, 76–81; Jantsch, T., ‘“Sokratische” Themen in der Areopagrede: Apg 17,22–31 im Kontext der antiken Philosophiegeschichte’, EC 8 (2017) 481–503Google Scholar.

10 See e.g. Pervo, Acts, 426.

11 On the opposition to Paul in Beroea in Acts 17.10–15 (and Thessalonica in 17.1–9), see M. Kochenash, ‘The Scandal of Gentile Inclusion: Reading Acts 17 with Euripides’ Bacchae’, Classical Greek Models of the Gospels and Acts: Studies in Mimesis Criticism (ed. M. G. Bilby, M. Kochenash and M. Froelich; Claremont Studies in New Testament & Christian Origins 3; Claremont, CA: Claremont Press, 2018) 125–44. See also Kochenash, M., ‘Better Call Paul “Saul”: Literary Models and a Lukan Innovation’, JBL 138 (2019) 433–49, esp. 447–9Google Scholar.

12 See also Plato, Apol. 24b–c, 26b; Euthyphr. 2c–3b; Xenophon, Apol. 10–13; Quintilian, Inst. 4.4.5; Philostratus, Life 7.11.2; 8.7.1; Diogenes Laertius, Lives 2.40.

13 For the use of a verb related to παρατυγχάνω (i.e. ἐντυγχάνω) with Socrates as the subject, see Plato, Apol. 29d, 41b. See also Plato, Phaed. 61c, where Socrates is the object. Παρατυγχάνω in Acts 17.17 is a hapax legomenon within New Testament literature.

14 Pervo, Acts, 424. For Socrates’ interactions in the Athenian marketplace, see Plato, Apol. 17c; Xenophon, Mem. 1.1.10; Diogenes Laertius, Lives 2.21.

15 For the use of εἰσφέρω with Socrates as the subject, see Xenophon, Apol. 10–11; Mem. 1.1.1 (quoted above); Justin, 1 Apol. 5.4; 2 Apol. 10.5–6. See also Quintilian, Inst. 4.4.5 (introduco); Philostratus, Life 7.11.2 (ἐπεισάγω), 8.7.1 (ἡγέομαι); Diogenes Laertius, Lives 2.40 (εἰσάγω).

16 Barrett, Acts of the Apostles, ii.830.

17 Sandnes, ‘Paul and Socrates’, 20.

18 MacDonald, Luke and Vergil, 76. Compare Acts 17.16–17 with Plato, Resp. 376e–392c; Euthyphr. 6a–c.

19 See e.g. Diogenes Laertius, Lives 2.20, 22, 45, 122. Cf. Plato, Apol. 33a; Resp. 454a.

20 See Reis, ‘Areopagus as Echo Chamber’, 270. Per Reis, the use of ἐπιλαμβάνω in Acts 17.19 can be compared with its use in 16.19, 18.17, 21.30, 33 (270 n. 47).

21 See e.g. Rowe, C. K., ‘The Grammar of Life: The Areopagus Speech and Pagan Tradition’, NTS 57 (2010) 31–50, at 37Google Scholar.

22 MacDonald, Luke and Vergil, 79.

23 For an argument in favour of classifying Paul's speech as deliberative, see Sandnes, ‘Paul and Socrates’, esp. 15–17.

24 Sandnes, ‘Paul and Socrates’, 23–4. Those following Sandnes include Reis, ‘Areopagus as Echo Chamber’, 269–70; Jipp, ‘Paul's Areopagus Speech’, 576–88; Marguerat, Paul in Acts and Paul in his Letters, 72–4; MacDonald, Luke and Vergil, 76–81; Jantsch, ‘“Sokratische” Themen in der Areopagrede’, 490–502.

25 Sandnes, ‘Paul and Socrates’, 25.

26 See Marguerat, Paul in Acts and Paul in his Letters, 71.

27 On the potential significance of these names, see MacDonald, Luke and Vergil, 122–3.

28 On the Socratic nature of the Acts 19 narrative, see MacDonald, D. R., ‘A Categorization of Antetextuality in the Gospels and Acts: A Case for Luke's Imitation of Plato and Xenophon to Depict Paul as a Christian Socrates’, The Intertextuality of the Epistles: Explorations of Theory and Practice (ed. Brodie, T. L., MacDonald, D. R. and Porter, S. E.; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2006) 211–25, at 216–19Google Scholar; Marguerat, Paul in Acts and Paul in his Letters, 66–8; MacDonald, Luke and Vergil, 87–90.

29 See MacDonald, ‘Categorization of Antetextuality’, 217.

30 MacDonald, ‘Categorization of Antetextuality’, 219–24; R. R. Dupertuis, ‘Bold Speech, Opposition, and Philosophical Imagery in Acts’, Engaging Early Christian History: Reading Acts in the Second Century (ed. R. R. Dupertuis and T. Penner; London: Routledge, 2014) 153–68; R. Carhart, ‘The Second Sophistic and the Cultural Idealization of Paul in Acts’, Engaging Early Christian History, 187–208; MacDonald, Luke and Vergil, 90–6.

31 Paul's accusers use a more straightforward Socratic address, ‘Men, Israelites’ (Ἄνδρες Ἰσραηλῖται, Acts 21.28).

32 On the delivery of apologiae as characteristically Socratic, see Whitmarsh, T., The Second Sophistic (Greece & Rome: New Surveys in the Classics 35; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005) 81Google Scholar.

33 Dupertuis, ‘Bold Speech’, 166.

34 Dupertuis, ‘Bold Speech’, 166, quoting Plato, Apol. 39e.

35 For a review of the uses and meanings of παρρησία in ancient literature, including Acts 4, see Hilton, A. R., Illiterate Apostles: Uneducated Early Christians and the Literates Who Loved Them (LNTS 541; London: T&T Clark, 2018) 103–54Google Scholar. See also Unnik, W. C., ‘The Christian's Freedom of Speech in the New Testament’, Sparsa Collecta: The Collected Essays of W. C. Van Unnik (2 vols.; NovTSup 29/30; Leiden: Brill, 1980) ii.269–89Google Scholar; Winter, S. C., ‘παρρησία in Acts’, Friendship, Flattery and Frankness of Speech: Studies on Friendship in the New Testament World (ed. J. T. Fitzgerald; NovTSup 82; Leiden: Brill, 1996) 185–202Google Scholar; Dupertuis, ‘Bold Speech’, esp. 160–7; MacDonald, Luke and Vergil, 114–16.

36 Hilton, Illiterate Apostles, 138. He continues: ‘As it became fashionable for philosophers and other educated persons to defy the powerful rulers of their day, their minds naturally gravitated to Plato and Xenophon and other authors who presented vivid images of Socrates before his Athenian accusers.’ Hilton also argues convincingly that Socratic material played a formative role in literary education (Illiterate Apostles, 138–9).

37 See Alexander, ‘Acts and Ancient Intellectual Biography’, 66: ‘As the dramatic setting for two of Plato's most famous dialogues, prison inevitably figures just as large in the biography of Socrates’, citing Epictetus, Diatr. 1.1.23–4, 1.4.24, 1.12.23.

38 See also Plato, Apol. 39e; Xenophon, Apol. 23–30; Diogenes Laertius, Lives 2.5 Socrates (39); 2.7 Aeschines (60). Epictetus writes, ‘But Socrates used to practise speaking to some purpose – Socrates, who discoursed as he did to the Tyrants, to his judges, and in the prison’ (Diatr. 2.13.24 (trans. Oldfather, LCL)).

39 Dupertuis observes, ‘When Plutarch recounts the death of Cato the Younger, he does so with the death of Socrates as his literary template (Cat. Min. 66.4–77.6). Like Socrates, Cato calms his friends and refuses their efforts to save him. Plutarch also mentions that Cato read through Plato's Phaedo twice on the night of his death’ (‘Bold Speech’, 159).

40 Pervo attributes this allowance to Julius being ‘sufficiently impressed by his prisoner – and of sufficient character himself – to permit Paul to visit (lit.) “the friends”’ (Acts, 655). If this assessment is correct, it establishes another connection with the end of Socrates’ life – his guard is effusive in his praise of Socrates (Plato, Phaed. 116c–d).

41 One notable comparandum for the Socratic characterisation of Paul in Acts is Lucian's characterisation of Peregrinus as an ersatz ‘new Socrates’, who is cared for by a group of Christians while imprisoned but whose ineffectual ‘boldness’ does not precipitate his death (Peregr. 12–18).