Luke S Literary Achievement

The essays in this collection come from a research symposium involving the universities of Manchester and Lausanne. The essays cover a wide range of mutually-enriching approaches to the study of the Lukan writings. Aspects considered include Luke's use of the term 'Son of Man', his use of scripture, his literary achievements, and the issue of 'godfearers' in Acts.

The essays in this collection come from a research symposium involving the universities of Manchester and Lausanne. The essays cover a wide range of mutually-enriching approaches to the study of the Lukan writings. Aspects considered include Luke's use of the term 'Son of Man', his use of scripture, his literary achievements, and the issue of 'godfearers' in Acts.

An investigation into the motives behind writing the canonical versions of Luke and Acts Building on recent scholarship that argues for a second-century date for the book of Acts, Marcion and Luke-Acts explores the probable context for the authorship not only of Acts but also of the canonical Gospel of Luke. Noted New Testament scholar Joseph B. Tyson proposes that both Acts and the final version of the Gospel of Luke were published at the time when Marcion of Pontus was beginning to proclaim his version of the Christian gospel, in the years 120-125 c.e. He suggests that although the author was subject to various influences, a prominent motivation was the need to provide the church with writings that would serve in its fight against Marcionite Christianity. Tyson positions the controversy with Marcion as a defining struggle over the very meaning of the Christian message and the author of Luke-Acts as a major participant in that contest. Suggesting that the primary emphases in Acts are best understood as responses to the Marcionite challenge, Tyson looks particularly at the portrait of Paul as a devoted Pharisaic Jew. He contends that this portrayal appears to have been formed by the author to counter the Marcionite understanding of Paul as rejecting both the Torah and the God of Israel. Tyson also points to stories that involve Peter and the Jerusalem apostles in Acts as arguments against the Marcionite claim that Paul was the only true apostle. Tyson concludes that the author of Acts made use of an earlier version of the Gospel of Luke and produced canonical Luke by adding, among other things, birth accounts and postresurrection narratives of Jesus.

Introduces literary, historical, and theological issues of Luke and Acts. Biblical texts create worlds of meaning, and invite readers to enter them. When readers enter such textual worlds, which are often strange and complex, they are confronted with theological claims. With this in mind, the purpose of the Interpreting Biblical Texts series is to help serious readers in their experience of reading and interpreting by providing guides for their journeys into textual worlds. The controlling perspective is expressed in the operative word of the title--interpreting. The primary focus of the series is not so much on the world behind the texts or out of which the texts have arisen as on the worlds created by the texts in their engagement with readers. In keeping with the goals of the series, this volume provides an introductory guide to readers of the New Testament books of Luke and Acts. It focuses on both the synchronic and diachronic dimensions of the literature in an effort to acquaint readers with literary, historical, and theological issues that will facilitate interpretation of these important books. F. Scott Spencer is Professor of New Testament at Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond.

John the Baptist as a Rewritten Figure in Luke-Acts compares the Gospel of Luke’s account of John’s ministry with those of Matthew, Mark, and John to make the case for the hypertextual relationship between the synoptic gospels. The book is divided into three parts. Part I situates the Gospel of Luke within the broader context of biblical rewritings and makes the general case that a rewriting strategy can be detected in Luke, while Parts II and III combined offer a more detailed and specific argument for Luke’s refiguring of the public ministry of John the Baptist through the use of omitted, new, adapted, and reserved material. While the "two source hypothesis" typically presupposes the independence of Luke and Matthew in their rewritings of Mark and Q, Chauchot argues that Luke was heavily reliant on Matthew as suggested by the "L/M hypothesis". Approaching the Baptist figure in the synoptic gospels from a literary-critical perspective, Chauchot examines "test cases" of detailed comparative analysis between them to argue that the Gospel of Luke makes thematic changes upon John the Baptist and is best characterized as a highly creative reshaping of Matthew and Mark. Making a contribution to current research in the field of New Testament exegesis, the book is key reading for students, scholars, and clergy interested in New Testament hermeneutics and Gospel writing.

Most studies of the genre of Luke-Acts underestimate the role of literary divergence in genre analysis. This monograph will show how attention to literary divergence may bring resolution to the increasingly complex discussions of the genre(s) of Luke-Acts.

This substantial, reliable introduction examines the character and purpose of Luke and Acts and provides a thorough yet economical treatment of Luke's social, historical, and literary context. Karl Allen Kuhn presents Luke's narrative as a "kingdom story" that both announces the arrival of God's reign in Jesus and describes the ministry of the early church, revealing the character of the kingdom as dramatically at odds with the kingdom of Rome. Kuhn explores the background, literary features, plotting, and themes of Luke and Acts but also offers significant, fresh insights into the persuasive force of Luke's impressively crafted and rhetorically charged narrative.

This radical new interpretation reveals many connections between Luke and Johannine traditions. Comparision of pericopae shared by Luke and John suggests that the usual assumptions of Lukan priority may be mistaken; instead his may be chronologically the fourth gospel. Luke neverthless treats his sources in different ways, his response being both critical and creative. He aims to give security to Christians by including as much as possible and reconciling conflicting traditions, while firmly excluding heretical misinterpretation. Shellard also includes a consideration of Luke's use of possible sources, both canonical and extra-canonical, and places Luke-Acts in its literary context, noting among other things the presentation of Rome as a facilitatator of evangelization and a promoter of co-existence. This is volume 215 in the Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement series.