Toto

Perhaps I should have said that modern historians are skeptical of all documents.

Steven Carr

Did Luke use Jewish sources when writing Acts as Layman claims?

'“[W]hen passages in Luke are set alongside passages from Mark, Luke proves to have been a sober and careful scribe.� Further, Luke does not scatter his scources throughout his text. He reproduces them in large chunks. “Luke has tended to insert this material in blocks that preserve the sequences of his source.� Is this practice how the author supposedly used Paul’s letters in Acts? Not at all.'

Wait a moment. That is Layman trying to prove that Luke did not use Paul's letters as sources.

When Layman wants to claim that Luke used these (unknown) Jewish sources, other than Josephus, he forgets all about his arguments that we can disocunt Luke using a source, if he has not reproduced them in large chunks or scattered them throughout the text.

As always, Christian apologetics is a whole set of ad hoc arguments.

If somebody wants to argue one thing (Luke did not use source A), arguments will be wheeled out to show that, and if that person wants to argue the opposite (Luke used sources B,C and D), those arguments will vanish from view. Having served their purpose , they can be discarded, ready for the next ad hoc rationalisation of the author's fixed conclusions.

andrewcriddle

Can I just note that the idea that the use of 'schools' by Luke is derived from Josephus only requires Luke to have read the 'Jewish War' which is IMO probable anyway.

The interesting question IMO is the relation of Luke and the 'Antiquities' and the use of the term 'school' is really not relevant here. Luke could have picked this up from the 'Jewish War' without needing any access to the 'Antiquities'.

Andrew Criddle

Vorkosigan

I wanted to add to this. Layman had commented earlier on the issue of love and other things. One of the articles I have is Ascough's 1996 article on Chariton's Chaereas and Callirhoe and Luke-Acts in which he cites other affinities between the two. Here are some pieces:

• Richard Pervo makes a strong argument for the same generic designation for both the Acts of the Apostles and the ancient Greek novels.(FN5) In introducing his approach Pervo suggests that Acts does not reveal the basic concerns of ancient history. Instead, Acts is a popular work, edifying and entertaining in intention.(FN6) It deals with the beliefs, attitudes, and fortunes of ordinary people, not the political and military history of a nation.(FN7)
  Pervo admits that determining what might have been found to be entertaining in the ancient world can be difficult. As a control on subjectivity he bases his own observations upon criteria derived from frequently recurring themes and motifs of ancient novelists, particularly those of Chariton and Xenophon of Ephesus.(FN8) In looking at Acts he is able to identify thirty-three episodes of adventure which function "to stimulate their readers but also to proclaim the mighty providence of God."(FN9) These adventurous episodes include arrests, persecution and martyrdom, plots and intrigue, crowds and riots, trials, and shipwreck and travel. Each of these he illustrates, illuminating the entertaining thrust of each category through a comparison with the ancient novels. Pervo concludes that by using the methods and means of the ancient novelists Luke created a work of excitement and suspense. Among the extant genres of antiquity the Book of Acts can be understood to be most like the historical novel.(FN10)

in light of Layman's comments on love I thought this was apropo:

• Classicist C. R. Beye notes that "it is not too much to say that the idea of love found in the romances is related to the important idea of love that fills the Gospel narratives (which in other ways as well show affinities with this late Greek literary form) as well as Plato's Symposium."

and of course:

• In a work treating both Luke and Acts, Susan Praeder applies narrative analysis and interpretation in a comparative study of Luke-Acts and the ancient novel.(FN14) Attempting to move beyond the narrow criterion of content alone as a means for comparison, she establishes a number of generic criteria to which the ancient novels were expected to conform. These are (1) historical and fictional characters and events set in the eastern Mediterranean, (2) biography of a main character with backward references to past events, (3) "alternation between summary and scene with scene predominating," (4) "the presence or absence of the narrator from the narrative world as indicated by first or third person narration," (5) avoidance of references to sources, (6) a depiction of Greco-Roman experience and imagination, and (7) the achievement of various intentions and effects through interesting and entertaining communication.(FN15) Praeder suggests that the satisfaction of all these criteria by Luke-Acts establishes its genre as ancient novel. The presence of Christian theological themes and authorial reference to Christian experience and imagination establish it in subgenre as a Christian ancient novel.(FN16)

Ascough has also noted some close parallels between the crowd scenes in the NT and in the ancient Greek novels.

Vorkosigan

Toto

Is that Ascough, Richard S., "NarrativeTechnique and Generic Designation: Crowd Scenes in Luke-Acts and in Chariton," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 58 (1996) 69-81? It doesn't seem to be on line anywhere. Nor is Praeder, Susan M. "Luke-Acts and the Ancient Novel." Society of Biblical Literature: 1981 Seminar Papers, pp. 269-292

andrewcriddle

One problem with linking canonical Acts closely to the Greek romance is that it may blur the distinction between canonical Acts and other early Christian works, (some of the apocryphal Acts eg 'Paul and Thecla' the pseudo-Cllementine stuff), where the resemblance to the Greek romance is much more obvious.

Andrew Criddle

Toto

Andrew, why is that a problem?

andrewcriddle

Some scholars explain the spocryphal narratives as rewritings of canonical Acts under the influence of the Greek romance. There are cases like 'Paul and Thecla' where IMO this seems very plausible.

If however canonical Acts is already in genre clearly a Greek romance it becomes difficult IMO to explain the differences between canonical Acts and (some) of the apocryphal acts by saying that the apocryphal acts are influenced by the Greek romance in a way that canonical Acts was not.

Andrew Criddle

Vorkosigan

Yes, that's Ascough. Sorry. I got it through my university's online search catalogs. We have some limited access to non-engineering stuff.

Vorkosigan

Vorkosigan

Well, what would you say the difference is? I've never made any distinction between them, and that was long before I knew that they were Greek romance novels.

Vorkosigan