Geoff Hudson

SENECA = LUKE?

Could Lucius Annaeus Seneca have been the Luke who accompanied Paul? I believe that Seneca travelled during the last few years of his life. If Seneca was Luke then presumably he would have been known as the beloved {philosopher} not the beloved [physician] (Col.4.14). Luke was with Paul when the latter wrote Colossians. In that very same epistle, Paul's teachings about the treatment of wives and slaves echo almost identically the teachings of Seneca in his epistles. It is almost as though Seneca was looking over Paul's shoulder giving advice as the latter wrote his epistle.

Geoff

Amos

Interesting, but who was Luke if it is just a different perspective that we should be concerned about?

Geoff Hudson

Amos,

I am simply suggesting that Lucius Seneca and Luke could have been one and the same character. "Beloved" (KJ) or "dear friend" (NIV) (Col.4.14) are terms that one might apply to an older revered person such as Seneca who was born in CE5/4BC. I think it would be interesting to compare some of Seneca's teaching in his epistles with Paul's. What can we say about Luke from the NT? Is there anything that implies Luke was a believer the same as Paul? Could Luke have travelled with Paul as a supportive observer, agreeing with Paul's moral teachings, as one might expect a Stoic like Seneca would, but not necessarily adopting the full set of Paul's beliefs?

Geoff

Tristan Scott

Now that would be interesting! But at the time of Paul's arrest and trip to Rome Seneca would have been busy running Rome, and in the process accumulating a kingly fortune.

What I find mysterious is that Paul's arrival in Rome coincides with Seneca's falling out of favor with Nero. As your cited Professor Sordi explains, Christians would not have been seen favorably by Rome's upper crust as there was somewhat of a Jewish fad going on at the time and that even Nero's wife was a participant. When you couple all of this with the odd way Acts concludes it does make one suspicious that there could have been some connection between Paul and Seneca. Sordi also points out that there is an obvious connection in Acts when Seneca's brother Gallio, who is a Governor in Achaia, intercedes on Paul's behalf when he is about to be mobbed by angry Jews there.

Vorkosigan

The correspondences you mention are interesting, but Luke was not written until after 70 at least, and probably not until after Josephus. Seneca died in 65. It is far more likely that a tradition that Paul and Seneca were linked was incorporated into the later gospel tradition through the mention of Gallio, than that Seneca was a companion of Paul.

Vorkosigan

Geoff Hudson

Tristan,

Thankyou for this response. It has caused me to have a re-think, and I am working on an answer that supports my original suggestion.

A clue to Lucius Seneca's possible open attitude to the new religion of the Christians is in his second epistle to his close friend Lucilius. The latter was a Roman knight, a native of Pompeii or Naples who became procurator of Sicily, and who seems to have had Epicurean tendencies. Seneca writes: ?The thought for today is one I discovered in Epicuras; for I am wont to cross over even into the enemy?s camp, - not as a deserter but as a scout. He says, "Contented poverty is an honourable estate."

Geoff

Tristan Scott

That is the mystery isn't it? If you date Acts to be written after Luke, which is logical, then why doesn't it mention Paul's demise? I doubt if Seneca was a "companion" of Paul's, he could have been an acquaintance, but not a companion.