Sunday, June 12, 2011

The Trial of the Gospel: An Apologetic Reading of Luke's Trial Narratives

Alexandru Neagoe examines Luke's writings as an apologetic work, by focusing on the parts of Luke's story where the apologetic overtones seem most prominent--the trial narratives. In analyzing the trials of all major Lukan characters--Jesus, Peter, Stephen, and Paul, Neagoe argues that the narratives are best understood when viewed as part of Luke's apologia pro evangelio, a purpose which is in keeping with the author's declared aim to give his readers "assurance" about the "matters" in which they had been instructed (Luke 1:4). 

For many years Luke–Acts has been studied as a work of history and theology. The Trial of the Gospel sets out to examine Luke’s writings as an apologetic work, by focusing on those parts of Luke’s story where the apologetic overtones seem most prominent – the trial narratives. By analysing the trials of all major Lukan characters – Jesus, Peter, Stephen, and Paul – Alexandru Neagoe argues that the narratives are best understood when viewed as part of Luke’s apologia pro evangelio, a purpose which is in keeping with the author’s declared aim to give his readers ‘assurance’ about the ‘matters’ in which they had been instructed (Luke 1.4). Neagoe concludes that the specific role of the trial narratives is to provide the framework within which important tenets of the Christian faith are themselves put ‘on trial’ before the reader, with the intended result of the gospel’s confirmation.

Luke’s1 special interest in forensic trials has often been recognized in Lukan scholarship.2 The textual evidence for such a concern on Luke’s part abounds.3 While in the Gospels4 of Matthewand Mark Jesus predicts the disciples’ trials only once (Matt. 10.17–20; Mark 13.9–11), in the Third Gospel he does so twice (12.11–12; 21.12–15). Similarly, whereas for the other two Synoptics Jesus’ trial includes only two episodes (one before the Sanhedrin and one before Pilate), in Luke’s Gospel four trial scenes are recorded: one before the Sanhedrin (22.66–71), a preliminary hearing before Pilate (23.1–5), a peculiarly Lukan episode before Herod (23.6–12), and a second session before Pilate (23.13–25). As one turns to Acts, the evidence is even more ample. After a brief presentation of the origins and lifestyle of the early Christian community in Jerusalem, the reader encounters two extensive trial scenes involving Peter (4.1–31; 5.17–42). These are soon followed by an even lengthier account of the trial and martyrdom of Stephen (6.9–7.60). Finally, Paul’s whole missionary activity is scattered with conflicts and challenges which are often cast in a trial form, culminating, undoubtedly, with Paul’s judicial history between his arrest in Jerusalem (21.27) and his two-year stay in Rome (28.30–1). It is not without justification, then, that Neyrey can write: ‘Forensic trials in Acts have an incredible scope: (a) all of the major figures of Acts (Peter, Stephen, and Paul) are tried, (b) in all of the significant places where the Gospel was preached (Judea, Jerusalem, Achaia, and Rome); (c) the trials take place before Jewish courts as well as Roman tribunals.’

It is somewhat intriguing, in viewof such a significant Lukan emphasis, that there is to date not a single monograph specifically exploring Luke’s use of the trial motif. The attention has tended to focus instead on individual trial scenes or, at most, on the trial(s) of a single Lukan character – mainly Jesus or Paul.6 To the extent to which the question of authorial intent has been raised with regard to the trial material in larger sections of Luke–Acts, this has been done only indirectly, mainly in connection with the representation of Luke–Acts as some form of apologia. It is important, therefore, to introduce this discussion of Luke’s trial motif with a more general survey of previous research on apologetics in Luke–Acts and thus acquire a better grasp of the angles from which Lukan trials have been interpreted in the past. This survey is at the same time necessary in view of the fact that the present study itself proposes an apologetic reading of Luke’s trial motif.

No comments:

Post a Comment