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.

Download this book

The Old Latin Gospels: A Study of their Texts and Language (Oxford Early Christian Studies) By Philip Burton

This book is the first overall study of the texts and language of the Old Latin Gospels, the versions of the four Gospels that predate the Vulgate of Jerome. Author Philip Burton seeks to cast new light on their origins, translation techniques, and value as a source for vulgar Latin.

This book is the first attempt to give a general account of the language and textual history of the Old Latin Gospels. My first encounter with the Old Latin Gospels was in an undergraduate class on vulgar Latin, ten years ago. Dissatisfaction with a received opinion piqued my interest, and led me to choose them as a topic for my doctoral dissertation. In preparing that dissertation, I found myself trespassing into various fields not on my original route; from textual transmission to early Christian studies, from Romance philology to translation theory. It is hoped this work will be of interest to specialists in these and related fields; and that where others are in turn dissatisfied with it, they will be sufficiently intrigued to go out and prove me wrong.

There are preserved in libraries across Europe some thirty manuscripts, some very fragmentary, which contain translations of the four canonical Gospels which predate the Vulgate of Jerome. These manuscripts, of which about ten are extant at any given point, are collectively known as the 'Old Latin Gospels' (hereafter OLG). The textual relations and language of these manuscripts have received considerable, if uneven, attention from philologists and theologians. This present study is an attempt both to synthesize their work, and to advance it. Three main questions are addressed. How did the OLG come into being? What are the techniques employed by their translators? How far can they be used as sources for the development of post-classical Latin?

These questions are closely intertwined. Our enquiry into the origins of these versions will take its starting-point from an examination of the translation of certain key words. The knowledge thus gained may cast light on their value as sources for post-classical Latin. An evaluation of the position of the OLG within post-classical Latin will, in turn, help us to see how far the translators are prepared to follow everyday patterns of speech and how far they felt bound by the constraints of latinitas.

At this stage it is important to delimit the areas that will not be touched upon. First, our current concern is solely with the Gospels and not with other parts of the Scriptures. Loose references to 'the Latin Bible' appear to presuppose a single monolithic translation; no such homogeneity has been demonstrated, and the term is therefore misleading. Statements made about the origins, translation technique, and language of one part of the Bible should not be generalized to the Bible as a whole.

Secondly, we are not directly concerned with the identification of the types of Greek text underlying the various Latin traditions, nor with the value of the OLG for the textual criticism of the Greek Gospels. However, the possibility that a particular Latin reading is due to a Greek variant will be raised from time to time, even when the putative variant does not appear in any extant manuscript. The conditions under which the possibility of such an unattested Greek reading may be raised are discussed later in this chapter.

Thirdly, we are not directly concerned with the Biblical citations given in the patristic writings. The volume of patristic citations of the Gospels would prohibit more than the most cursory examination of this material. In addition to this, there are unique problems with the patristic citations. On encountering a Scriptural reference in the Fathers, we do not necessarily know whether it is intended to be an exact quotation or a loose allusion or conflation of references; whether the writer is making his own version or quoting from an existing one; whether he has the text in front of him or is quoting from memory.

Moreover, while there was no official policy before the sixteenth century of substituting the Vulgate readings for the original references in patristic texts, none the less it is likely that copyists familiar with the Vulgate (or other Old Latin, or liturgical) forms of a given passage would unconsciously introduce the words they knew best into their copies of the Fathers. The patristic citations are thus too complex to be dealt with in sufficient depth. However, the Oxford Old Latin editors (of whom more presently) of the last century developed the technique of comparing the readings given in the manuscript traditions with those in the patristic writings, as a means of giving a terminus post quern and perhaps a provenance for the various manuscript traditions.

 Go get this book!!!

Revisiting the sublime history: Dickens, Christianity, and The life of Our Lord

Colledge, Gary

While the study of Charles Dickens’s religion has produced various results, few would contest that Dickens’s religious views are shaped by his peculiar emphasis on Jesus and the Gospels. As to the precise nature of his views and the degree to which his commitment to the Christian faith extends, however, a much lesser degree of consensus has been established. I attempt to demonstrate here that at the heart of his work is a conspicuous Christian worldview, which is grounded squarely in the imitation of Jesus and which pervades his life and his work in the most profound yet unobtrusive ways. I argue, then, that Dickens’s The Life of Our Lord is a definitive source in the Dickens corpus for our understanding of his Christian thought and worldview. Moreover, as a serious expression of Dickens’s understanding of Christianity, The Life of Our Lord also functions as an index to his Christian thought in the larger Dickens corpus. Of first importance then, I attempt to establish the authority of The Life of Our Lord as a composition that will bear the full weight of such assertions. Then, I analyze its content as to its implicit theology in order to establish not only its thoroughgoing Christian character but also to demonstrate that it reveals Dickens’s own genuine Christian conviction manifested in all his work. Drawing the work to a close, I attempt to demonstrate how The Life of Our Lord helps us to understand Dickens’s churchmanship and his relationship to the church. In the end, I comment on its intended purpose as moral instruction for his children exemplifying his understanding of Christianity. The study demonstrates throughout how the Christianity embodied and articulated in The Life of Our Lord is consistently and naturally reflected in all of Dickens’s work, whether fiction, journalism or correspondence.

Read more