Introduction

Although the trials of Jesus and Paul have long constituted important foci in the study of Luke–Acts in general and of Lukan apologetics in particular, very little attention has been paid to Luke's account of the trials of Peter and Stephen. This is not to say, of course, that Acts 4–7 has not been subject to scholarly investigation in any sense, but rather that the concerns which have guided the study of these chapters have almost completely bypassed the specific question of the role of Peter's and Stephen's trials in the narrative of Luke–Acts.

The paucity of studies in this area is all the more notable when account is taken of the fact that (i) after Jesus and possibly Paul, Peter is the most dominant human character of Luke–Acts; (ii) two chapters (4–5) at the beginning of Luke's second volume are dominated by the trials of Peter; (iii) Luke's incorporation in these chapters of two trial stories which have so much in common can only be explained by a special Lukan interest in the common elements of these incidents; (iv) in the case of Stephen, virtually all his narrative life – occupying most of yet another two chapters of Acts – is taken up with aspects of his trial (proceedings, speech, and outcome).

For the concerns of the present study, probably the single most significant implication of the insufficient attention previously paid to the trials of Peter and Stephen is the underestimation of the undermining force of these chapters for the existing explanations of the apologetic tendencies which Luke's trial narratives are said to exhibit.