Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-tdptf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-13T12:17:02.005Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Authorial unity: analysis results and probabilities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2009

Patricia Walters
Affiliation:
Rockford College, Illinois
Get access

Summary

Using, then, as my main criterion simply that the speeches of Lysias are composed in a pleasing style, I have come to suspect many of the speeches which have been commonly regarded as genuine. I put them to the test and found them spurious, not because there was anything wrong with them in a general way, but because they did not strike me with that characteristic Lysianic charm or with the euphony of that style.

(Dion. Hal. Lys. 12)

Dionysius was concerned incidentally with problems of ascription and chronology throughout his career as a literary critic. In the early Lysias he shows how, in the absence of internal chronological or other evidence, a developed literary taste could be called into service as the final judge of authorship.

Although the once solid theological, thematic, generic, structural, and narrative unity of Luke and Acts has been challenged as to the extent of the two books' interwoven textuality, authorial unity has remained virtually closed to scholarly scrutiny. The paucity of modern inquiry into the single authorship hypothesis is worrisome at best, ill-considered at worst.

Both ancient and modern literary critics are intrigued by authorship issues. On the one hand, modern critics are at a disadvantage. We cannot possess the same “developed literary taste” as the ancient critics, because the Greek of the classical and post-classical eras is decidedly remote from modern linguistic sensibilities.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Assumed Authorial Unity of Luke and Acts
A Reassessment of the Evidence
, pp. 137 - 189
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Buntinas, Martin and Funk, Gerald M., Statistics for the Sciences (Belmont, Calif.: Brooks/Cole, 2005), pp. 457ffGoogle Scholar
Gibson, Craig A., “Learning Greek History in the Ancient Classroom: The Evidence of the Treatises on Progymnasmata”Classical Philology 99 (2004), 103fCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, Mikeal C., Luke: Storyteller, Interpreter, Evangelist (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007)Google Scholar
Parsons, , “The Unity of the Lukan Writings: Rethinking the Opinio Communis,” in Keathley, N. H. (ed.), With Steadfast Purpose: Essays on Acts in Honor of Henry Jackson Flanders, Jr. (Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 1990)Google Scholar
“Who Wrote the Gospel of Luke?”Bible Review 17 (2001), 12–21, 54–55
Dormeyer, Detlev, The New Testament Among the Writings of Antiquity, Porter, Stanley E. (ed.), trans. Kossov, Rosemarie (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press 1998)Google Scholar
Russell, D. A., Plutarch (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1973), pp. 18–41Google Scholar
Yaginuma, Shigetake, “Plutarch's Language and Style,” in Principat, Part 2, vol. 33.6, Haase, Wolfgang (ed.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1992)Google Scholar
Nikiprowetzky, V., “Caractère et structure du Commentaire Philonien” in Le Commentaire de l’Écriture chez Philon d'Alexandrie: son caractère et sa portée: observations philologiques (Leiden: Brill, 1977), pp. 170–235Google Scholar
Alexandre, Jr. Manuel, Rhetorical Argumentation in Philo of Alexandria (Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1999)Google Scholar
Leopold, J. and Conley, T., “Philo's Style and Diction” in Winston, D. and Dillon, J. (eds.), Two Treatises of Philo of Alexandria: Commentary on De gigantibus and Quod Deus sit immutabilis, Brown Judaic Studies 25 (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1983)Google Scholar
Cohen, Shaye J. D., Josephus in Galilee and Rome: His Vita and Development as a Historian (Leiden: Brill, 1979)Google Scholar
Rollins, Wayne G., The Gospels: Portraits of Christ (Philadelphia, Pa.: Westminster, 1963), p. 97Google Scholar
Sparks, H. F. D., “The Semitisms of Acts,”Journal of Theological Studies n. s., 1 (1950), 16–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creed, John Martin, The Gospel according to St. Luke: The Greek Text with Introduction, Notes, and Indices (London: Macmillan & Co., 1930), p. lxxviGoogle Scholar
Cerfaux, Lucien, “The Acts of the Apostles” in Robert, A. and Feuillet, A. (eds.), Introduction to the New Testament (New York: Desclée, 1965), p. 366Google Scholar
Plümacher, Eckhard, Lukas als hellenistischer Schriftsteller (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972), pp. 51, 63–64, 67–69, 72–78Google Scholar
Moulton, James Hope and Howard, Wilbert Francis (eds.), A Grammar of New Testament Greek, vol. Ⅱ (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1920; reprint 1968), pp. 7f
Pervo, Richard I., Dating Acts: Between the Evangelists and the Apologists (Santa Rosa, Calif.: Polebridge Press, 2006), p. 343Google Scholar
Norušis, Marija J., SPSS 11.0: Guide to Data Analysis (Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 2002), pp. 240ffGoogle Scholar
Allen, W. Sidney, Accent and Rhythm: Prosodic Features of Latin and Greek: A Study in Theory and Reconstruction (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973)Google Scholar
Frisk, Hjalmar, Studien zur griechischen Wortstellung, Göteborgs Högskolas Årsskrift 39 (Gothenburg: Wettergren & Kerbers Förlag, 1933), pp. 16fGoogle Scholar
Schwyzer, Eduard, Griechische Grammatik: auf der Grundlage von Karl Brugmanns griechischer Grammatik, vol. Ⅱ (Munich: C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1950), pp. 695fGoogle Scholar
Denniston, J. D., The Greek Particles (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1959), p. 497Google Scholar
Schweizer, Eduard, “Eine hebraisierende Sonderquelle des Lukas,”Theologische Zeitschrift 6 (1950), 166 note 18Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×