Overview

For centuries scholars have analyzed the composition of Luke-Acts presupposing that the reference to ""many"" accounts in Luke's Preface indicates the written texts which served as the author's primary sources of information. To justify this portrait of Luke as a text-based author, scholars have appealed to analogies with the text-based authors Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Diodorus Siculus, Plutarch, and Arrian. Luke among the Ancient Historians challenges this portrait of Luke's method through surveying the origins and development of ancient Greek historiography in chapters on Herodotus, Thucydides, Polybius, Josephus, and Luke. By focusing on the values and practices of ancient historians, Peters demonstrates not only that ancient authors following the model of Thucydides regarded the testimony of eyewitnesses, as opposed to texts, as the proper sources for historians but that Luke emulated the values, practices, and craft terminology of the contemporary historiographical tradition. Taking seriously the self-presentation of Luke as a reporter of contemporary events who claims to write on the basis of ""eyewitnesses from the beginning,"" and personal investigation, this book argues against analogies with text-based historians who wrote about non-contemporary events and instead situates Luke within a portrait of the values and practices of historians of contemporary events.

Full Product Details

9781666724899

Table of Contents

Reviews

"""Peters has written a fresh and stimulating portrayal of Lukan historiography. . . . Peters argues his position with methodological clarity and rigor, and this is why this book makes a significant contribution to the quest for the sources, methods, and purposes of Luke-Acts, which deserves a broad and thorough discussion."" --Michael Wolter, University of Bonn ""Peters makes a crucial distinction between Greek historians writing about contemporary events and those writing about noncontemporary events and places the author of Luke-Acts conclusively among the former. This distinction shows that the author does not rely only on isolated written accounts but primarily on autopsy, traveling, and inquiring eyewitnesses. Peters thus perceptively challenges some modes of form criticism and redaction criticism, pointing to Luke-Acts as an independent source for historical reconstruction."" --Samuel Byrskog, Lund University ""Although I believe that Luke had some written as well as oral sources available, Peters has provided a detailed and masterful case by comparing Luke's methodology with the most analogous ancient authors: historians of recent events. . . . Anyone interested in reading Luke-Acts as ancient historiography . . . needs to attend to and learn from Peters' detailed work."" --Craig S. Keener, Asbury Theological Seminary ""This is an important contribution to what should now be the central task of Gospels scholarship: to reassess the nature of the Gospels after the demise of form criticism. . . . Peters shows that Luke claims to have sourced his work directly from eyewitnesses, including some of the disciples of Jesus. It hardly needs saying that this must have a major impact on the study of Luke's Gospel in particular, but also the Acts of the Apostles."" --Richard Bauckham, St Andrews University, emeritus"

Peters has written a fresh and stimulating portrayal of Lukan historiography. . . . Peters argues his position with methodological clarity and rigor, and this is why this book makes a significant contribution to the quest for the sources, methods, and purposes of Luke-Acts, which deserves a broad and thorough discussion. --Michael Wolter, University of Bonn Peters makes a crucial distinction between Greek historians writing about contemporary events and those writing about noncontemporary events and places the author of Luke-Acts conclusively among the former. This distinction shows that the author does not rely only on isolated written accounts but primarily on autopsy, traveling, and inquiring eyewitnesses. Peters thus perceptively challenges some modes of form criticism and redaction criticism, pointing to Luke-Acts as an independent source for historical reconstruction. --Samuel Byrskog, Lund University Although I believe that Luke had some written as well as oral sources available, Peters has provided a detailed and masterful case by comparing Luke's methodology with the most analogous ancient authors: historians of recent events. . . . Anyone interested in reading Luke-Acts as ancient historiography . . . needs to attend to and learn from Peters' detailed work. --Craig S. Keener, Asbury Theological Seminary This is an important contribution to what should now be the central task of Gospels scholarship: to reassess the nature of the Gospels after the demise of form criticism. . . . Peters shows that Luke claims to have sourced his work directly from eyewitnesses, including some of the disciples of Jesus. It hardly needs saying that this must have a major impact on the study of Luke's Gospel in particular, but also the Acts of the Apostles. --Richard Bauckham, St Andrews University, emeritus

Author Information

John J. Peters has an MA from Regent College (Vancouver, Canada) and a PhD from Regent University (Virginia Beach, USA). At present he is actively working on a second book focusing on the question: What was Luke attempting to do? He lives in Virginia.

Tab Content 6

Customer Reviews

Recent Reviews

Countries Available