Kenneth D. Litwak, «Israel’s Prophets Meet Athens’ Philosophers: Scriptural Echoes in Acts 17,22-31», Vol. 85 (2004) 199-216
Generally, treatments of Paul’s speech note biblical parallels to Paul’s wording but find no further significance to these biblical allusions. This study argues that Luke intends far more through this use of the Scriptures of Israel beyond merely providing sources for Paul’s language. I contend that, through the narrative technique of "framing in discourse", Luke uses the Scriptures of Israel to lead his audience to interpret Paul’s speech as standing in continuity with anti-idol polemic of Israel’s prophets in the past. As such, read as historiography, Luke’s narrative uses this continuity to legitimate Paul’s message and by implication, the faith of Luke’s audience. Luke’s use of the Scriptures here is ecclesiological.
Israel’s Prophets Meet Athens’ Philosophers 213
presents Moses as a prophet in Deuteronomy, and shows prophets after
Moses, particularly Elijah, acting similarly. The Chronicler shows
recurrence in numerous ways, including the pattern of the transfer of
leadership, first from Moses to Joshua, and later to Solomon from
David. Trompf asserts that when Luke, following earlier historians,
showed these recurrences in his narrative, he was “writing historically
by his lightsâ€. Luke used this approach of showing events in his
narrative as reenactments to show their significance, which “was
integral to his historiographical enterprise, not just a passing
theological reflection over and above his narrative†(35). Ancient
historians, says Trompf, worked out such connections with great
seriousness, as these connections brought cohesion and significance to
their narratives. Luke, quite familiar with this practice in the Old
Testament, used it himself to show continuity between Christians and
Israelites. Of relevance to this study is Trompf’s emphasis on Jesus
(and his followers) as prophets, standing “in line with the ancient
prophets†through reenactment (36). Trompf does not deal with Paul’s
speech at the Areopagus, but it is appropriate, based on the connections
with Israel’s prophets that I have already identified in Acts 17, to see
Paul’s anti-idol polemic on Mars Hill as a reenactment that connects
Paul’s preaching with that of Israel’s prophets in the past. Trompf’s
work is important for showing that Luke did not create such
connections simply for stylistic reasons. They have significance for
Luke’s narrative and we should take them seriously as evidence that
Luke’s narrative intends to establish continuity between Israel’s past
and “the things accomplished among usâ€.
b) The Function of Continuity in Luke’s Narrative of Paul’s Speech
This conclusion that Paul’s speech stands in continuity with
prophetic oracles in the past is important for understanding how
Luke has deployed the Scriptures of Israel in this speech. If we read
Luke’s narrative as historiography, then the role of the pervasive
intertextuality I have identified becomes transparent. This is because
one common goal of Hellenistic historiographers was to show
continuity between people and events in the past and people and events
in the present. The reason is that the historiographer validated the
people and events of the present by their continuity with people and
events in the past. For these writers, the past is used for reaffirmation
(35) TROMPF, Historical Recurrences, 135-136.
(36) TROMPF, Historical Recurrences, 142.