Tag: Luke

This is the sixth and final post in a series offering a number of imaginary letters from the ancient world, only recently “discovered”. The letters, we might imagine, reflect what the recipient of the “orderly account of the things that have come to fulfilment” (what we know as the Gospel of Luke), the man named Theophilus, might have written to the author of that work, as he received sections of the “orderly account” in sequence.

For earlier letters, see https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/17/i-make-prayers-on-your-behalf-letters-to-luke-1-year-c/ and https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/19/i-rejoice-in-the-gift-of-writing-letters-to-luke-2-year-c/ and https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/21/how-exciting-it-was-letters-to-luke-3-year-c/

Theophilus to Luke, greetings. I am returning soon.

I was astonished to receive your brief note to the effect that you had in fact been raised a Jew. I had no idea! This explains your own depth of understanding of things Jewish. And to think that you have laboured so hard and long to acquire a knowledge of the great writers and thinkers of our Greek civilisation—I am filled with awe.

I must now think harder about the various people who come to the regular gatherings of our group, where we hear the good news of Jesus proclaimed. I wonder just how diverse a group we actually are? The fact that I have come only of late to this gathering has meant that there is much that I do not know.

I look forward to being able to talk with you face to face about the things that we have touched on in our letters to one another.

I am happy to hear that you have continued writing so productively, and I will of course be keen to read your second volume once I have returned.

Greetings to all.

*****

Questions for discussion: The use which Theophilus makes of Luke’s Gospel changes in the course of these six letters. What different stages can you identify in the way that he uses the Gospel?

These letters suggest one way that the story of Jesus became known to those outside of the Jewish culture and religion. Can you think of other ways that this may have happened?

Do you think that Luke was a Jew? What would support this idea? What might count against it?

*****

These six “letters” formed one session of my presentations at a conference held at St Hilda’s College, University of Melbourne, in November 2000. The conference was entitled “Preaching and Teaching in the Year of Luke: a national conference on preaching, teaching and learning”. It was sponsored by the national Uniting Church agency, Uniting Education, in association with Otira, the Continuing Education agency of the Synod of Victoria. The keynote addresses were subsequently published as AT TABLE WITH LUKE (UTC Publications; UTC Bible Studies 2, 2000) ©John T. Squires 2000

This is the fifth post in a series offering a number of imaginary letters from the ancient world, only recently “discovered”. The letters, we might imagine, reflect what the recipient of the “orderly account of the things that have come to fulfilment” (what we know as the Gospel of Luke), the man named Theophilus, might have written to the author of that work, as he received sections of the “orderly account” in sequence.

For earlier letters, see https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/17/i-make-prayers-on-your-behalf-letters-to-luke-1-year-c/ and https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/19/i-rejoice-in-the-gift-of-writing-letters-to-luke-2-year-c/ and https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/21/how-exciting-it-was-letters-to-luke-3-year-c/ and https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/23/i-write-briefly-letters-to-luke-4-year-c/

Theophilus to Luke, greetings.

I give thanks to God, etc., etc. But I must turn swiftly to the matter at hand!

After the success of my earlier reading from your narrative at table with my companions, I am happy to report that we have held another reading. I was of the opinion that we ought to pick up at the point where we had stopped last time, but two of my companions indicated that they were about to leave the city, and they strongly desired to hear the conclusion of your story before they left.

I, of course, was grateful for the opportunity to convey more of the story to my fellow-diners; and I was anxious that they hear the good news about how, even after Pilate sentenced Jesus to death, God was able to raise him from the dead. So together the company of diners agreed that I would read two selections from the later part of your work.

The first selection was of the teachings of Jesus in the temple (Luke 20:1– 21:4). I chose this so that my audience might appreciate the wisdom of God which was manifested in the words of Jesus, and hear how he was able to refute all objections placed in front of him. How I admired this capacity to better any opponent!

The second selection was of the death and burial of Jesus (23:26–56) and of the way the good news of the risen Lord became known (24:1–53). By this means, I was able to avoid difficult questions about some of the final teachings of Jesus, when he predicted the destruction of the temple and spoke about the cosmic catastrophes yet to come; and about the precise status of Jesus, for he was crucified as a rebel under the Roman authority of Pilate.

Instead, I was able to focus on the valiant and stoic manner in which he faced death, as you especially emphasise in your narrative of that sombre moment. And, of course, I was able to convey the essence of the good news about Jesus, that God raised him from the dead in a sovereign act of grace.

However, I must recount to you the striking turn which was taken in the course of our discussion. I had not realised at the start of our meal that there was a person at table who was present with us for the first time in this group. I suspect that he had been properly introduced to the group before I arrived; to my shame, I confess, I had been delayed and did not arrive until the group was already eating.

It was by sheer grace that my host welcomed me to the table and that those present agreed to the reading from your work, as we had earlier agreed. I was afraid that my late arrival might have prejudiced this agreement. But I digress. It turns out that this visitor was not only a learned man (as was soon evident from his contributions to the discussion) but also a man very familiar with the scriptures of the Jewish people.

Here I must make another confession. In your narrative, you make many references to such scriptures (as I now recognise). Sometimes these are direct references, which you occasionally signal as such; elsewhere, as I have learned, you subtly allude to portions of these scriptures. Indeed, I now appreciate the depth of your learning; for not only do you show a profound understanding of Greek history writing, but also a fine knowledge of the prophecies of the ancient Jews.

Of course, I had always understood that it was natural for Jesus to make reference to these scriptures, for they were his sacred books. He was, as you so clearly demonstrate, a Jew. But now, I am happy to say, I also have an appreciation (I believe) of how you have made appropriate use of these scriptures in your work.

What I learned from our visiting scholar can be traced to the explicit references to these scriptures in the final section of your work: your description of the conversation about the scriptures which Jesus had at table with the travellers in Emmaus (Luke 24:25–27), and especially the words of Jesus spoken to the group of his followers who were gathered in Jerusalem: “everything written about me in the law of Moses, the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled” (24:44). Aha—there it is again, that potent little word, “must be fulfilled”! At any rate, our discussion this past evening ventured into new fields for me.

The learned visitor was struck with these references to the prophets, and asked me no end of questions about this matter. As I had the whole of your manuscript with me, I was able, with only a little difficulty, to find other instances where Jesus, in your narrative, had referred directly to the prophecies in those scriptures, and also to the prophecies which he himself uttered. I must say, I was surprised just how many such instances there were throughout your work!

What was of fascination to myself, and I hope to others at the meal, was the way in which this scholar drew comparisons with the scriptures of Israel. Apparently, the idea that a prophecy such as an oracle bought from an oracle monger, or the reading of entrails, or the explanation of an omen, might be fulfilled. This idea is not at all strange to us; it is also to be found in the narratives of the Jews.

This information was not known to the company as a whole, and so the visitor found that he had acquired a platform for explaining the history of the Jewish people to an interested audience. This was not what many of us would have anticipated at the start of the evening! Indeed, what struck me as the man expounded his theme, was just how familiar some of this was to me.

Strange, for I am not known as one who religiously reads the Jewish scriptures! Yet I realised that the patterns and structures of the stories told and analysed by our learned companion were very close to some of the patterns and structures that I had encountered in my reading of your narrative.

The way that Jesus uttered prophecies and they came to pass later in the narrative—this is very close to the Jewish pattern. So too, the explicit note of scriptural prophecies coming to fulfilment in the narrative itself—this formulaic patterning of events is also akin to the Jewish pattern. I began to wonder just how much of this you might have been aware of. Were you consciously writing in the style of the Jewish historians?

Towards the end of the evening, the visitor spoke of the work of an acquaintance of his, who is presently writing in Rome, in an attempt to tell us gentiles about the Jewish people. Apparently this writer, one Flavius (Josephus) by name, makes abundant use of this pattern of prophecy and fulfilment in the course of his narrative.

And, I should tell you, he also deploys the motif of divine providence to interpret the story of the Jewish people to the learned Romans. What a striking coincidence; the very same features that we find in your work! Do you, perchance, know of this Flavius? Or is it simply that you and he have both been trained in the same manner, with due attention to the essential features of Greek history writing and Jewish scripture interpretation? A fascinating question, I dare say, even if I have posed it myself!

Incidentally, it must be noted that it was with no little surprise that I learned, at the conclusion of our dinner and discussion, that the visiting scholar at our table was himself a Jew. I had imagined that he was, like you, a gentile scholar who had made a special study of the Jewish scriptures; but apparently he was raised himself as a Jew, and he bears the bodily marks to prove this. (I must assure you that this last statement is made on the basis of a statement made by the man himself, not on any personal inspection which I carried out!)

Although I had long heard of such a phenomenon, this was in fact the first time that I had encountered a Jew who displayed no clear sign of his religion in the way that he behaved. To all intents and purposes, he acted like one of us—until the discussion turned to prophecies from scripture, I must add. Back home, the Jews in our city are much more distinctive; and even those of Jewish origin in our own group are quite noticeably so, I believe.

Well, I must conclude. I confess that I had not before thought so hard about the matters which I have canvassed above. I am glad, now, that we were able to discuss these things around the table in the house of Themistocles. It has shed a new light on your work.

I wonder, now, just how much of this was your intention as you wrote your story of Jesus? Perhaps we should add this to our list of things to discuss when we are able to meet face to face in Achaia.

Greetings to all.

*****

Question for discussion: what is the importance, for you, of the parts of scripture that say, “this fulfilled the scriptures”?

These “letters” were part of my presentation at a conference held at St Hilda’s College, University of Melbourne, in November 2000. The conference was entitled “Preaching and Teaching in the Year of Luke: a national conference on preaching, teaching and learning”. It was sponsored by the national Uniting Church agency, Uniting Education, in association with Otira, the Continuing Education agency of the Synod of Victoria. The keynote addresses were subsequently published as AT TABLE WITH LUKE (UTC Publications; UTC Bible Studies 2, 2000) ©John T. Squires 2000

https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/26/i-was-astonished-to-receive-your-brief-note-letters-to-luke-6-year-c/

This is the fourth post in a series offering a number of imaginary letters from the ancient world, only recently “discovered”. The letters, we might imagine, reflect what the recipient of the “orderly account of the things that have come to fulfilment” (what we know as the Gospel of Luke), the man named Theophilus, might have written to the author of that work, as he received sections of the “orderly account” in sequence.

For earlier letters, see https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/17/i-make-prayers-on-your-behalf-letters-to-luke-1-year-c/ and https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/19/i-rejoice-in-the-gift-of-writing-letters-to-luke-2-year-c/ and https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/21/how-exciting-it-was-letters-to-luke-3-year-c/

Theophilus to Luke, greetings.

I give thanks to God for all good things granted to you.

I write briefly, so that this letter might accompany the rather more lengthy report and request, concerning my business affairs. I will not bore you with those details. But I do want you to know that now I understand what was meant by the words which you wrote that Jesus spoke: “you are witnesses of these things” (Luke 24:48).

Eumenes is thinking deeply about Jesus, whilst some others are at least interested to hear more about him. For myself, I am thinking much more about things than I have ever done before—even, I must say, to the point of feeling that I am able to mount a defence, an apologia, of what it is that I believe. I am most grateful that your narrative of Jesus has had this effect in me, and in those whom I have already mentioned.
I will tell you more at a later date.

For the moment, I pray that you may keep well.

*****

These “letters” were part of my presentation at a conference held at St Hilda’s College, University of Melbourne, in November 2000. The conference was entitled “Preaching and Teaching in the Year of Luke: a national conference on preaching, teaching and learning”. It was sponsored by the national Uniting Church agency, Uniting Education, in association with Otira, the Continuing Education agency of the Synod of Victoria. The keynote addresses were subsequently published as AT TABLE WITH LUKE (UTC Publications; UTC Bible Studies 2, 2000) ©John T. Squires 2000

I am happy to report that we have held another reading (Letters to Luke #5; Year C)

https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/26/i-was-astonished-to-receive-your-brief-note-letters-to-luke-6-year-c/

This is the third post in a series offering a number of imaginary letters from the ancient world, only recently “discovered”. The letters, we might imagine, reflect what the recipient of the “orderly account of the things that have come to fulfilment” (what we know as the Gospel of Luke), the man named Theophilus, might have written to the author of that work, as he received sections of the “orderly account” in sequence.

For earlier letters, see https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/17/i-make-prayers-on-your-behalf-letters-to-luke-1-year-c/ and https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/19/i-rejoice-in-the-gift-of-writing-letters-to-luke-2-year-c/

Theophilus to Luke, greetings.

I give thanks to God for your faith, and for your gift of storytelling. But let me get straight to the point.

How exciting it was! As we gathered at table, my companions were in fact eager to hear from your writings. I had mentioned to them, at our last meal, that I was reading through your work, and that I was much impressed with its erudition as well as with its entertainment value. (I think, perhaps, that I exaggerated my point a little; but I am sure that you will forgive me this.) So, they were most eager to hear from it for themselves, and accordingly, I was able to read to them a not insignificant section of your work.

I chose to begin by reading from the charge which Jesus gave to his twelve closest followers, when he sent them out to proclaim God’s kingdom amongst the villages (Luke 9:1–6). I must admit that my decision to begin at this place was influenced by the fact that immediately after this, you reported the interest which King Herod showed, as he wished to learn more about Jesus (9:7–9).

It seemed to me to be important to establish that people of means and power, such as Herod, could take an interest in Jesus; for this was precisely the kind of group to which I was reading your account—people of means and power.

I continued my reading of what took place in your narrative, through the description of Jesus’ decision to head, steadfastly and with steely resolve, towards Jerusalem (9:51). At this point, the nobility of Jesus’ words about the supreme importance that should be attached to following him (9:57–62) had a striking effect on those who heard it.

All agreed that this was a most unconventional way to go about collecting students to teach! The reading followed all that you had written, in order, right on up to the passage where Jesus spoke with vigour and passion about God’s care for each one of us (12:22–34).

I must admit that I had some degree of discomfort when I read the stinging words spoken by Jesus concerning the rich, just before this passage (12:13– 21); for I felt that some of my companions at table might well take offence. I was also aware that some other things that Jesus had said must have been perplexing to my companions, for they probably were not aware of the intense hatred for Samaritans which is found amongst the inhabitants of Judea (9:52–56; 10:25–37).

However, it was more than pleasing to discover that these people amongst my audience were more concerned to explore the significance of Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom, and the sovereignty of God, which seem to be scattered throughout the excerpt which we read. In fact, the reading was interrupted by a vigorous discussion immediately after I had read the words, “it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom” (12:32).

I was struck in a way that I had not imagined before, by the comments of one Philoxenes, a learned man, who showed not a little awareness of the niceties of history writing. For, you see, Philoxenes proposed that your description of Jesus as one who pointed to the providential care of God, was not unlike the way that some of the writers of the history of Greece and Rome had made use of precisely this topos to organise their works.

Indeed, I began to recall some of the lessons I had taken many years ago— lessons whose relevance had faded into insignificance until the present moment reawakened them in my memory. Lessons about how a good work of history tells of how the gods intervened in events, in both direct and indirect ways, so as to be seen to be sovereign over those events.

In the course of this discussion, I had occasion to refer to some comments in earlier passages of your work which I found to be of particular relevance. For instance, when you noted that Jesus preached his message as he travelled around the synagogues of Judea (by the way, surely you mean Galilee?—for at this point in the story, Jesus was active only in the north!)—when you say that his message was, “I must proclaim the good news of the kingdom” (4:43), are you intending to allude to this theme, of the providential guidance of human actions by the gods? For it seemed to some of us at table—and I must confess to being persuaded by this view—that this was, indeed, the theme which you had in mind: the divine necessity which impelled the message of Jesus.

Furthermore, as I proudly pointed out, in a portion of the work which we had not yet read (but which I have already surveyed), Jesus himself says, “I must be on my way to Jerusalem” (13:33). And I also noted that you had very clearly reported Jesus as referring to “the plan of God” (7:30) in a section of the work before that which we read at the meal.

And someone else commented on the striking tone of Jesus’ words to the disciples, “The Son of Man must undergo great suffering” (9:21), words which came almost immediately before the voice of God himself was heard, commending Jesus as “my son, my chosen one” (9:35). For it seemed to us that you had provided us, your listeners, with many pointers to the way in which the story of Jesus took place under the guidance and direction of the Lord God.

If this is indeed the case, I shall be careful to note any recurrences of this idea in the later sections of your work which, I confess, I have not yet been able to read. For I am now of the mind that you have consciously shaped your narrative on the models provided by those earlier chroniclers of human history who were intent upon showing how the divine providence has “brought the orderly arrangement of the visible stars and the natures of human beings together into one common relationship, continually directing their course throughout all eternity” (Diodorus Siculus, Universal History 1.1.3).

If you have time, it would be good to hear your comments on these ruminations. If you are not able to write—and I do not need to remind you of the comments you made to me, about how you would be consumed by the task of completing your second volume, so that it might be complete when I return—then I shall look forward to a spirited discussion with you when I see you once more in Achaia.

Greetings to all. Secundus, the faithful scribe of all that Theophilus dictates to him, adds his greetings. I pray that you may keep well.

I will return in a short time, after my business here is complete. Farewell.

*****

Questions for discussion: what do you think of the idea that “divine providence” is the guiding force in the events of history? do we still hold to this idea today? how do we discern what is in accord with the plan of God?

This and the associated “letters” were part of my presentation at a conference held at St Hilda’s College, University of Melbourne, in November 2000. The conference was entitled “Preaching and Teaching in the Year of Luke: a national conference on preaching, teaching and learning”. It was sponsored by the national Uniting Church agency, Uniting Education, in association with Otira, the Continuing Education agency of the Synod of Victoria. The keynote addresses were subsequently published as AT TABLE WITH LUKE (UTC Publications; UTC Bible Studies 2, 2000) ©John T. Squires 2000

See also https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/23/i-write-briefly-letters-to-luke-4-year-c/

https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/25/i-am-happy-to-report-that-we-have-held-another-reading-letters-to-luke-5-year-c/

https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/26/i-was-astonished-to-receive-your-brief-note-letters-to-luke-6-year-c/

This is the second post in a series offering a number of imaginary letters from the ancient world, only recently “discovered”. The letters, we might imagine, reflect what the recipient of the “orderly account of the things that have come to fulfilment” (what we know as the Gospel of Luke), the man named Theophilus, might have written to the author of that work, as he received sections of the “orderly account” in sequence.

For letter one, see https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/17/i-make-prayers-on-your-behalf-letters-to-luke-1-year-c/

*****

Theophilus to Luke, greetings.

I have continued to make mention of you in my prayers, and I trust that you are likewise remembering me.

I rejoice in the gift of writing which God has bestowed on you, for as I indicated to you in my earlier letter, I have been reading your narrative concerning Jesus. Once more I have dined in the house of Themistocles, and once more our discussion ranged over many matters concerning business and pleasure.

When we came, as I had anticipated, to the topic of ‘great men’ once more, I felt that I was better prepared. For I had read your narrative about Jesus—or, at least, I have read a goodly amount of it.

So I spoke a little more about Jesus. However, one of the company retorted that he had never heard of this Jesus, and that he was probably a figure made up by a clever author. At this point, I was able to reply that you had explicitly described your account of Jesus as a diegesin (Luke 1:3)—that is, as a narrative which has the appearance of being in historical form.

Indeed, as I have read your work, I have come to understand how you have presented your story about Jesus in the fashion familiar to us from those who have written accounts of the lives of great men in a history-like fashion, so lifelike and understandable was the character of Jesus whom you had depicted.

Hegestratus said that one should not presume that simply because a work was described as a diegesin, that it could be accounted worthy of belief, since there were often too many paradoxa, too many strange things, which strained credulity in such works.

Another diner, Apollonius, disagreed, arguing that the inclusion of such sections performed the good function of forcing the hearers to decide for themselves just what they thought about it.

Indeed, this is precisely the effect that your work has had on me. It is fair to say that I did know the basic story of Jesus. You had talked with me about it, and of course I had been present at gatherings where one or another had spoken about the deeds of Jesus, or repeated and explained some of his words, while we met, as we often did, at table in the house of Nikias, as well as with my own household from time to time.

But I have to say, with admiration, that your account has provided me with many more details, some of which I suppose I might have heard, but most of which I have clearly not remembered.

You have also presented the particular incidents in an overall framework which I assume you have supplied in the course of your writing. As you yourself wrote, you knew various incidents and happenings relating to Jesus from those who had previously written about them, but you have cast them into a narrative of ‘an orderly account’ (Luke 1:3). For this, I am most grateful.

I now sense that what you have done is to provide me with a collection of stories about Jesus which I myself can learn and retell. They form a basis for my own thinking and talking about issues, using the stories about Jesus, but allowing me to appropriate them for myself, in relation to my own needs.

I trust that this is what I may be able to do, should there be occasion in future gatherings with my host and the highly enjoyable company which he always seems able to draw together for the meals in his house.

I hope also that I might be able to keep a clear head, for after many hours of talking, interspersed with drinking from the amphoras of good wine which he provides us, it is sometimes difficult to think with precision!

Give my greetings to Staphys, and Nikia, and to my own household. I intend not to be away too long this time! I hope to hear from you, as you are able to put pen to papyrus in reply.

I pray that you may keep well.

*****

Question for discussion: What do you think that Theophilus meant, in this letter, by ‘history’? Is it the same as what you mean by this term? If not, how might it be different?

This and the other “letters” were part of my presentation at a conference held at St Hilda’s College, University of Melbourne, in November 2000. The conference was entitled “Preaching and Teaching in the Year of Luke: a national conference on preaching, teaching and learning”. It was sponsored by the national Uniting Church agency, Uniting Education, in association with Otira, the Continuing Education agency of the Synod of Victoria. The keynote addresses were subsequently published as AT TABLE WITH LUKE (UTC Publications; UTC Bible Studies 2, 2000) ©John T. Squires 2000

See also https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/21/how-exciting-it-was-letters-to-luke-3-year-c/

https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/23/i-write-briefly-letters-to-luke-4-year-c/

https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/25/i-am-happy-to-report-that-we-have-held-another-reading-letters-to-luke-5-year-c/

https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/26/i-was-astonished-to-receive-your-brief-note-letters-to-luke-6-year-c/

This is the first post in a series of posts offering imaginary letters from the ancient world, only recently “discovered”. The letters, we might imagine, could reflect what the recipient of the “orderly account of the things that have come to fulfilment ” (what we know as the Gospel of Luke), the man named Theophilus, wrote to the author of that work, as he received sections of the “orderly account” in sequence.

Theophilus is away on a business trip. He writes home to Luke, telling of what happens as he reads Luke’s narrative and shares it with others. You will need to be prepared to engage in an act of imagination, which will transport you across the centuries into another time and place.

And so, imagine …

*****

Theophilus to Luke, greetings. Before all else, I wish that you are well, and that you are applying yourself to the tasks of writing that are before you.

I make prayers on your behalf to our Lord God, praying that you may continue to enjoy good health. Now that I have arrived in Antioch, and have found someone who is travelling back to Achaia, I have entrusted this letter to him. I hope that you will be able to write back to me, about your health, and about the health of our brothers and sisters in Achaia.

I am writing to you to report that I have now, at last, been able to find time to read the narrative which you delivered to me just before my departure from Achaia. After sailing across the Aegean to Ephesus, I have travelled along the common way to Laodicea, and now to Antioch, where I have lodged in the house of Themistocles whilst I conduct my business in this city.

In fact, whilst we were reclining at table just two nights ago, some matters arose in conversation which reminded me of the task which I had promised you that I would undertake whilst on this journey.

Our table talk covered many matters. The price of grain was, as usual, the matter to which the company first turned its attention. Then, one of the group spoke of the new trade opportunities that have been reported from a merchant who has just returned here from an eastern trip. Quite some time was spent in hearing the details of a scandal which has just erupted, concerning two of the servants of a local merchant here in Antioch.

The rather appalling state of the produce seen in the marketplace each day was also canvassed, as was the welcome news that the maritime trade season has just now begun, having been delayed some two weeks because of the unseasonable winds on the Aegean Sea. We all agreed that this should lead to an improvement in the marketplace produce within the week.

Incidentally, you must remind me to tell you of the scandal surrounding the two servants; I do not wish to be distracted by it at the moment, but I am certain that you will find it to be entertaining when I recount it to you face to face. I recall with fondness your own ability when it comes to storytelling, and I can only hope that I will live up to your best expectations when I have the opportunity to tell you this rather sordid tale. I know that you have an ear for tales of striking dramatic effect, and so I would be pleased to add this to your collection.

At any rate, as you might imagine, it was only a matter of time before our conversation happened to venture onto a more elevated plane. The opportunity for good table talk, such as was valued by a number of our company, was too valuable to be squandered on boring business details spiced with licentious scandal mongering, for the whole of the evening. And so we found ourselves engaged in a discussion concerning some of the great men from before our times.

One of my companions spoke about the virtues of Romulus, famed for his role in the founding of the city of Rome. None dare speak ill of the Romans at this time, of course; but at the time when the city was founded, it was, so it seems, a little place of no repute. Romulus is rightly honoured for his great deeds: he is the father of a widespread, if not widely-loved, empire.

Another at table with me spoke of the great Alexander, whose soldiers once marched not far from here, so I am told, as they ventured east to conquer many new lands. Rightly is Alexander endowed with the title ‘great’, for such were his deeds.

And yet another who was present with us spoke in exalted tones of Pythagoras, the famous teacher and philosopher, who performed no great deeds save that he taught of the mysteries of numbers, sounds, and ideas. It may perhaps be that his impact will be far greater than that of the other two, although it would have been a brave man to declare that in the company of those at table with me two nights back.

However, such conversation did embolden me to speak, for just a short while, of the man Jesus, about whom you have written so eloquently in your narrative which you have vouchsafed to me. If the truth be told, it was this moment in the discussion that reminded me of your work, of which I had read but two or three portions some days before the meal, but which now I have determined to read through consecutively, until I arrive at the ending. And so it was that I spoke about Jesus to my dinner companions.

As I did so, I recalled what you had written about the birth of Jesus: how strange, portentous happenings took place before and immediately after he was born. For I recall that you wrote about how the man Zechariah was struck dumb (Luke 1:19–22); and how Elizabeth conceived when everyone expected that she was well past her time (1:24–25); and then how Zechariah was able to speak (1:59–66). And you wrote also about how Mary conceived in strange, inexplicable circumstances, which you described as the spirit of holiness which overshadowed Mary (1:35).

And I recalled more clearly your words about how the angel spoke to Zechariah (1:8–20), and then to Mary (1:27–38), and still later to the shepherds (2:8–14). Indeed, these things reminded me of what I once read concerning the great Alexander—how his conception in the womb of Olympias had been announced to her in a dream in which a thunderbolt struck her womb, and then how Philip, the boy’s father, dreamed of how he sealed up the womb.

And I also recall reading how the priestess of the oracle at Delphi predicted how invincible the boy would be once he was born, and how the temple of Artemis was burnt to the ground on the very day that the child was born. Such amazing events took place in association with his birth!

This recollection gave me courage, then, to speak of Jesus during the table talk; for surely similar amazing things took place in association with his birth. But one of my companions objected in the strongest terms—what great things did this Jesus do? he asked. I recall now that you wrote about the prophecy that ‘he would be called great’ (Luke 1:32); I lament the fact that I was not quick-witted enough to speak of this at the meal itself.

At any rate, I told the company of how he spoke great things—like Pythagoras, like Epicurus, like Socrates even—things which help us to know how to live life and what choices to make when confronted with dilemmas in life.

As I spoke, it became clear to me that I had not remembered very well the things which you had told me, when we were speaking about your writing project at the time when I was with still you. And so, I was especially glad that I had brought your manuscript with me, and I have determined to make good use of my time away, so that I might read and understand the things which have been fulfilled amongst us, as you so eloquently describe them.

Give my greetings to the members of my household, and please assure my beloved wife that the requests she made for goods that I was to bring back with me have not been forgotten. I believe that it will be some time before my business here is concluded, and so I will write directly to her in good time; but it will please the gods if you are able to convey this message to her. Give greetings also to Staphys, and to the household of Nikias, and those who lodge with him.

I pray that you may keep well.

*****

Questions for discussion: do you think that it is reasonable to interpret the “signs and wonders” of Luke 1–2 not as historical occurrences, but as symbols which are pointers to the significance of Jesus? Are such ‘miracles’ (paradoxa) and ‘portents’ (to which Theophilus refers in this letter) something that we expect in histories today?

This and the following “letters” were part of my presentation at a conference held at St Hilda’s College, University of Melbourne, in November 2000. The conference was entitled “Preaching and Teaching in the Year of Luke: a national conference on preaching, teaching and learning”. It was sponsored by the national Uniting Church agency, Uniting Education, in association with Otira, the Continuing Education agency of the Synod of Victoria. The keynote addresses were subsequently published as AT TABLE WITH LUKE (UTC Publications; UTC Bible Studies 2, 2000) ©John T. Squires 2000

See also https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/19/i-rejoice-in-the-gift-of-writing-letters-to-luke-2-year-c/

https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/21/how-exciting-it-was-letters-to-luke-3-year-c/

https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/23/i-write-briefly-letters-to-luke-4-year-c/

https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/25/i-am-happy-to-report-that-we-have-held-another-reading-letters-to-luke-5-year-c/

https://johntsquires.com/2022/02/26/i-was-astonished-to-receive-your-brief-note-letters-to-luke-6-year-c/