connecting the dots & the Caiaphus proposal

Steven Avery

Administrator
wip

======================

here is some material on theophilus from richard h. Anderson (we have had email contact, however not for the last few years.)

theophilus: A proposal (1995)
http://web.archive.org/web/20051231195209/http://www.geocities.com/gospelofluke/theosub/theosub.htm

who are johanna and theophilus?: The irony of the intended audience of the gospel of luke (2011)
https://www.amazon.com/who-are-johanna-theophilus-intended-ebook/dp/b0056ixw6u

blog - (active 2004-2014)
dokeo kago grapho soi kratistos
theophilos
http://kratistostheophilos.blogspot.com

there has been some really solid supportive buzz by a couple of other writers as well, (john lupia and lee dahn) and richard anderson has put quite a bit of related material in his blogs.

======================

there is also a book by another gentleman, "luke: The priest":

Rick strelan
https://hapi.uq.edu.au/profile/453/rick-strelan
https://uq.academia.edu/rickstrelan

which appears to be fully compatible with the theophilus proposal.

Luke the priest: The authority of the author of the third gospel
by dr rick strelan
https://books.google.com/books/about/luke_the_priest.html?id=vrq_rbhsxggc (2008)
https://books.google.com/books?id=aetdi13weaoc&pg=pr1#v=onepage&q&f=false (2013)
https://www.amazon.com/luke-priest-rick-strelan/dp/0754662594#reader_0754662594

and i see acts 6:7, "great company of the priests", as liking having a personal auto-biographical element of luke explaining his actions, his leaving the fold, to theophilus.

=======================

and i have a bit here, as a reference spot:

Pure bible forum
theophilus the high priest
http://www.purebibleforum.com/forumdisplay.php?66-theophilus-the-high-priestzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

new testament early dating, synoptics, wenham, theophilus and much more
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index.php/threads/a.1016

and i wrote a bit about the 1700s understanding of this theory, theodore hase, to the learned johann michaelis., which richard anderson had missed, or omitted. However, i have not gotten to the text of the hase material.

This purebibleforum section needs at least a few hours of improvement to make it into a reasonably robust section.

======================

david lewis allen
https://swbts.edu/academics/faculty/preaching/david-allen/

has touched on some elements.

Lukan authorship of hebrews (2010)
https://books.google.com/books/about/lukan_authorship_of_hebrews.html?id=ib65awaaqbaj

see brian small and the comments here:

Is luke the author of hebrews? (2009)
http://polumeros.blogspot.com/2009/01/is-luke-author-of-hebrews.html

and i do not see the lewis sermon online, it was a lot of fun.

=======================

tonight, preparing this, i see that another gentleman has nicely touched on the relationship of the studies of strelan and anderson. Like many, he chokes a bit on the proper early dating. Think richard bauckham and the octogenarian eye-witnesses :) .

Everyone will see the salvation of god: Studies in lukan theology (2015)
by lesław daniel chrupcała
https://books.google.com/books?id=b-xgdwaaqbaj&pg=pa17

luke the jew? Current trajectories of scholarship p. 1-21

note the reference to josep rius-camps starting on p. 20.

=======================

while we are in the neighborhood, there is also an idea that relates john to the high priest, based on the comment of polycrates. So far, that is a bit on the fringe, even for me. :) not sure if it has any supporters today.

=======================

my personal view is that the theophilus proposal is quite definite. The connections are multi-faceted. However, it requires an early date that clashes with the scholarly presuppositions of today.

And luke as a priest is very sensible.

And that you (james david audlin, writing of joseph caiaphas and joseph of arimethea) may have added a vital connecting piece

=======================

steven
 
Top