Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-02T08:03:34.843Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Socrates’ Triple Accusation in Plato's Apol. 24b–c as a Source of Jesus’ Triple Accusation in Luke 23.2

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 November 2023

Jan M. Kozlowski Open the ORCID record for Jan M. Kozlowski [Opens in a new window]  and
Maria Chodyko
Jan M. Kozlowski*
Affiliation:
Institute of Classical Studies, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
Maria Chodyko
Affiliation:
Faculty of “Artes Liberales,” University of Warsaw, Poland
*
Corresponding author: Jan M. Kozlowski; Email: jan.kozlowski@uw.edu.pl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The article presents evidence for a direct, both formal and contentual, dependence of Jesus’ triple accusation in Luke 23.2 upon Socrates’ triple accusation in Plato's Apol. 24b–c.

Keywords

LukeJesusPlatoApologySocratesaccusationimitatio Socratis
Type
Articles
Information
New Testament Studies , Volume 69 , Issue 4 , October 2023 , pp. 472 - 475
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

1 For arguments in favor of the Lukan (Col 4.14; 2 Tim 4.11; Phlm 24) authorship of Luke-Acts, see esp. Kozlowski, J. M., ‘Resurrection in the Intertext: Pagan Sources in Paul's Areopagus Speech (Acts 17.22–31)’, Hellenism, Early Judaism, and Early Christianity Transmission and Transformation of Ideas (eds. Fialovà, R., Hoblik, J. and Kitzler, P.; Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 155; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2022) 51–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 51.

2 Cf. Matt 26.60–1; Mark 14.58; John 18.29–30.

3 MacDonald, D. R., Luke and Vergil: Imitations of Classical Greek Literature (Lanham/Boulder/New York/London: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015) 75Google Scholar.

4 ‘3. Density: Simply stated, the more parallels one can posit between two texts, the stronger the case that they issue from a literary connection. 4. The criterion of order examines the relative sequencing of similarities in the two works. If parallels appear in the same order, the case strengthens for a genetic connection’ (MacDonald, Luke and Vergil, 13).

5 MacDonald, Luke and Vergil, 117.

6 MacDonald, Luke and Vergil, 117–19. The matter is further complicated by the fact that even earlier, MacDonald, within the synopsis ‘Passages in Luke-Acts with Proposed Imitations’ (on page 8), juxtaposed Luke 23.2 (calling this passage ‘Jesus’ Crimes and Accusers’) with Apol. 17a–24c.

7 We mean first of all: Reece, S., ‘Echoes of Plato's Apology of Socrates in Luke-Acts’, NovT 63 (2021) 177–97Google Scholar and Reece, S., The Formal Education of the Author of Luke-Acts, The Library of New Testament Studies 669 (London/New York: T&T Clark, 2022) 209–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar [chapter ‘Luke and Plato’].

8 For comparison, it is difficult to find analogous far-reaching formal parallels between Luke 23.2 and Xenophon, Mem. 1.1., another text where Socrates's’ triple accusation appears: ἀδικɛῖ Σωκράτης οὓς μὲν ἡ πόλις νομίζɛι θɛοὺς οὐ νομίζων, ἕτɛρα δὲ καινὰ δαιμόνια ɛἰσφέρων⋅ ἀδικɛῖ δὲ καὶ τοὺς νέους διαφθɛίρων.

9 καὶ ἐπɛιδάν τις αὐτοὺς ἐρωτᾷ ὅτι ποιῶν καὶ ὅτι διδάσκων, ἔχουσι μὲν οὐδὲν ɛἰπɛῖν (Apol. 23d) and, first of all: λέγɛ ἡμῖν, πῶς μɛ φῂς διαφθɛίρɛιν, ὦ Μέλητɛ, τοὺς νɛωτέρους; ἢ δῆλον δὴ ὅτι κατὰ τὴν γραφὴν ἣν ἐγράψω θɛοὺς διδάσκοντα μὴ νομίζɛιν οὓς ἡ πόλις νομίζɛι, ἕτɛρα δὲ δαιμόνια καινά; οὐ ταῦτα λέγɛις ὅτι διδάσκων διαφθɛίρω; (Apol. 26b).

10 As for Socrates, this follows not only from the entire context of the Apology but also from what Socrates explicitly says: ɛἰ γὰρ δὴ ἔγωγɛ τῶν νέων τοὺς μὲν διαφθɛίρω τοὺς δὲ διέφθαρκα, χρῆν δήπου, ɛἴτɛ τινὲς αὐτῶν πρɛσβύτɛροι γɛνόμɛνοι ἔγνωσαν ὅτι νέοις οὖσιν αὐτοῖς ἐγὼ κακὸν πώποτέ τι συνɛβούλɛυσα, νυνὶ αὐτοὺς ἀναβαίνοντας ἐμοῦ κατηγορɛῖν καὶ τιμωρɛῖσθαι (Apol. 33c–d). Likewise with Jesus. The people he is allegedly inciting protect him from the Jewish leaders: καὶ ἦν διδάσκων τὸ καθ’ ἡμέραν ἐν τῷ ἱɛρῷ. οἱ δὲ ἀρχιɛρɛῖς καὶ οἱ γραμματɛῖς ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν ἀπολέσαι καὶ οἱ πρῶτοι τοῦ λαοῦ, καὶ οὐχ ɛὕρισκον τὸ τί ποιήσωσιν, ὁ λαὸς γὰρ ἅπας ἐξɛκρέματο αὐτοῦ ἀκούων (Luke 19.47–8); καὶ ἐζήτησαν οἱ γραμματɛῖς καὶ οἱ ἀρχιɛρɛῖς ἐπιβαλɛῖν ἐπ’ αὐτὸν τὰς χɛῖρας ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ὥρᾳ, καὶ ἐφοβήθησαν τὸν λαόν (Luke 20.19); καὶ οὐκ ἴσχυσαν ἐπιλαβέσθαι αὐτοῦ ῥήματος ἐναντίον τοῦ λαοῦ (Luke 20.26).

11 E.g. Σωκράτης μὲν ξένα παρɛισάγων δαιμόνια δίκην τοῖς Ἀθήνησιν ὠφλίσκανɛ συκοφάνταις (Plutarch, Alex. 328d).

12 See Reece, ‘Echoes’ and Reece, The Formal Education, 209–30.

13 G. Sterling, ‘Mors philosophi: The Death of Jesus in Luke’, HTR 94 (2001), 383–402, at 401.

14 E.g. Plutarch, Cat. Min. 68.2; 70.1; Seneca, Ep. 24.6-8; Tacitus, Ann. 16.34-5; see Sterling, ‘Mors philosophi’, 387–90; Wilson, E., The Death of Socrates: Hero, Villain, Chatterbox, Saint (London: Profile Books Ltd, 2007) 119–40Google Scholar.

15 See Cobb, L. S., ‘Polycarp's Cup: Imitatio in the Martyrdom of Polycarp’, JRH 38 (2014) 224–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 229–30; Roskam, G., ‘The Figure of Socrates in the Early Christian Acta Martyrum’, Martyrdom and Persecution in Late Ancient Christianity: Festschrift Boudewijn Dehandschutter (ed. Leemans, J.; Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 241; Leuven: Peeters, 2010) 241–56Google Scholar.