Jonathan Bernier raised some interesting problems with suggestions that are often made regarding why Luke ended Acts where he did. The open ending doesn’t really work well as a defense of Paul’s innocence, if the work was written after Paul’s death.
That does not, however, mean that we must embrace as the only alternative dating Acts to soon after its final scene.
Also worth mentioning is the possibility that, contrary to the tradition, Paul did not die in the time of Nero, but was executed before then, under the auspices of an emperor upon whom the author could not shift blame in the way one might just be able to in Nero’s case.
I don’t have strong feelings either way.
See also Bernier’s earlier post mentioning my own, mentioning his, about the possible quotation of Luke in 1 Timothy.
As for the possibility of Luke-Acts-X, what do you think that third volume might have focused on, and what period of history do you think it might have covered, if it had existed? What title might it have ended up being given if it had the contents you imagine it could have?
Feel free to compare your speculations about Luke’s two/three volumes to speculations about Star Wars Episode VII if you are so inclined…
The above depiction of the other St. Luke is one that I shared previously. It is by Chawakarn Khongprasert.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In