Historiographische Wunderdarstellung im lukanischen Doppelwerk

Abstract It is widely acknowledged among exegetes that Luke, unlike his contemporary historians, does not present his miracles in a distanced manner. The findings of recent studies in classics, however, challenge this view for two reasons. The first concerns the common notion of what is meant by miracle distance, and the second concerns the realization of such a distance. In this article, one of the distancing strategies—modifying the plausibility structure that is presupposed by the reader—will serve as an example to demonstrate that Luke is aware of these historiographical conventions. Contrary to his contemporaries, however, Luke does not interrupt his narrative with his auctorial “I” to implement this strategy. Instead, he incorporates this effect of distance into his account subtly. Finally, these findings correspond with another idea that recently gained ground in Lukan scholarship. Namely, that Luke also addresses his account to pagans and their cultural horizon.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Novum Testamentum
Published
2025-08-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1163/15685365-bja10104
Primary Topic
Historical and Religious Studies of Rome
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Historiographische Wunderdarstellung im lukanischen Doppelwerk

Manuel Nägele
Novum Testamentum
Historical and Religious Studies of Rome
article

Historiographische Wunderdarstellung im lukanischen Doppelwerk

Manuel Nägele
article en

Abstract

Abstract It is widely acknowledged among exegetes that Luke, unlike his contemporary historians, does not present his miracles in a distanced manner. The findings of recent studies in classics, however, challenge this view for two reasons. The first concerns the common notion of what is meant by miracle distance, and the second concerns the realization of such a distance. In this article, one of the distancing strategies—modifying the plausibility structure that is presupposed by the reader—will serve as an example to demonstrate that Luke is aware of these historiographical conventions. Contrary to his contemporaries, however, Luke does not interrupt his narrative with his auctorial “I” to implement this strategy. Instead, he incorporates this effect of distance into his account subtly. Finally, these findings correspond with another idea that recently gained ground in Lukan scholarship. Namely, that Luke also addresses his account to pagans and their cultural horizon.

Novum TestamentumVol. 67(4)
University of Zurich (CH)
Openalex Percentile: Top 76%
Historical and Religious Studies of Rome
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.