Lost Letters of Pergamum Reflection
NT520, Fall 04
Bradford McCall
11/28/04
Bruce Longenecker stated his two purposes of writing this fictional addendum to NT corpus in the preface to the aforementioned book. He desired for readers to gain a better appreciation of the historical context of early Christian writings, and develop sharper instincts for understanding the writings of the NT. In evaluating his purposes, after thorough perusal of the book, I must conclude that he was in fact successful in his attainment of stated goals. Through reading this text, I have indeed garnered a more thorough understanding of the surrounding the context in which the Holy writ was manufactured. He incorporated scripture-like intimations throughout his own artificial writings, which aided infinitely in comprehension of the true Scripture.
However, having said this, I must declare that I did not exactly agree with his methodology for gaining such a perspective for his readers. Antipas verily was a pagan at the start of his virtual diatribe with Luke. Although, Luke nonetheless interacted with him as a brother, even though Antipas was adamantly polytheistic from the onset of this fictional narrative. This fact leads me to posit that perhaps Longenecker had an underlying, somewhat subliminal message in this book: that we should attempt to evangelize those who agree not with us by gradual persuasion and the expression of love despite their unbelief. And I must declare that this thought is quite correct. However, I do not think that a 1st century Christian, ardent as they were, would share a similar view. We must realize that Luke was an apostle of a direct apostle of our Lord, and as such, he would have expressed much fervency as well (the apple does not fall far from the tree, i.e.). Thus do I not think that Luke would have been so understanding of Antipas’ blatant idolatry and denial of the Lordship of Christ Jesus. Admittedly, by the end of this fictional narrative, Antipas had indeed converted to faith in Christ (giving implicit support for my aforementioned underlying message of the book), but it was a long time coming. Instead of the perpetual correspondence of Luke and Antipas, I posit that Luke, having been thwarted in his attempts to persuade Antipas after one or two letters, would have knocked the dust from his feet, and not attempted to convert Antipas any longer. Assuredly this would be the case, I posit, for Luke would realize that he had other, more fertile, ground elsewhere.
My reaction to Longenecker’s methodology of deriving the fruition of his thesis does not at all denigrate the value of reading this volume, I must admit however. Indeed, this book did enlighten my knowledge regarding the situational context into which the Son of Man was revealed, and as such, is therefore a worthy read.