Abstract
In his 2010 doctoral dissertation (supervised by Frank J. Matera, Catholic University of America), Martínez analyses the pericope Luke 7:18–35 ‘from a narrative-critical perspective’ (p. 2). It is his aim to ‘analyse how literary aspects of the passage such as setting, character, and plot function within the whole of Luke-Acts’ (p. 2). In addition to this methodological approach, Martínez ‘also takes into account historical-critical methods and redaction-critical observations’ (p. 2).
The study is arranged in five chapters: First, Martínez summarises the history of research from the Patristic period to the present (‘Luke 7:18–35: A Historical Survey’, pp. 1–41). Second, he presents his ideas on the ‘Origin, Redaction, and Literary Function of Luke 7:18–35’ (pp. 42–79). The third and fourth part provide the centre of the study as they interpret the text Luke 7:18–35 – divided into the two sections 7:18–28 (pp. 80–123) and 29–35 (pp. 124–167) – by means of narrative criticism. Finally, Martínez sums up his observations in an elaborate ‘Conclusion’ (pp. 168–196).
This study is in a certain way an indistinct amalgam of old and new methods. To give two examples: Why does Martínez examine ‘Redactional and Stylistic Issues in Luke 7:29–30’ (pp. 125–131) in the context of chapter 4 (‘A Narrative-Critical Interpretation of 7:29–35’) and not in his second one where it seems to fit much better? Although Martínez intends to analyse Luke 7:18–35 also by means of redaction-criticism (cf. p. 2), he does not do so in his reconstruction of the text Q 7:18–35. He rather develops an indistinct methodology to determine the redactional traits of Luke and Matthew by comparison of both and without reconstructing Q: ‘Rather, the main concern of my analysis is to determine the way in which a study of the differences between Matthew and Luke can illuminate the meaning of each pericope. Furthermore, this comparative study will elucidate how these differences play into each Gospel’s theological perspectives’ (p. 44).
Martínez shows in this work that Luke keenly incorporates the story Q 7:18–35 into the context of the gospel so that ‘the pericope performs a number of important functions’ (p. 174) because chapter 7 echoes important topics raised elsewhere in the gospel. For example, Luke develops the ‘conflict motif’ (p. 174) in the section 7:29–35 to underline ‘the negative reaction of the religious leaders to the ministries of John and Jesus’ (p. 174).
A bibliography (pp. 197–206) and three indices (of subjects: pp. 207–209, authors: pp. 211–214, and source texts: pp. 215–231) complete this study which is probably the only monograph about the important text Luke 7:18–35.