Problematyka literacko-historyczna Łk 4, 16-30

Abstract

The article analyzes the literary aspect of the Nazareth percicope (Lk 4,16-30). It is shown against the background of the Third Gospel as a whole and of its more im mediate context, the narrative in Lk. 3,21-4,44. The interdependencies between the pericopes reveal the main theological motifs of the passage. The unity of the narrative of Lk. 3,21-4,44, the typically Lucan vocabulary of the Nazareth pericope and an editorial style matching that of the author of the Third Gospel all point to Luke as the main author of the passage. Whole the Nazareth episode is constructionally dependent on Mark (Mk. 1,14f.; 6,1-6) and on the Q source, Luke also drew on traditions not used by the other Synoptics. Besides, his own contribution to the final form of the pericope is so large that the question of tradition is a secondary one. The Evangelist's primary motive was to give a theological interpretation of the events in Nazareth. The structure of the passage is very carefully thought out and composed so as to form three units that bring out the content of the verses 18f. and 21f. The three elements call to mind the tripartite structure of the whole Gospel of Luke. They are: (1) preparation in the form of a chiasmus (vv. 16-20), (2) revelation as the central part (vv. 21-22), and (3) mission – twofold comparison with the tragic outcome of Jesus' visit to Nazareth (vv. 23-30). The fact that Lk. 4,16-30 was composed in accordance with Hellenic literary canons suggests that we should interpret it, alongside the Capernaum episode, as an exemplary account of Jesus' messianic activity as a prophet and a healer.