Peter in prison in Acts 12:1-17

by Leolaia 9 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    According to Lapham, the story of Peter imprisoned by Herod Agrippa in Acts 12:1-17 bears striking similarities with the story of Jesus' death and resurrection and the story of Peter's martyrdom in the Martyrdom of Peter (later incorporated into the Acts of Peter). This raises the intriguing possibility that the original story in Acts was of Peter's martyrdom in Judea at the hands of Agrippa, followed by a resurrection appearance and/or angelophany. The "prison" in Acts would refer to Peter's tomb. Here are the conceptual parallels with Jesus' Passion:

    1. Herod beheads James the brother of John, like John the Baptist (Acts 12:2; cf. Matthew 14:3-12)
    2. Herod next seeks to arrest Peter, as Herod sought to kill Jesus (Acts 12:2; cf. Luke 13:31, 23:7-15)
    3. Peter is taken during the Feast of the Passover (Acts 12:4; cf. Matthew 26:17, Gospel of Peter 2:5)
    4. Guards are posted in and outside the prison/tomb (Acts 12:4, 6; cf. Matthew 27:66; Gospel of Peter 8:31)
    5. An angel with shining light appears at the entrance of the prison/tomb (Acts 12:7; cf. Matthew 28:2, 3; Gospel of Peter 13:55)
    6. The angel tells Peter to "stand up" (anasta, the same word as "resurrect") (Acts 12:7; cf. Matthew 27:53)
    7. The gate opening of its own accord (Acts 12:10; cf. Luke 24:2; Gospel of Peter 13:55)
    8. Peter reveals himself to an astonished Mary and brethren (Acts 12:2-12-16; cf. Matthew 28:9-10; Luke 24:36-43; John 20:14)
    9. He sends a message for James and all the brethren (Acts 12:17; cf. Matthew 28:10)
    10. Then he departs to another place (Acts 12:17; cf. Luke 24:50-51)

    And these are some parallels with the martyrdom story in Acts of Peter:

    1. The name of the persecutor -- Agrippa (King Herod Agrippa in Acts, Agrippa II in Acts of Peter)
    2. The four squads of "four soldiers" arresting Peter (Acts 12:4; cf. Acts Pet. 36 = Mart. Pet. 7)
    3. The motif of Peter "withdrawing to safety" (Acts 12:17; cf. Acts Pet. 35 = Mart. Pet. 6)
    4. Peter is accompanied by an angel (= the Lord) on a road outside the city where the angel leaves him (Acts 12:10; cf. Acts. Pet. 35 = Mart. Pet. 6)

    There is also a connection between Acts 12 and the prophecy of Peter's martyrdom in John 21. The angel tells Peter to "gird yourself" (zosai) and "put on" (hupodesai) his sandals and "follow" (akolouthei) him out of the prison. In John 21:18, referring to "the kind of death [Peter] would glorify God," Jesus tells Peter that he used to "gird himself" and walked where he wished but in the future "someone else will gird you (zosei)" and will bring him where he does not wish.

  • Room 215
    Room 215

    Wow, Leolaia, you never cease to amaze! I can't help but wonder about how many of your waking hours you devote to research of this depth. Do your findings result from research conducted in pursuit of some sort of degree in theology?

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    Interesting, although I'm not inclined thus far to look for any historical event behind Acts 12 or the Martyrdom. The latter may well derive from the former, or both from an original yet fictional martyrdom/resurrection story.

    One argument for the second possibility is that Luke consistently avoids describing the death of his main characters (Peter and Paul). It is not the same with second roles. The likely fictional apostle James brother of John (who appears as a Gospel substitute for James the Just) conveniently exits (v. 2) before the distorted yet historical James enters (v. 17). Apparently the tradition of James the Just's death as recorded by Josephus and Hegesippus is split in Acts: the name in 12:2 and the story in chapter 7 (Stephen).

    Many or most miracle stories (not only resurrections) in the Gospels and Acts (as well as non-canonical writings) are fashioned after (or allude to) a death-resurrection story, as the ubiquous yet significant use of anistemi (raise) or egeirô (awaken) clearly show. In this regard Acts 12 is no exception.

    A subjective final note: strange as it may seem, I can testify Acts 12:1-17 functions pretty well as a kind of symbolical midrash or even Gnostic parable. I remember relating a lot to this story when I left the JWs. It all began as a dream, or a sort of game, where everything looked light, easy and unreal. I found myself able of thinking and discussing things freely, passing doors and gates mentally as it were. And when I came to my senses I was really out and free, without having given much previous thought to the consequences. Certainly this experience of "living the text" influences my personal reading. But I think it also reveals a certain quality of the text as a didactic, spiritual or initiatic story...

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    I didn't see this thread and briefly responded about the parallel in the "loosing and binding" thread. Lapman may be right but I'm inclined to agree with Narkissos. There are obviously deliberate parallels with the Passion and resurrection appearances. But does this necessitate that the Peter story be about his death? No. Luke 22:33 has Peter declaring that he would never disown Jesus even to "prison or death". I think we are seeing the familiar symbolism, prison=death, release=resurrection/enlightenment. I wonder tho if such a cerebral even gnostic symbolism could be original to the Catholic author of Acts.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia
    Interesting, although I'm not inclined thus far to look for any historical event behind Acts 12 or the Martyrdom. The latter may well derive from the former, or both from an original yet fictional martyrdom/resurrection story.

    Yes, yes, yes, that was what I implying, there was no word "historical" intended in my post. It seems that the story was based on elements in the Jesus death-resurrection narrative, and then later played a role in composing the Quo Vadis story from Acts of Peter. Interesting that the story has personal meaning for you, but indeed that's how it is for many leaving the old mind-set behind.

    I think it would be an interesting study to just look at all the cases of anistemi in the NT and see where it is theologically loaded in otherwise prosaic contexts.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos
    I think it would be an interesting study to just look at all the cases of anistemi in the NT and see where it is theologically loaded in otherwise prosaic contexts.

    I've done my homework!

    Concentrating on Gospels-Acts, taking into account anistèmi and egeiro (both can mean "raise", only the second can mean "awaken"), and eliminating (1) the explicit meaning "resurrection" (except in miracle variants) and (2) the occurrences where the subject is an enemy (the priests, the pharisees), I get the following list:

    Matthew 1:24; 2:13,14,20,21; 3:9; 8:15,25,26; 9:5,6,7,9,19,25; 11:11; 12:11; 17:7; 25:7;

    Mark 1:31,35; 2:9,11,12,14; 3:3; 4:27,38; 5:41,42; 7:24; 9:27; 10:1,49; 14:42;

    Luke 1:39,69; 3:8; 4:16,38,39; 5:23,24,25,28; 6:8; 7:16; 8:54,55; 10:25; 11:7,8; 13:25; 15:18,20; 17:19; 22:45,46; 24:12,33;

    John 5:8; 7:52; 11:29,31; 13:4; 14:31;

    Acts 1:15; 3:6,7,22; 5:6; 7:37; 8:26,27; 9:6,8,11,18,34,39; 10:13,20,23,26; 11:7,28; 12:7; 13:16,22; 14:10,20; 15:7; 22:10,16; 26:16,30

    Italics: revelatory dream story

    Underlined: raise children to Abraham from the stones

    Bold: miracle stories

    Highlight color: Jesus awakened/raised by the disciples on the sea

    Bold italics: Conversion story (Matthew/Levi, Saul, Cornelius)

    Red: raise (a prophet, a king)

    Bold underlined: raise / save (a sheep)

    Italics underlined: revelatory vision (Transfiguration)

    Bold italics underlined: parable.

    I think in many cases the overtones are quite inescapable. This in turn sheds light on the kind of (religious, mystagogical, not "historical") text we are dealing with.

    About Acts 12:1ff, I just thought the parallel story of 16:25ff (Paul in prison) might also be brought into the picture, counterbalancing the study of this text in the diachronical perspective of Petrine tradition... At least the opening of gates is a common motif to both (didn't Peacefulpete bring that up in some previous thread?)

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    I think it was Leolaia that remarked about the use of the word gate. A while bac I posted a essay by Peter Kirby of these prison escapes and how the typify those of the Greek and Roman world of myth.

    This is it again abbreviated. Greek text appears as (????).

    Euripides and Luke
    by Peter Kirby (August 30, 2003)
    The observation that Luke draws on the play Bacchae by Euripides, posthumously published in 405 BCE, is spotted on the internet here by Steven Carr, as well as here and here. The most commonly cited source is Randel Helms, but the idea was discussed among scholars in the 1950s and before. This essay is written to give a fair shake of the evidence pointing particularly to Euripides as Luke's source for two items in Acts: (1) the prison escape scenes found in Acts 5:17-20, 12:6-11, and 16:23-30 and (2) the statement of the risen Christ in Paul's speech found in Acts 26:14.
    (1) Prison Escape
    First, the texts of Euripides and Acts themselves.
    For background, the Columbia Encyclopedia says, "Pentheus: in Greek mythology, king of Thebes, son of Cadmus' daughter Agave. When Dionysus came to Thebes, Pentheus denied his divinity and tried to prevent his ecstatic rites. The women of Thebes, led by Agave, were driven mad by the offended god and tore Pentheus to pieces. The story is the subject of Euripides' Bacchae."
    Bacchae 434-451 Buckley. [Servant speaks:] Pentheus, we are here, having caught this prey for which you sent us, nor have we set out in vain. This beast was docile in our hands and did not withdraw in flight, but yielded not unwillingly. He did not turn pale or change the wine-dark complexion of his cheek, but laughed and allowed us to bind him and lead him away. He remained still, making my work easy, and I in shame said: "Stranger, I do not lead you away willingly, but by order of Pentheus, who sent me." And the Bacchae whom you shut up, whom you carried off and bound in the chains of the public prison, are set loose and gone, and are gamboling in the meadows, invoking Bromius as their god. Of their own accord, the chains were loosed from their feet and keys opened the doors without human hand. (???????? ?' ?????? ????? ??????? ????? ?????? ?' ?????? ??????' ???? ?????? ?????.) This man [Dionysus] has come to Thebes full of many wonders. You must take care of the rest.
    Acts 5:17-20 Darby. And the high priest rising up, and all they that were with him, which is the sect of the Sadducees, were filled with wrath, and laid hands on the apostles and put them in the public prison. But an angel of [the] Lord during the night opened the doors of the prison, and leading them out, said, (??????? ?? ?????? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ??? ??????? ???????? ?? ?????? ?????) Go ye and stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life.
    Acts 12:6-11 Darby. And when Herod was going to bring him forth, that night Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains, and guards before the door kept the prison. And lo, an angel of [the] Lord came there, and a light shone in the prison: and having smitten the side of Peter, he roused him up, saying, Rise up quickly. And his chains fell off his hands. (??? ???????? ????? ?? ??????? ?? ??? ??????) And the angel said to him, Gird thyself, and bind on thy sandals. And he did so. And he says to him, Cast thine upper garment about thee and follow me. And going forth he followed [him] and did not know that what was happening by means of the angel was real, but supposed he saw a vision. And having passed through a first and second guard, they came to the iron gate which leads into the city, which opened to them of itself; (????? ??? ??? ????? ??? ??????? ??? ???????? ??? ??? ?????, ???? ???????? ?????? ??????) and going forth they went down one street, and immediately the angel left him. And Peter, being come to himself, said, Now I know certainly that [the] Lord has sent forth his angel and has taken me out of the hand of Herod and all the expectation of the people of the Jews.
    Acts 16:23-26 Darby. And having laid many stripes upon them they cast [them] into prison, charging the jailor to keep them safely; who, having received such a charge, cast them into the inner prison, and secured their feet to the stocks. And at midnight Paul and Silas, in praying, were praising God with singing, and the prisoners listened to them. And suddenly there was a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison shook, and all the doors were immediately opened, and the bonds of all loosed. (?????????? ?? ????????? ?? ????? ?????, ??? ?????? ?? ????? ?????.)
    Several scholars have noted the parallels of prison escape, as narrated in Acts, in other Greek literature, including but not limited to Bacchae.
    Luke Timothy Johnson writes: "Accounts of prison-escapes are found everywhere in Hellenistic fiction, whether their wonderful character is owed to some human virtue or relationship (see Lucian of Samosata, Toxaris 28-33; Achilles Tatius, Clitophon and Leucippe 3:9-11), or due to some divine intervention (Ovid, Metamorphoses 3:690-700; Artapanus, On the Jews, frag. three; The Acts of Paul 7; The Acts of Thomas 162-163). One of the most interesting examples of the type-scene is also one of the earliest, the escape of the devotees of Bacchus from prison by divine intervention after a tyrant had jailed them in an attempt to halt the growth of the cult (see Euripides, Bacchae 346-357; 434-450; 510-643)." (The Acts of the Apostles, p. 217)
    Ovid's account says (Metamorphoses 699-700):
    "Of their own accord the doors fly open wide; of their own accord, with no one loosing them, the chains fell from the prisoner's arms."
    sponte sua patuisse fores lapsasque lacertis
    sponte sua fama est nullo solvente catenas.
    Here is what we find in Artapanus, On the Jews, fragment three (as translated by J. J. Collins in Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2, p. 901):
    "The king of the Egyptians learned of Moses' presence, summoned him and asked for what purpose he had come. He responded that the master of the universe had orderd him to release the Jews. When the king learned of this, he confined him in prison. But when night came, all the doors of the prison opened of themselves (?????????), and some of the guards died, while others were relaxed by sleep and their weapons were broken."
    Indeed, the opening of a door by itself was a way of expressing the guiding hand of a god, for weal or woe (often for one side over another in a conflict), a kind of portent as seen from several Greco-Roman writers.
    Xenophon, Hellenica 6.4.7. Besides this, they were also somewhat encouraged by the oracle which was reported -- that the Lacedaemonians were destined to be defeated at the spot where stood the monument of the virgins, who are said to have killed themselves because they had been violated by certain Lacedaemonians. The Thebans accordingly decorated this monument before the battle. Furthermore, reports were brought to them from the city that all the temples were opening of themselves, (????????? ?????????) and that the priestesses said that the gods revealed victory. And the messengers reported that from the Heracleium the arms also had disappeared, indicating that Heracles had gone forth to the battle. Some, to be sure, say that all these things were but devices of the leaders.
    Suetonius is speaking of the portents that foretold the murder of Caesar on the Ides of March (De Vita Caesarum, Divus Iulius 81.3): "In fact the very night before his murder he dreamt now that he was flying above the clouds, and now that he was clasping the hand of Jupiter; and his wife Calpurnia thought that the pediment of their house fell, and that her husband was stabbed in her arms; and on a sudden the door of the room flew open of its own accord." (ac subito cubiculi fores sponte patuerunt)
    Josephus, Wars 6.293. Moreover, the eastern gate of the inner 6 [court of the] temple, which was of brass, and vastly heavy, and had been with difficulty shut by twenty men, and rested upon a basis armed with iron, and had bolts fastened very deep into the firm floor, which was there made of one entire stone, was seen to be opened of its own accord (????????? ?????????) about the sixth hour of the night. Now those that kept watch in the temple came hereupon running to the captain of the temple, and told him of it; who then came up thither, and not without great difficulty was able to shut the gate again. This also appeared to the vulgar to be a very happy prodigy, as if God did thereby open them the gate of happiness. But the men of learning understood it, that the security of their holy house was dissolved of its own accord, and that the gate was opened for the advantage of their enemies. So these publicly declared that the signal foreshowed the desolation that was coming upon them.
    Dio Cassius, Roman History 42.26.3-4. The following year a violent earthquake occurred, an owl was seen, thunderbolts descended upon the Capitol and upon the temple of the Public Fortune, as it was called, and into the gardens of Caesar, where a horse of no small value was destroyed by them, and the temple of Fortune opened of its own accord. (????????? ???????) In addition to this, blood issued from a bake-shop and flowed to another temple of Fortune ...
    Dio Cassius, Roman History 66.17.2. Portents had occurred indicating his approaching end, such as the comet which was visible for a long time and the opening of the mausoleum of Augustus of its own accord. (??? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ????????? ????????? ????????)
    While the parallels are closer in Ovid and Artapanus and Euripides, these additional references illuminate the background of such a statement as we find in Acts 12:10.
    Commenting on Acts 12:7, Conzelmann writes, "There is, however, no literary dependence of Luke upon Euripides here, but rather the appropriation of a widespread motif," (Acts, p. 94), referencing Alfred Vogeli's article "Lukas and Euripides" in ThZ 9 (1953) 415-38. (No, I haven't read it.)
    Comparison between the New Testament and Euripides goes back to the second century. Origen writes in Contra Celsum 2.34:
    This Jew of Celsus, ridiculing Jesus, as he imagines, is described as being acquainted with the Bacchae of Euripides, in which Dionysus says:- "The divinity himself will liberate me whenever I wish." Now the Jews are not much acquainted with Greek literature; but suppose that there was a Jew so well versed in it (as to make such a quotation on his part appropriate), how (does it follow) that Jesus could not liberate Himself, because He did not do so? For let him believe from our own Scriptures that Peter obtained his freedom after having been bound in prison, an angel having loosed his chains; and that Paul, having been bound in the stocks along with Silas in Philippi of Macedonia, was liberated by divine power, when the gates of the prison were opened. But it is probable that Celsus treats these accounts with ridicule, or that he never read them; for he would probably say in reply, that there are certain sorcerers who are able by incantations to unloose chains and to open doors, so that he would liken the events related in our histories to the doings of sorcerers. "But," he continues, "no calamity happened even to him who condemned him, as there did to Pentheus, viz., madness or discerption." And yet he does not know that it was not so much Pilate that condemned Him (who knew that "for envy the Jews had delivered Him"), as the Jewish nation, which has been condemned by God, and rent in pieces, and dispersed over the whole earth, in a degree far beyond what happened to Pentheus. Moreover, why did he intentionally omit what is related of Pilate's wife, who beheld a vision, and who was so moved by it as to send a message to her husband, saying: "Have thou nothing to do with that just man; for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of Him? " And again, passing by in silence the proofs of the divinity of Jesus, Celsus endeavours to cast reproach upon Him from the narratives in the Gospel, referring to those who mocked Jesus, ...
    It seems that Celsus is not comparing the stories in Acts (Origen says he may never have read them) but saying that Jesus should have been able to let himself down off the cross. Origen replies that the disciples of Jesus could escape their bonds, so how much more could the master? Origen antipates the objection of a neo-Celsus, that a magician could release himself from imprisonment. This once again shows the proliferation of stories about prison escape in the Greco-Roman world. In the Life of Apollonius by Philostratus, the divine man can easily loosen his chains (7.34, 8.30), while Luke would consider the "magic" in his story to be the miracle of God's doing (but, nevertheless, is probably influenced by these magical ideas).
    My bet is that this kind of prison escape scene was stock in trade for fiction in the first century. Which definitely casts doubt on historicity, but doesn't necessarily indicate Euripides as the sole source (or in the mind of Luke while writing at all).
    ...........................................
    Conclusion
    Although I doubt that Luke had Euripides in particular in mind when composing any certain passage of Acts, my study has made clear the substance of the argument made by critics, which is, that the stories were inspired and shaped within the context of Greco-Roman civilization, where the expression of an animal kicking at its spurs would signify resistance to the will of a god, and where a story about an escape through a door that opens by itself was a portent of divine approval, and when historiography did not have the same meaning that it has today. Such is all the weight that the argument based on Euripides was meant to bear, and the argument is made stronger from the parallels not only to Bacchae but also to the wider literary tradition.
    Christian Origins is copyright © 2003 Peter Kirby <[email protected]> and others.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    That's quite impressive, Narkissos. It is interesting how much a big fan Luke was of egeiro and anistemi and how restrained John was in comparison. This goes against conventional wisdom, which views John as mostly writing allegory and Luke as attempting to write history. Yet Luke was the bigger user of this crucial symbolic language.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    PP....The author's assessment seems reasonable. There were lots of narrative tropes and archetypes floating around in the Hellenistic ether, exapted into new narrative settings and put to different purposes. I wonder tho if there could be more direct influence. After all, Luke himself mentioned his use of written sources in Luke 1:1-3, he was thoroughly influenced by Josephus, and he knew either the Hymn of Cleanthes or Aratus to quote the saying in Acts 17:28. I'm sure you are aware of the theory that the story of Paul's shipwreck in Acts 27-28 was directly modelled on the Odyssey, books 5 and 12 (cf. the use of unique classical vocabulary from the Odyssey in Luke's account, verbatim resemblances between Odyssey 14.299-304, 307, 319-12 and Acts 27:13-14, 20, 43-44 and between Odyssey 12.401 and Acts 27:2, similarities in the voyage, rescue by an angel/god, both Odysseus and Paul being mistaken for gods after the rescue, and many other parallels), down to even the use of the plural "we". The parallels in the prison story would be another example of the same thing.

    Also: Please check out my new post in the "keys given to Peter" thread....lots of new detailed information.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos
    This goes against conventional wisdom, which views John as mostly writing allegory and Luke as attempting to write history. Yet Luke was the bigger user of this crucial symbolic language.

    I guess the "best" in "Luke" is not really "Lukan". "Luke", as the NT Deuteronomist as it were, is certainly responsible for the cheap historical frame which unfortunately made up the basis for every current catechism, obscuring many original traditions. But he does also record, with little redactional effort (less than Matthew) and consequently much authenticity, a number of those very original traditions (Q for instance, but many others too) even when they were at odds with his general project. I sometimes wonder to what extent he understood what he was writing...

    About John, it is quite obvious that the resurrection motif was not essential (understatement intended) to his theology. As even R.E. Brown remarked, the Johannine Jesus does not really need resurrection (same thing with Hebrews). This may account for the relatively scarce use of egeirô / anistèmi...

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit