the role of the lukan parables in terms of the purpose of luke's gospel

accepted because of their response to the prophet.” 77 Do the possessions of the rich in the
Lukan community prevent them from being genuine Christians? Luke’s answers to the
question reveal complexity. Furthermore, Luke strives to demonstrate to both Jewish and
Gentile converts that they are in continuity with Judaism. To put it another way, Luke seeks
to explain how his community, as missionary communities, are in continuity with the
Messiah, prophet, the Lord Jesus. In conclusion, Luke’s communities, Karris contends, are
missionary communities: “They are communities which debate with the Jews that Jesus is the
fulfillment of God’s promises. They are communities which prove to their Gentile members
that they are heir to the promises God made to the Jewish people. They are communities
whose missionary work and daily existence are prone to danger and suffering-both from Jew
and Gentile, but primarily from the Jewish synagogal authorities.” 78
P.F. Esler examines the interrelationships between Luke’s theology and the social and
political pressures of his community by means of ‘socio-redaction criticism’ which combines
social science with redaction criticism. According to Esler, this community “needed strong
assurance that their desire to convert and to adopt a different life-style had been the correct
79
one.” Therefore, Luke’s theology results from his desire to legitimate Christianity toward
his community which is made up of Jews and Gentiles, especially ‘God-fearers,’ and the rich
and poor. That is to say, Luke claims that Christianity should be treated as a religio licita
because of the antiquity and correctness of the sect of Jesus. With respect to the diversity of
this group and its relationship to Judaism, he deals with table fellowship, the law, the temple,
and poor and rich. In his chapter on table-fellowship, Esler puts his emphasis on the crisis in
the early church caused by commensality, criticizing scholars who have passed over this
important point for a proper understanding of Lukan theology. For him a proper
understanding of table-fellowship, that Jews did not eat with Gentiles, is a focal point, since
the Lukan community is composed of both Jew and Gentile. In other words, it is important
“to appreciate the centrality of this phenomenon, both to Luke’s history of Christian
beginnings and to the life of his own community” 80
for a proper understanding of Lukan
theology.
Through a combination of analysing the social world of Luke’s text and its social and
historical context known from other sources, H. Moxnes attempts to delineate the social
77. Johnson, The Literary Function of Possessions in Luke-Acts, 166.
78. Karris, “Missionary Communities: A New Paradigm for the Study of Luke-Acts,” 96.
79. Esler, Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social and Political Motivations of Lucan Theology, 16.
80. Ibid., 71.
280