John Marincola’s research has thoughtfully explored the negotiation of authority in Herodotus’ Histories, revealing the extent to which the narrator is a highly intrusive one who organizes and steers the reader’s progression through the text.1 In Authority and Tradition in Ancient Historiography, he demonstrated how Herodotus’ first-person verbs mediate historical memory for his audience and in doing so draw upon the authority of performers of wisdom evident in fifth-century intellectual culture.2 This work also gestured toward the alternative means by which the Histories could generate expertise effects but did not have the scope to go beyond the narrator’s self-representation. This chapter will contribute to this project by surveying the rhetorical function of the narratee through the second person and impersonal ‘one’, and I will argue that its embedding of virtual experience into the text contributes to the work’s construction of authority.

In the first two chapters of Luke, characters acknowledge Jesus as Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Lukan characters also speak of John the Baptist going before the Lord God, suggesting that Jesus might be the Lord in view, and connect Jesus with Old Testament YHWH passages. These features have made Luke 1–2 a key locus for discussions of Lukan Christology, raising the question of whether Luke presents Jesus as divine. However, they also create an apparent incongruity with the body of the Gospel. In Luke 3 and elsewhere, human characters are initially ignorant that Jesus is Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Moreover, Jesus’ divinity – if Luke affirms it – does not seem to be recognized until after the resurrection. In this study, Caleb T. Friedeman advances a new model for understanding the christological relationship between Luke 1–2 and the rest of Luke-Acts, in which Luke presents these opening chapters as a christological mystery.

In the first two chapters of Luke, characters acknowledge Jesus as Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Lukan characters also speak of John the Baptist going before the Lord God, suggesting that Jesus might be the Lord in view, and connect Jesus with Old Testament YHWH passages. These features have made Luke 1–2 a key locus for discussions of Lukan Christology, raising the question of whether Luke presents Jesus as divine. However, they also create an apparent incongruity with the body of the Gospel. In Luke 3 and elsewhere, human characters are initially ignorant that Jesus is Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Moreover, Jesus’ divinity – if Luke affirms it – does not seem to be recognized until after the resurrection. In this study, Caleb T. Friedeman advances a new model for understanding the christological relationship between Luke 1–2 and the rest of Luke-Acts, in which Luke presents these opening chapters as a christological mystery.

In the first two chapters of Luke, characters acknowledge Jesus as Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Lukan characters also speak of John the Baptist going before the Lord God, suggesting that Jesus might be the Lord in view, and connect Jesus with Old Testament YHWH passages. These features have made Luke 1–2 a key locus for discussions of Lukan Christology, raising the question of whether Luke presents Jesus as divine. However, they also create an apparent incongruity with the body of the Gospel. In Luke 3 and elsewhere, human characters are initially ignorant that Jesus is Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Moreover, Jesus’ divinity – if Luke affirms it – does not seem to be recognized until after the resurrection. In this study, Caleb T. Friedeman advances a new model for understanding the christological relationship between Luke 1–2 and the rest of Luke-Acts, in which Luke presents these opening chapters as a christological mystery.

In the first two chapters of Luke, characters acknowledge Jesus as Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Lukan characters also speak of John the Baptist going before the Lord God, suggesting that Jesus might be the Lord in view, and connect Jesuswith Old Testament YHWH passages. These features have made Luke 1–2 a key locus for discussions of Lukan Christology, raising the question of whether Luke presents Jesus as divine. However, they also create an apparent incongruity with the body of the Gospel. In Luke 3 and elsewhere, human characters are initially ignorant that Jesus is Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Moreover, Jesus’ divinity – if Luke affirms it – does not seem to be recognized until after the resurrection. In this study, Caleb T. Friedeman advances a new model for understanding the christological relationship between Luke 1–2 and the rest of Luke-Acts, in which Luke presents these opening chapters as a christological mystery.

In the first two chapters of Luke, characters acknowledge Jesus as Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Lukan characters also speak of John the Baptist going before the Lord God, suggesting that Jesus might be the Lord in view, and connect Jesus with Old Testament YHWH passages. These features have made Luke 1–2 a key locus for discussions of Lukan Christology, raising the question of whether Luke presents Jesus as divine. However, they also create an apparent incongruity with the body of the Gospel. In Luke 3 and elsewhere, human characters are initially ignorant that Jesus is Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Moreover, Jesus’ divinity – if Luke affirms it – does not seem to be recognized until after the resurrection. In this study, Caleb T. Friedeman advances a new model for understanding the christological relationship between Luke 1–2 and the rest of Luke-Acts, in which Luke presents these opening chapters as a christological mystery.

In the first two chapters of Luke, characters acknowledge Jesus as Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Lukan characters also speak of John the Baptist going before the Lord God, suggesting that Jesus might be the Lord in view, and connect Jesus with Old Testament YHWH passages. These features have made Luke 1–2 a key locus for discussions of Lukan Christology, raising the question of whether Luke presents Jesus as divine. However, they also create an apparent incongruity with the body of the Gospel. In Luke 3 and elsewhere, human characters are initially ignorant that Jesus is Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Moreover, Jesus’ divinity – if Luke affirms it – does not seem to be recognized until after the resurrection. In this study, Caleb T. Friedeman advances a new model for understanding the christological relationship between Luke 1–2 and the rest of Luke-Acts, in which Luke presents these opening chapters as a christological mystery.

In the first two chapters of Luke, characters acknowledge Jesus as Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Lukan characters also speak of John the Baptist going before the Lord God, suggesting that Jesus might be the Lord in view, and connect Jesus with Old Testament YHWH passages. These features have made Luke 1–2 a key locus for discussions of Lukan Christology, raising the question of whether Luke presents Jesus as divine. However, they also create an apparent incongruity with the body of the Gospel. In Luke 3 and elsewhere, human characters are initially ignorant that Jesus is Messiah, Son of God, and Lord. Moreover, Jesus’ divinity – if Luke affirms it – does not seem to be recognized until after the resurrection. In this study, Caleb T. Friedeman advances a new model for understanding the christological relationship between Luke 1–2 and the rest of Luke-Acts, in which Luke presents these opening chapters as a christological mystery.