![]() ![]() Some would argue that Paul is simply using hyperbolic language to refer to the great detail in which the Gospel was preached to the Galatians, however this interpretation need not be divorced from the iconographic one. The reason it’s not translated this way in Galatians 3:1 seems to be because Paul explicitly states that Jesus’ Crucifixion was “written out” before the very “eyes” of the Galatians, implying that it was something visual rather than audible. 3:3-4), and in both contexts it refers to something that’s been “written before” and is now being read out. The word that gets translated as “publicly portrayed” is προεγράφη, which Paul only uses in two other places (Rom. In my opinion, this is very likely the correct interpretation when all things are considered. Paul doesn’t dwell much on this statement, it has many plausible interpretations, one of which is that it’s talking about an icon of the Crucifixion (I believe N.T. The only place Scripture arguably references a new covenant icon is in Galatians 3:1, “O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified.” Given the fact that St. While I’ll admit the case for this is somewhat tenuous, I do genuinely believe that there is something to it. But so what if it’s probable that Luke knew how to paint? Is there anything to suggest that he actually did? Luke was also a Gentile physician before his conversion, it’s not a stretch to suppose that he also received some artistic training through his study of the human body. Of course, physicians like Galen would’ve reserved their artistic skills for trying to accurately depict human anatomy, but this would’ve undoubtedly given them the ability to draw portraits in other contexts as well. ![]() This is important because Galen, like many other antique physicians, was likely a decent artist. Regardless of what specific form of training Luke received, it would’ve been similar to the kind of education the physician Galen would receive a couple centuries later. From this we can glean that he almost certainly received an education in the medical arts from some Gentile academy, possibly the Alexandrian school of medicine, which was one of the most famous at the time. To begin, what do we know about the Apostle Luke? Scripture only gives us a small amount of information about his personal life. And so, in this article, I just want to put together some pieces of data given to us in Scripture that suggest the plausibility of Luke being an iconographer. However, given how firmly rooted this belief is in the Church’s liturgical life, I do actually think it’s a tradition we shouldn’t dispense with so easily. Luke the Apostle actually painted icons of our Lord and His Mother is often scoffed at in academic circles, especially given that the earliest witness to this tradition comes from Theodorus Lector in the 6th century ( Church History, Codex Baroccianus 142, 18 ). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |