While the precise dating of the Gospels has remained an area of relatively constant contention, one current within scholarship has increasingly situated the Gospels in a predominantly second century milieu. In particular, second century biographies, novels, and other literary productions associated with the Second Sophistic movement increasingly are put forward as comparanda for best understanding the canonical Gospels, as well as a large host of other Christian prose narrative literature. One recent and highly fêted argument within this strand has insisted that the gospels be viewed first as elite literature written for the pleasure of other literati, not as religious documents for Christian communities. However, when we examine the features of lexis, style, and intertextuality that characterize 2nd century literary productions aimed at this sort of entertainment, we find that the Gospels lack several key features.
Drawing on explicit discussions of speech, composition, and reference in the works of Lucian and Athenaeus, this paper will compare the lexis, syntax, and intertextuality of the canonical Gospels with representative samples of various genres from the Second Sophistic–from the works of Achilles Tatius, Lucian, and Philostratus–to demonstrate that the Gospels do not show the characteristic signs of literary productions written for the entertainment of Greek-speaking imperial literati.