In his novel The Serpent’s Whisper (Szept węża), Robert M. Rynkowski offers a literary reinterpretation of the Emmaus story (Luke 24:13–35) by exploring the idea that the unnamed second disciple walking alongside Cleopas was Philip the Deacon, known from the Acts of the Apostles.

This bold narrative thread is inspired by a hypothesis put forth by French author Emmanuel Carrère in his book The Kingdom (Le Royaume). Carrère speculates that since Luke and Paul stayed in the house of Philip the Deacon in Caesarea Maritima, as mentioned in Acts, Luke may have lived there during Paul’s imprisonment. During that time, Luke could have heard Philip’s personal account of meeting the risen Christ on the road to Emmaus, which Luke later wove into his Gospel—making it the most detailed version of that episode in all four Gospels.

Carrère’s theory not only supports the identification of Philip the Deacon as the second Emmaus disciple, but also suggests that Luke himself authored both the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles, and that these texts may have been written as early as the 60s of the first century, while Paul was imprisoned.

The novel’s interpretation also literarily echoes Rynkowski’s theological interpretation of the Emmaus story, presented in his book Everyone Is a Theologian (Każdy jest teologiem). There, Rynkowski argues that the disciples’ journey should not be seen as a cowardly escape from Jerusalem, but rather as a theological quest, a walk filled with questioning and openness to divine encounter.

Apocryphal “Acts of Philip”

The idea of “Philip’s Acts” mentioned in The Serpent’s Whisper refers to an existing apocryphal work, not included in the biblical canon. Interestingly, this non-canonical text merges two historical Philips—the Apostle Philip and Philip the Deacon—into a single character. Although attributed to Luke by some, it was not written by the evangelist, despite speculation that he may have planned a third volume following the Gospel and Acts.

Conclusion

By merging biblical exegesis, early Christian tradition, and literary imagination, Robert M. Rynkowski not only revitalizes the Emmaus narrative but also builds a bridge between academic theology and fiction. His reinterpretation invites both scholars and general readers to explore how sacred stories can be retold, reinterpreted, and reimagined across genres—from theological essays to novels.

In his reflective interpretation of Luke 24:13–35, Robert M. Rynkowski challenges the commonly held notion that the two disciples in the Emmaus story were fleeing Jerusalem out of fear and despair. He proposes instead that their journey should be understood as a walk of searching and theological questioning, not as a cowardly escape.

Key Insights from Rynkowski’s Interpretation

1. The Disciples Were Not Afraid

Rynkowski contests the idea that the disciples left Jerusalem in fear of persecution. The text, he notes, mentions sadness, but no reference to fear or fleeing. The Greek used in Luke 24:22 (exestēsan) is more accurately translated as “they were amazed” rather than “they were terrified”. This suggests the disciples were confused and overwhelmed — not paralyzed by fear.

2. They Were Engaged in Deep Theological Dialogue

The disciples are described as “discussing and debating” (homileó and suzéteó) — words that imply a lively exchange of ideas, seeking understanding, even if tinged with disappointment. Their conversation is portrayed as a form of theological inquiry, not resignation or faithlessness.

3. Recognition through Scripture and Breaking Bread

Jesus meets them in their seeking. Their eyes are eventually opened during the breaking of bread, which may be a reference to the Eucharist—but not necessarily in a technical sense. It is the entire encounter, both the opening of Scripture and the shared meal, that brings recognition. Jesus becomes recognizable through His characteristic gestures and presence — not only through ritual.

4. Their Hearts “Burned” – A Sign of Divine Encounter

The phrase “our hearts were burning” (kaió hēmōn hē kardia) refers to a deep inner stirring. Drawing on Septuagint usage and biblical symbolism, Rynkowski interprets this not merely as emotion, but as a sign of God’s presence — just as the burning bush signaled divine encounter to Moses.

5. Emmaus: A Confirmation of Faith in the Midst of Doubt

The Emmaus disciples are not saints or prophets. They are ordinary believers, puzzled and processing grief. And yet, it is precisely these open, seeking hearts that are granted the privilege of encountering the Risen Christ. This highlights that theological dialogue, even with doubts, opens the way for divine revelation.

Conclusion: Theology Begins on the Road

Rynkowski’s reading suggests that Emmaus is a parable for theological practice. It affirms that the search for understanding, the honest articulation of confusion, and the shared experience of Scripture and fellowship are where Christ reveals Himself. This story becomes not just a post-Resurrection tale, but a model for how theology happens — in conversation, on the road, and in community.

Perhaps these two were privileged to meet the Risen Lord precisely because they were talking about God, and they were already just a short step away from understanding the encounter.

This interpretation encourages both scholars and seekers to see theological reflection as a shared journey — not fleeing the city, but walking toward recognition.

Robert M. Rynkowski, in his article “Teologia spotkania i dialogu” (Theology of Encounter and Dialogue), offers a compelling and theologically rich reflection on the nature of theology, challenging traditional academic approaches and inviting a more inclusive, dialogical, and experiential understanding of the field.