First Christian Historian: Writing the "Acts of the Apostles", The

Trinity Journal, Spring 2005 by Pao, David W

Daniel Marguerat. The First Christian Historian: Writing the "Acts of the Apostles." Trans. Ken McKinney, Gregory J. Laughery, and Richard Bauckham. SNTSMS 121. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. xii 299 pp. $70.00.

Those who are familiar with the works of Daniel Marguerat, Professor of NT at the Faculty of Theology of the University of Lausanne, should welcome the publication of this monograph that well represents his continued interest in exploring the theology of the Lukan writings with historical critical tools informed by a narratological sensitivity. This volume is the translation of eleven chapters of his work La première histoire du Christianisme (Actes des apôtres) (Lectio Divina 180; Paris, Cerf and Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1999) together with a chapter that first appeared in David P. Moessner, ed., Jesus and the Heritage of Israel (Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity, 1999), pp. 284-304. The first half of this work deals with traditional topics in Lukan scholarship of the past decades: historicity, genre, relationship between Luke and Acts, Jews and Gentiles, God and salvation history, pneumatology, and the problem of Israel. The second half provides studies on selected Lukan themes and passages: the story of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11), Saul's conversion narratives (Acts 9; 22; 26), the conclusion of Acts (28:16-31), and the journey motif in Acts.

In an attempt to move beyond the debate between those who affirm (Bruce, Marshall, Hemer) and deny (Vielhauer, Conzelmann, Haenchen) the essential historicity of Luke's narrative, Marguerat provides a sustained argument that points to the complexity of the notion of truth and historicity. Instead of focusing on the issue of "factuality," he suggests that Luke's work "must be evaluated according to the point of view of the historian which controls the writing of the narrative, the truth that the author aims to communicate and the need for identity to which the work of the historian responds" (pp. 6-7, emphasis his). This definition essentially draws on a postmodern definition of truth: "The 'truth' of history does not depend on the factuality of the event recounted (even though the historian is required to keep to the facts), but, rather, depends on the interpretation the historian gives to a reality that is always in itself open to a plurality of interpretative options" (p. 6). Using the language of Ricoeur, Marguerat points to the relevance of the label "poetic history," one that does not conform to the same norms of documentary history and one that "does not fit the criterion of true/false verification" (p. 8). This discussion of the historicity of the Lukan narrative may satisfy those who already subscribe to such an epistemological position, but it is difficult to see how this might settle the debate concerning the historical value of Acts. Moreover, the insufficiency of the narrative paradigm in bracketing concerns of historicity has long been recognized. One can readily concede, however, that one's understanding of Luke's purpose does affect one's evaluation of the various aspects of Luke's writings. Nevertheless, the mere arguments against the existence of "raw history" are no longer sufficient in denying the validity of questions related to the historical basis of a narrative.

Reservations concerning Marguerat's position on the issue of historicity should not prevent us from appreciating the creativity and significance of his subsequent treatment of Luke's narrative. In terms of genre, Marguerat labels Luke's work as a "narrative of beginnings" (p. 31) where the identity of the early Christian movement is clarified. In developing this narrative, Marguerat rightly points to the "theology of the word" as lying at the center of Luke's theological program. His portrayal of Luke's departure of the apocalyptic worldview is helpful, although one wonders whether one can speak of Luke's "intense admiration for the Roman Empire" (p. 35) in light of the implicit anti-imperialistic claims in Luke's writings.

In interacting with Richard Pervo and Mikeal Parsons, who challenge the reading of Luke-Acts as a unified narrative, Marguerat questions the criteria used in evaluating the "unity" of a "narrative" and proceeds in identifying three narrative strategies that Luke uses that secure the link between the two sections of his two-volume work: prolepses, narrative chains, and modeling. Rather than simply providing a defense of Henry Cadbury's thesis, Marguerat is successful in advancing the discussion by demonstrating how a unified narrative can tolerate tensions, changes of perspectives, and development of theological concepts. More importantly, this discussion paves the way for further work on methodological issues surrounding the debate concerning the unity of Luke's work.

In his discussion of the role of Jerusalem and Rome in Luke's narrative world, Marguerat argues for the presence of both in defining the identity of the early Christian movement. In connecting the story of Luke with the sacred history of Israel, Luke emphasizes the significance of the continuity with Israel's past. In situating his story within Roman imperial history, Luke utilizes Roman universalism in depicting the universal significance of Jesus' gospel. Instead of regarding this as a new "paradigm" (p. 66), however, it is best to see this chapter as a further articulation of the position best represented by two other French-speaking Lukan scholars, Jacques Dupont and François Bovon.