Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-28T03:47:57.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - Background and methodology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2009

Patricia Walters
Patricia Walters
Affiliation:
Rockford College, Illinois
Get access

Summary

Today, the discussion on the common authorship of [Luke] and Acts, which is to be distinguished from that on the identity of the author, is closed. Of course, “resolution of this basic issue does not determine that the same author could not have written in different genres, employed different theological constructs in the two volumes, or used different narrators” (Parsons-Pervo, Rethinking, p. 116). But it is a necessary condition to allow for a reflection on the way Luke has composed both writings [emphasis added].

Rarely do scholars make the startling and uncompromising declaration that a topic is closed to further investigation. Such a statement defies the search and research objectives of any systematic, critical inquiry. So universally held is the above opinion that few have opted to challenge the hypothesis – and it is a hypothesis – that Luke and Acts were written and compiled by a unitary author-editor. Here “author-editor” denotes a writer who not only composed independently but also redacted and compiled inherited sources and traditions, be they written or oral.

Although few, challenges to the single authorship of Luke and Acts follow two trajectories. The first understands Luke and Acts as the fulfillment of different writers' theological agendas, a proposition with little currency among scholars. On this trajectory, which is profiled later, are examples of two nineteenth-century exegetes, F. C. Baur and J. H. Scholten, whose complex theological interpretations of the early Christian religious milieux treat the possible extenuating historical circumstances from which conflicting theologies emerged.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Assumed Authorial Unity of Luke and Acts
A Reassessment of the Evidence
 , pp. 1 - 42
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Verheyden, J., “The Unity of Luke-Acts” in Verheyden, J. (ed.), The Unity of Luke-Acts, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 142 (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1999), pp. 6–7Google Scholar
Parsons, Mikeal C. and Pervo, Richard I., Rethinking the Unity of Luke and Acts (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 1993), p. 116Google Scholar
Aune, David E., The New Testament and Its Literary Environment (Philadelphia, Pa.: Westminster Press, 1987), p. 77Google Scholar
Bruce, F. F., The Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1990), pp. 1–9Google Scholar
Cadbury, Henry J., The Making of Luke-Acts, 2nd edition (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 1958; reprint, 1999), p. 8Google Scholar
Conzelmann, Hans, Acts of the Apostles, trans. Limburg, James, Kraabel, A. Thomas, and Hermeneia, Donald H. Juel (Philadelphia, Pa.: Fortress Press, 1987), pp. xl–xlvGoogle Scholar
Danker, Frederick W., Luke, Proclamation Commentaries (Philadelphia, Pa., Fortress Press, 1987), p. 2Google Scholar
Dibelius, Martin, From Tradition to Gospel, trans. Woolf, Bertram Lee from the 2nd edition (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1935), p. 3Google Scholar
Die Formgeschichte des Evangeliums (Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1919)
“Style Criticism in the Book of Acts” in Greevan, Heinrich (ed.), Studies in the Acts of the Apostles, trans. Ling, Mary (London: SCM Press, 1956; reprint, Mifflintown, Penn.: Sigler Press, 1999), pp. 174f.
“Stilkritisches zur Apostelgeschichte” in Schmidt, H. (ed.), Eucharisterion: Studien zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments, Gunkel, Festschrift Hermann, vol. II (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1923), pp. 27–49Google Scholar
Fitzmyer, Joseph A., The Gospel According to Luke Ⅰ–Ⅸ, Anchor Bible 28 (New York: Doubleday, 1970), pp. 35–41Google Scholar
The Acts of the Apostles: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Anchor Bible 31 (New York: Doubleday, 1998), pp. 49–51
Haenchen, Ernst, The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary, trans. Blackwell, Basil (Philadelphia, Pa.: Westminster Press, 1971), pp. 90–112Google Scholar
Hawkins, John C., Horae Synopticae: Contributions to the Study of the Synoptic Problem, 2nd edition (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1909; reprint, 1968), p. 174Google Scholar
Plummer, Alfred, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to S. Luke, 5th edition (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1922; reprint 1969), pp. xi–xiiGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Gerhard, Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Kapitel 1–10, vol. I (Würzburg: Gütersloher Verlagshaus Gerd Mohn, Gütersloh und Echter Verlag, 1977), pp. 32–33Google Scholar
Unnik, W. C., “The ‘Book of Acts’ – The Confirmation of the Gospel” in Orton, David E. (ed.), The Composition of Luke's Gospel: Selected Studies from “Novum Testamentum” (Leiden: Brill, 1999), pp. 184fGoogle Scholar
Walton, Steve, “Where Does the Beginning of Acts End?” in Verheyden, Unity of Luke-Acts, p. 447
Jackson, F. J. Foakes and Lake, Kirsopp, The Beginnings of Christianity: Part 1: The Acts of the Apostles: Prolegomena Ⅱ, vol. II (London: Macmillan and Co., 1922), p. 207Google Scholar
Alexander, Loveday, “Formal Elements and Genre: Which Greco-Roman Prologues Most Closely Parallel the Lukan Prologues?” in Moessner, David P. (ed.), Jesus and the Heritage of Israel: Luke's Narrative Claim upon Israel's History (Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press International, 1999)Google Scholar
Alexander, Loveday, The Preface to Luke's Gospel: Literary Convention and Social Context in Luke 1.1–4 and Acts 1.1, Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 78 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), p. 167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eusebius, , The Ecclesiastical History, trans. Lake, Kirsopp, Loeb Classical Library 153 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1926; reprint 1949, 1953, 1959, 1965)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metzger, Bruce M., The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), pp. 191–201Google Scholar
Hahneman, Geoffrey Mark, The Muratorian Fragment and the Development of the Canon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), pp. 215–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundberg, Jr. A. C., “Canon Muratori: A Fourth-Century List,” Harvard Theological Review 66 (1973), 1–41Google Scholar
Cadbury, Henry J., “The Tradition,” in Jackson, F. J. Foakes and Lake, Kirsopp (eds.), The Beginnings of Christianity, Part 1: The Acts of the Apostles, vol. II. Prolegomena II: Criticism (London: Macmillan and Co., 1922), pp. 210–211Google Scholar
Bird, Michael F., “The Unity of Luke-Acts in Recent Discussion,” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 29 (2007), pp. 425–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, Andrew, “The Reception of Luke and Acts and the Unity of Luke-Acts” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 29 (2007), pp. 459–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Luke Timothy, “Literary Criticism of Luke-Acts: Is Reception-History Pertinent?” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 29 (2007), pp. 159–162Google Scholar
Kümmel, Werner Georg, The New Testament: The History of the Investigation of its Problems, trans. Gilmour, S. McLean and Kee, Howard C. (Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon Press, 1972)Google Scholar
Gasque, W. Ward, A History of the Criticism of the Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans, 1975)Google Scholar
Hemer, Colin J., The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990; reprint 2001), pp. 308–364Google Scholar
Dawsey, J., “The Literary Unity of Luke-Acts: Questions of Style – A Task for Literary Critics,” New Testament Studies 35 (1989), 48–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tannehill, Robert, The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary Interpretation, 2 vols. (Philadelphia, Pa.: Fortress Press, 1986)Google Scholar
Alter, Robert, The Art of Biblical Narrative (New York: Basic Books, 1981)Google Scholar
Kaestli, Jean-Daniel, “Luke-Acts and the Pastoral Epistles: The Thesis of a Common Authorship,” in Tuckett, C. M. (ed.), Luke's Literary Achievement: Collected Essays, Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 116 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995), pp. 117–120Google Scholar
Cadbury, Henry J., The Style and Literary Method of Luke (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1920; reprint, Eugene, Ore.: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2001), pp. 4–39Google Scholar
Cerfaux, Lucien, “La première communauté chrétienne à Jérusalem: Act. Ⅱ, 41–V, 42,” Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 16 (1939), 6–14Google Scholar
Cerfaux, Lucien, “La composition de la première partie du Livre des Actes” (first published in Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 13 [1936], pp. 667–691)Google Scholar
Receuil Lucien Cerfaux: études d'exégèse et d'histoire religieuse de Monseigneur Cerfaux, vol. II (Leuven: 1954)
Neirynck, Frans and Segbroeck, F., “Caractéristiques stylistiques,” Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 61 (1984), 304–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogel, T., Zur Charakteristik des Lukas nach Sprache und Stil: eine philologische Laienstudie, 2nd edition (Leipzig: 1899), pp. 61–68Google Scholar
Harnack, Adolf, Lukas der Arzt, der Verfasser des dritten Evangeliums und der Apostelgeschichte (Leipzig: 1906), pp. 29–46, 51–54, 69–72, 138–150Google Scholar
Sprüche und Reden Jesu. Die zweite Quelle des Matthäus und Lukas (Leipzig: 1907), pp. 6–87
Morgenthaler, R., Statistik des neutestamentlichen Wortschatzes (Zurich: Gotthelf-Verlag, 1958), pp. 51, 181, 182–183Google Scholar
Jeremias, J., Die Sprache des Lukasevangeliums: Redaktion und Tradition im Nicht-Markus-Stoff des dritten Evangeliums (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boismard, M.-É. and Lamouille, A., Texte occidental des Actes des Apôtres: reconstitution et réhabilitation, vol. II (Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations, 1984), pp. 197–209Google Scholar
Russell, Henry G., “Which was Written First, Luke or Acts?” Harvard Theological Review 48 (1955), 167–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norden, Eduard, Agnostos Theos: Untersuchungen zur Formengeschichte religiöser Rede (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1956)Google Scholar
Die antike Kunstprosa von vi. Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis in die Zeit der Renaissance, vol. II (Stuttgart: B. G. Teubner, 1958), pp. 480–492
Turner, Nigel, Style, vol. IV of Moulton, James Hope (ed.), A Grammar of New Testament Greek (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1976), p. 58Google Scholar
Fitzmyer, 's “The Authorship of Luke-Acts Reconsidered” in Luke the Theologian: Aspects of His Teaching (New York: Paulist Press, 1989), pp. 1–26Google Scholar
Mealand, David L., “Luke-Acts and the Verbs of Dionysius of Halicarnassus,” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 63 (1996), pp. 63–86Google Scholar
Pervo, Richard, “Israel's Heritage and Claims upon the Genre(s) of Luke and Acts: The Problems of a History” in Moessner, Jesus and the Heritage of Israel, p. 128
Conzelmann, Hans, The Theology of St. Luke, trans. Buswell, Geoffrey (New York: Harper & Row, 1961), pp. 16–17Google Scholar
Die Mitte der Zeit (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1953)
Talbert, Charles H., Literary Patterns, Theological Themes, and the Genre of Luke-Acts (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1975), pp. 103–107Google Scholar
Goodenough, Erwin R., “The Perspective of Acts,” in Keck, Leander E. and Martyn, J. Louis (eds.), Studies in Luke-Acts: Essays Presented in Honor of Paul Schubert, Buckingham Professor of New Testament Criticism and Interpretation at Yale University (Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon Press, 1966; London: SPCK, 1968, 1976, 1978; Philadelphia, Pa.: Fortress Press, 1980; reprint, Mifflintown, Penn.: Sigler Press, 1999), pp. 51–59Google Scholar
Baur, Ferdinand Christian, Paul, the Apostle of Jesus Christ: His Life and Work, His Epistles and His Doctrine, vol. I, trans. Zeller, Eduard (London: Williams and Norgate, 1873), pp. 12–13Google Scholar
Schneckenburger, Matthias, Über den Zweck der Apostelgeschichte (Berne: Chr. Fischer, 1841), pp. 92–95Google Scholar
Windisch, H., “The Case Against the Tradition” in Jackson, F. J. Foakes and Lake, Kirsopp (eds.), The Beginnings of Christianity, Part 1: The Acts of the Apostles, vol. II.: Prolegomena: Criticism (London: Macmillan and Co., 1922), p. 298Google Scholar
Scholten, J. H., Is de derde evangelist de schrijver van het boek der Handelingen? Critisch onderzoek (Leiden: Academische Boekhandel van P. Engels, 1873), pp. 95–99Google Scholar
MacRory, J., “The Authorship of the Third Gospel and the Acts,” Irish Theological Quarterly 2 (1907), 190–202Google Scholar
Wendham, J., “The Identification of Luke,” Evangelical Quarterly 63 (1991), 3–44Google Scholar
Clark, Albert C., The Acts of the Apostles: A Critical Edition with Introduction and Notes on Selected Passages (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1933; reprint 1970)Google Scholar
Lake, Kirsopp and Lake, Silva, “The Acts of the Apostles,” Journal of Biblical Literature 53 (1934), 34–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delobel, J., “The Text of Luke-Acts: A Confrontation of Recent Theories” in Verheyden, Unity of Luke-Acts, pp. 83–108
Bruder, Carl Hermann, Concordantiae omnium vocum Novi Testamenti graeci: primum ab Erasmo Schmidio editae, nunc secundum critices et hermeneutices nostrae aetatis rationes emendata auctae meliori ordine dispositae (Lipsiae: Sumptibus Ernesti Bredtii, 1867)Google Scholar
Moulton, W. F. and Geden, A. S., A Concordance to the Greek New Testament, 3rd edition (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1926)Google Scholar
Knox, Wilfred L., Some Hellenistic Elements in Primitive Christianity, The Schweich Lectures on Biblical Archaeology, 1942 (London: Oxford University Press, 1944; Munich, Kraus Reprint, 1980), pp. 1–15Google Scholar
Knox, , The Acts of the Apostles (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1948)Google Scholar
Russell, D. A., Criticism in Antiquity (Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, 1981), p. 5Google Scholar
Klarreich, Erica, “Bookish Math: Statistical Tests are Unraveling Knotty Literary Mysteries,” Science News 164 (2003), 392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenny, Anthony, A Stylometric Study of the New Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), p. 1Google Scholar
Usher, 's comment in Dionysius of Halicarnassus, “On Literary Composition” in Dionysius of Halicarnassus: Critical Essays, vol. II, trans. Usher, Stephen, Loeb Classical Library 466 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1985), pp. 250fGoogle Scholar
Foster, Donald W., Elegy by W. S.: A Study in Attribution (Newark, Del.: University of Delaware Press, 1989)Google Scholar
Author Unknown: On the Trail of Anonymous (New York: Henry Holt, 2000)
Mosteller, Frederick and Wallace, David L., “Deciding Authorship,” in Tanur, J. M.et al. (eds.), Statistics: A Guide to the Unknown (San Francisco, Calif.: Holden-Day, 1972), pp. 207–219Google Scholar
Fung, Glenn, The Disputed Federalist Papers: SVM Feature Selection via Concave Minimization (New York: ACM Press, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, C. B., Style and Vocabulary: Numerical Studies (London: Charles Griffin, 1970)Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Background and methodology
  • Patricia Walters, Rockford College, Illinois
  • Book: The Assumed Authorial Unity of Luke and Acts
  • Online publication: 24 June 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511575204.001
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Background and methodology
  • Patricia Walters, Rockford College, Illinois
  • Book: The Assumed Authorial Unity of Luke and Acts
  • Online publication: 24 June 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511575204.001
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Background and methodology
  • Patricia Walters, Rockford College, Illinois
  • Book: The Assumed Authorial Unity of Luke and Acts
  • Online publication: 24 June 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511575204.001
Available formats
×