I'm currently re-hashing my lecture notes on a course on Luke-Acts, so I'm naturally interested in forthcoming Acts commentaries. A few I've learnt of:
1. Steve Walton (WBC). 2. Richard I. Pervo (Hermeneia). 3. Craig Keener (Eerdmans).
The latter two should be interesting to read in counterpoint. On the one hand we have Richard Pervo who has revived the Knox hypothesis of a radically late dating of Acts. On the other hand, we have Craig Keener the evangelical, who however is astonishingly well-versed in the primary literature. Together they probably represent the best informed radical and conservative commentators respectively on the subject.
The statement that my forthcoming (November) Hermeneia commentary is "radical" is erroneous. Not an attempt to revive John Knox's theory of date. He adduced little evidence and dated c. 140. I date Acts c. 115 (see Dating Acts [Santa Rosa, CA: Polebridge, 2006]). For which project made use of and appreciated your study of Miletus speech.
There's a fascinating list of forthcoming commentaries for lots of series at: http://parablemania.ektopos.com/archives/2005/08/forthcoming_com.html
ReplyDeleteCongratulations Mike!
ReplyDeleteThe latter two should be interesting to read in counterpoint. On the one hand we have Richard Pervo who has revived the Knox hypothesis of a radically late dating of Acts. On the other hand, we have Craig Keener the evangelical, who however is astonishingly well-versed in the primary literature. Together they probably represent the best informed radical and conservative commentators respectively on the subject.
ReplyDeleteFrom Richard Pervo:
ReplyDeleteThe statement that my forthcoming (November) Hermeneia commentary is "radical" is erroneous. Not an attempt to revive John Knox's theory of date. He adduced little evidence and dated c. 140. I date Acts c. 115 (see Dating Acts [Santa Rosa, CA: Polebridge, 2006]). For which project made use of and appreciated your study of Miletus speech.