Abstract
The authors in this collection of essays read Acts alongside other second century material in order to illuminate particular aspects of Acts. For some of these authors, such comparanda mean that Acts itself should be understood as a second-century work, while for others, these comparanda suggest trajectories that either begin with or include Acts and are more fully developed by others in the second century.
In “Reading Acts in the Second Century: Reflections on Method, History, and Desire,” Todd Penner notes that scholarly distinction between the first and second centuries in terms of dating Acts is related to an opposition that scholars themselves have fabricated: the “second century becomes identifiable only as we construct and delineate the first century as its opposite” (p. 6). Second, Penner notes that Acts, like all narratives, presents the world “not as it really is, but as it might or could be” (p. 10).
Milton Moreland, “Jerusalem Destroyed: The Setting of Acts,” argues that Luke uses Jerusalem as both a “narrative setting” and an “imagined historical, cultic place” (p. 17). While Vespasian and his sons, Titus and Domitian, used the destruction of the temple “as a means to bolster their claims to authority,” Luke imagined it as a “place of Christian origins” (p. 19), though Luke claims Jerusalem's destruction is due to Jews misunderstanding their own epic tradition.
Joseph Tyson, “Acts and the Apostles: Issues of Leadership in the Second Century,” argues that Acts limits the definition of the apostles to twelve in order to counter Marcion's claims on Paul's legacy. Unlike Clement and Irenaeus, who both name only two apostles, Peter and Paul, Acts does not call Paul an apostle.
David Reis, “Spec(tac)ular Sights: Mirroring in/of Acts” discusses the significant number of references to seeing and visual experience in Acts. Acts stresses looking to Christ who “functions as a living mirror, a virtuous father/ancestor who becomes the model upon whom his disciples (‘sons') gaze and pattern their lives” (p. 71).
David McCabe, “Acts of Ascension: History, Exultation, and Ideological Legitimation,” argues that Acts sees Jesus’ ascension in line with claims about Julius Caesar's “ascension-as-exultation” (p. 81), discourse which serves to demonstrate the divine status of a founding figure and to legitimate current social practices as divine in their origin. Justin and Irenaeus build on the theme of Jesus’ ascension as exultation, while the Acts of Peter shows Simon's failed attempt to gain legitimation through ascension.
Marianne Bjelland Kartzow, “The Complexity of Pairing: Reading Acts 16 with Plutarch's Parallel Lives,” examines Acts 16 alongside Plutarch's Parallel Lives. Kartzow points out that, due to its structure, the parallels in Plutarch's work are obvious in ways that they are not necessarily so in Acts 16. She discusses pairing the various characters in Acts with those in Acts 16. K.'s argument shows that scholars’ previous attempts to form pairs for the characters of Acts 16 usually focus on only one elements of the characters’ identity (e.g. gender; status as householder; class), while Kartzow calls for an intersectional approach treating these elements together.
Christopher Mount, “Constructing Paul as a Christian in the Acts of the Apostles,” argues that by presenting Paul operating in legal contexts, acting piously, supporting the religion of the one true (“unknown”) God against superstitions, and being threatened by mob violence in Acts, the author imagined “not the life of Paul in the first century but the difficult social and political realities facing Christians in the second century” (p. 147).
Rubén Dupertuis, “Bold Speech, Opposition, and Philosophical Imagery in the Acts of the Apostles,” shows that the use of the term parrēsia in Acts corresponds to its use in philosophical texts from the Second Sophistic. Acts understands parrēsia to evoke opposition, to be the practice of divinely inspired people, and to be similar in some ways to Socrates.
Andrew Gregory, “Among the Apologists? Reading Acts with Justin Martyr,” sees several similarities between the way Acts and Justin construe the beginnings of the Jesus movement. Both authors agree that Jesus taught the disciples after being raised from the dead, that the message moved outward from Jerusalem, and that Jewish Law was not binding upon all the followers of Jesus. Alternatively, the texts diverge in significant ways as well. For Justin, it was the twelve who carried the message to the ends of the earth, whereas for Acts, Paul carries the message abroad, Acts views the Roman government more favorably, and Acts views upholding Jewish Law as virtuous.
Ryan Carhart, “The Second Sophistic and the Cultural Idealization of Paul in Acts,” argues that Acts presents Paul as a rhetor like others of the Second Sophistic due to his receipt of paideia, the author's appeals to older texts, both Greek and Jewish, through the use of mimēsis, and use of the genre of apologia, linking Paul to other famous figures, most notably Socrates. Acts crafts Paul's identity in a way that revalues older traditions to craft an ideal Christian identity for second century readers.
Claire Clivaz, “Reading Luke-Acts in Second-Century Alexandria: From Clement to the Shadow of Apollos,” suggests that Acts had significant influence in Alexandria in the second century. She notes that the majority of early manuscripts of Acts are Alexandrian, and some of these manuscripts link Acts to texts besides Luke or the other gospels (e.g. Acts of Paul, Apocalypse of Peter, Revelation). While Acts is “special” for Clement, he preserves other memories of early Christian history. Clivaz also suggests that the competition between Apollos and Paul in Acts shows that Acts views an Alexandrian Christianity as “still perfectible in the Lukan conception of the Christian faith” (p. 221).
This collection raises important questions for how comparison works and what is at stake in terms of understanding an ancient text. It is likely to be most useful to graduate students or scholars whose work focuses primarily on Acts.