What do you think?
Rate this book
Acts: An Exegetical Commentary: Volume 1: Introduction and 1:1-2:47
Highly respected New Testament scholar Craig Keener is known for his meticulous and comprehensive research. This commentary on Acts, his magnum opus, may be the largest and most thoroughly documented Acts commentary available. Useful not only for the study of Acts but also early Christianity, this work sets Acts in its first-century context.
In this volume, the first of four, Keener introduces the book of Acts, particularly historical questions related to it, and provides detailed exegesis of its opening chapters. He utilizes an unparalleled range of ancient sources and offers a wealth of fresh insights. This magisterial commentary will be a valuable resource for New Testament professors and students, pastors, Acts scholars, and libraries.
1088 pages, Hardcover
First published July 1, 2012
30 people are currently reading
147 people want to read
About the author
Craig S. Keener
141 books230 followersCraig S. Keener (PhD, Duke University) is professor of New Testament at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky. He is the author of many books, including Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts, the bestseller The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament, The Historical Jesus of the Gospels, Gift and Giver, and commentaries on Matthew, John, Romans, 1–2 Corinthians, and Revelation.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
July 2, 2021
In the Prolegomenon to his four-volume commentary on Acts, Craig S. Keener writes, “The primary focus [of this commentary] is what the text meant to its first audience. Its primary contributions lie in often providing further documentation for, and sometimes further elaboration of, the social and historical framework in which Acts was first written, read, and heard” (4). Keener’s focus on “social-historical inquiry” (16) is not to meant to denigrate other approaches to the text (e.g., literary, sociological, reception-historical). Nor is it meant to bypass concerns typically addressed in commentaries (e.g., text-critical, lexical, semantic). Indeed, Keener takes up such approaches and concerns as they bear on his primary focus throughout the four volumes.
Commentators typically divide their work into two parts: introductory matters and the commentary proper. Keener assigns 60% (638 pages) of volume 1 to introductory matters such as Acts’ genre, date, author, audience, purpose, theological emphases, literary structure and unity with the Gospel of Luke, geography, and perspective on gender and women. The remaining 40% (400 pages) offer commentary on Acts 1–2, as well as 13 excurses on topics related to the verses under discussion, such as the excursus on Lukan, Greco-Roman, and Jewish views of material possessions attached to the commentary on 2:44–45 (1023–1026). The primary value of volume 1, then, lies in its discussion of introductory matters, which shape Keener’s treatment of Acts in the remaining three volumes of the commentary.
Because Keener’s focus is on what Acts meant to its first audience, he devotes considerable space (chapters 2–9) to discussing the literary genre of the book. Along with the majority of commentators, Keener considers the book “a work of ancient historiography” (91). More specifically, it is a an “apologetic history in the form of a historical monograph” (115).
In chapter 2, Keener considers and rejects five alternative genres: travel narrative, biography, novel, epic, and acts, the latter being understood as “a narrative account of the heroic deeds of famous historical or mythological figures” (88). Though the latter is the title of Acts itself, Keener considers the title a “misnomer” (ibid).
In chapters 4–5, he argues that ancient historiography combined a concern for accurate information with literary skill in the service of a larger agenda. “In Acts, then,” Keener writes, “we should expect to find a blending of historical (informational) and literary (rhetorical, moral, and theological) interests. By ancient standards of composition, one could at least in principle accomplish each objective without harm to the other. Writers varied, however, in their amount of rhetorical expansion and adaptation” (147).
Acts’ historical-monograph genre does not necessarily guarantee the historical accuracy of the events it records, however, so, in chapters 6–9, Keener outlines a case for its historicity, keeping in view the fact that ancient views of historical accuracy are not identical to modern views. As noted above, ancient historiography allowed for more “rhetorical expansion and adaptation” than one would normally find in modern historical works. Chapter 6 concludes that “in the strong majority of cases [of issues we can test]”—such as titles, place names, people known from extrabiblical sources, and the like—“we find Luke a reliable reporter of events” (220). Chapters 7–9 examines arguments against that reliability, based on (1) tensions between the way Acts and the Pauline epistles portray Paul’s life, ministry, and theology: (2) disputes about whether or how Luke accurately reported speeches in Acts; and (3) Acts’ presentation of miracles, which is viewed as a prima facie argument against its historicity by many modern commentators. Keener’s two-volume Miraclesoffers a robust argument in favor of the reality of the supernatural, but here, his conclusion to chapter 9 is worth quoting: “Whether or not in the end one shares the early Christian worldview concerning signs, it is ethnocentric to simply despise it. And whether or not in the end one despises it, one cannot objectively expunge from the record the clear evidence that early Christians (and many people since then) believed that they experienced or witnessed these phenomena” (382).
Chapters 10–12 take up the questions of Acts’ dating, authorship, and original audience. Keener argues that the work was written in the early 70s by Luke, a missionary companion of Paul, for Theophilus (the named recipient in Acts 1:1), but also for “mixed but predominantly Gentile congregations” (434).
In chapter 13, Keener concludes that Luke had “more than one agenda in Luke-Acts” (458). For example, the book serves as “vindication for the mission to uncircumcised Gentiles” (ibid). It may also outline “the apostolic model for the church’s continuing mission” (ibid). Finally, Keener argues Acts’ purpose is also apologetic. “Romans generally tolerated Judaism because it was an ancient, ethnic religion; although the Christian movement now included many Gentiles … , Luke argues for his movement’s continuity with biblical history to indicate that it should be tolerated” (ibid).
Flowing out of this last point, Keener begins his discussion in chapters 14–15 of Luke’s theological emphases by noting how Luke and Acts “climax and continue the biblical [i.e., Old Testament] story in his [i.e., Luke’s] own day” (491). Other theological emphases include Jesus as Savior, the Gentile mission, eschatology, the work of the Holy Spirit, and the function of the miraculous. Chapter 18, which concludes Keeners’ discussion of introductory matters, also notes the Lukan emphasis on women in the ministry of Jesus, then in the ministry of the churches of Acts.
Finally, chapters 16 and 17 discuss the literary unity and structure of Luke-Acts, as well as geographical aspects of Acts.
On the whole, Keener demonstrates that Acts should be taken seriously as a historical monograph. Like other ancient historians, Luke used rhetoric to make a point, but neither his rhetoric nor his theological points obviate the basic historicity of the work. Even the reflexive, modern dismissal of the supernatural does do that. After all, a historian reporting what people believe to be the case has not done his work well if he fails to note that those people believe a miracle has occurred.
Space does not permit description or evaluation of Keener’s commentary on Acts 1–2, even though the second chapter of Acts is programmatic for the entire book. It is enough for now simply to note that Keener has made a strong case for social-historical inquiry into Acts. A focus on how the book’s original audience received it indicates that they viewed it as a reliable report and explanation of “all that Jesus began to do and to teach” (Acts 1:1). It was history with a purpose.
The only criticism of Keener’s commentary this author would like to register is its length. At 638 pages, Keener’s discussion of introductory matters alone is longer than most commentaries on Acts, and three similarly long volumes follow this initial installment. The publisher decided that the four volumes were too long to include a bibliography, so they helpfully put that information on a CD. Keener makes no apology for the academic nature of his commentary, and his insights will set the standard for the next generation of discussion about Acts’ historical value. Even so, it is doubtful that full-time academics—let alone theological students or pastors—will be able to read all four volumes. Thankfully, Keener has abridged them in a one-volume commentary in the New Cambridge Bible Commentary series, which also is highly recommended, especially if time and budget are considerations.
Book Reviewed
Craig S. Keener, Acts: An Exegetical Commentary, Volume 1: Introduction and 1:1–2:47 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012).
P.S. If you liked my review, please click "Helpful" on my Amazon review page.
Commentators typically divide their work into two parts: introductory matters and the commentary proper. Keener assigns 60% (638 pages) of volume 1 to introductory matters such as Acts’ genre, date, author, audience, purpose, theological emphases, literary structure and unity with the Gospel of Luke, geography, and perspective on gender and women. The remaining 40% (400 pages) offer commentary on Acts 1–2, as well as 13 excurses on topics related to the verses under discussion, such as the excursus on Lukan, Greco-Roman, and Jewish views of material possessions attached to the commentary on 2:44–45 (1023–1026). The primary value of volume 1, then, lies in its discussion of introductory matters, which shape Keener’s treatment of Acts in the remaining three volumes of the commentary.
Because Keener’s focus is on what Acts meant to its first audience, he devotes considerable space (chapters 2–9) to discussing the literary genre of the book. Along with the majority of commentators, Keener considers the book “a work of ancient historiography” (91). More specifically, it is a an “apologetic history in the form of a historical monograph” (115).
In chapter 2, Keener considers and rejects five alternative genres: travel narrative, biography, novel, epic, and acts, the latter being understood as “a narrative account of the heroic deeds of famous historical or mythological figures” (88). Though the latter is the title of Acts itself, Keener considers the title a “misnomer” (ibid).
In chapters 4–5, he argues that ancient historiography combined a concern for accurate information with literary skill in the service of a larger agenda. “In Acts, then,” Keener writes, “we should expect to find a blending of historical (informational) and literary (rhetorical, moral, and theological) interests. By ancient standards of composition, one could at least in principle accomplish each objective without harm to the other. Writers varied, however, in their amount of rhetorical expansion and adaptation” (147).
Acts’ historical-monograph genre does not necessarily guarantee the historical accuracy of the events it records, however, so, in chapters 6–9, Keener outlines a case for its historicity, keeping in view the fact that ancient views of historical accuracy are not identical to modern views. As noted above, ancient historiography allowed for more “rhetorical expansion and adaptation” than one would normally find in modern historical works. Chapter 6 concludes that “in the strong majority of cases [of issues we can test]”—such as titles, place names, people known from extrabiblical sources, and the like—“we find Luke a reliable reporter of events” (220). Chapters 7–9 examines arguments against that reliability, based on (1) tensions between the way Acts and the Pauline epistles portray Paul’s life, ministry, and theology: (2) disputes about whether or how Luke accurately reported speeches in Acts; and (3) Acts’ presentation of miracles, which is viewed as a prima facie argument against its historicity by many modern commentators. Keener’s two-volume Miraclesoffers a robust argument in favor of the reality of the supernatural, but here, his conclusion to chapter 9 is worth quoting: “Whether or not in the end one shares the early Christian worldview concerning signs, it is ethnocentric to simply despise it. And whether or not in the end one despises it, one cannot objectively expunge from the record the clear evidence that early Christians (and many people since then) believed that they experienced or witnessed these phenomena” (382).
Chapters 10–12 take up the questions of Acts’ dating, authorship, and original audience. Keener argues that the work was written in the early 70s by Luke, a missionary companion of Paul, for Theophilus (the named recipient in Acts 1:1), but also for “mixed but predominantly Gentile congregations” (434).
In chapter 13, Keener concludes that Luke had “more than one agenda in Luke-Acts” (458). For example, the book serves as “vindication for the mission to uncircumcised Gentiles” (ibid). It may also outline “the apostolic model for the church’s continuing mission” (ibid). Finally, Keener argues Acts’ purpose is also apologetic. “Romans generally tolerated Judaism because it was an ancient, ethnic religion; although the Christian movement now included many Gentiles … , Luke argues for his movement’s continuity with biblical history to indicate that it should be tolerated” (ibid).
Flowing out of this last point, Keener begins his discussion in chapters 14–15 of Luke’s theological emphases by noting how Luke and Acts “climax and continue the biblical [i.e., Old Testament] story in his [i.e., Luke’s] own day” (491). Other theological emphases include Jesus as Savior, the Gentile mission, eschatology, the work of the Holy Spirit, and the function of the miraculous. Chapter 18, which concludes Keeners’ discussion of introductory matters, also notes the Lukan emphasis on women in the ministry of Jesus, then in the ministry of the churches of Acts.
Finally, chapters 16 and 17 discuss the literary unity and structure of Luke-Acts, as well as geographical aspects of Acts.
On the whole, Keener demonstrates that Acts should be taken seriously as a historical monograph. Like other ancient historians, Luke used rhetoric to make a point, but neither his rhetoric nor his theological points obviate the basic historicity of the work. Even the reflexive, modern dismissal of the supernatural does do that. After all, a historian reporting what people believe to be the case has not done his work well if he fails to note that those people believe a miracle has occurred.
Space does not permit description or evaluation of Keener’s commentary on Acts 1–2, even though the second chapter of Acts is programmatic for the entire book. It is enough for now simply to note that Keener has made a strong case for social-historical inquiry into Acts. A focus on how the book’s original audience received it indicates that they viewed it as a reliable report and explanation of “all that Jesus began to do and to teach” (Acts 1:1). It was history with a purpose.
The only criticism of Keener’s commentary this author would like to register is its length. At 638 pages, Keener’s discussion of introductory matters alone is longer than most commentaries on Acts, and three similarly long volumes follow this initial installment. The publisher decided that the four volumes were too long to include a bibliography, so they helpfully put that information on a CD. Keener makes no apology for the academic nature of his commentary, and his insights will set the standard for the next generation of discussion about Acts’ historical value. Even so, it is doubtful that full-time academics—let alone theological students or pastors—will be able to read all four volumes. Thankfully, Keener has abridged them in a one-volume commentary in the New Cambridge Bible Commentary series, which also is highly recommended, especially if time and budget are considerations.
Book Reviewed
Craig S. Keener, Acts: An Exegetical Commentary, Volume 1: Introduction and 1:1–2:47 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012).
P.S. If you liked my review, please click "Helpful" on my Amazon review page.
August 17, 2017
By far the most exhaustive look at the book of Acts, four volumes of 1,000 pages, each, of scholarly academic information regarding Luke's work. If you don't have these on your book shelf, it's probably because they're hard to find and expensive, but worth every cent!
January 18, 2025
Interesting book. Comprehensive in its discussion of the book. Particularly compares to other writings around that time such as Josephus. Has talk on genre and signs. Discusses sources. Interesting academically but not particularly deep theologically, at least not in the introduction.
May 1, 2020
3.75
Decent, thorough series. Very thorough, but redundant and verbose at times - repeated statements word-for-word in multiple areas. I "only" read the introduction to volume one.
Decent, thorough series. Very thorough, but redundant and verbose at times - repeated statements word-for-word in multiple areas. I "only" read the introduction to volume one.
July 26, 2014
I have looked at the first two volumes in this commentary, and here is a brief review.
Craig Keener’s Acts: An Exegetical Commentary is a vast and incomplete piece of scholarship. It is vast because in print form it is over 2100 pages. It is incomplete because these two volumes only cover up to Acts 14:28. For the purpose of this review, I am looking at the digital version on my Logos software. I have not read every page, of course, so this is not a full scholarly review.
Keener is meticulous. Anyone who has used his previous commentaries on Matthew, John and Revelation will know that. This can be highly beneficial, or at times, frustrating. Almost two-thirds of the complete first volume is introductory material covering such issues as genre (zeroing in on Acts as a work of ancient historiography), historical interpretation of Acts, Acts and Paul, the speeches, the author, audience, Luke’s perspective on women and gender, etc.
Once you get into the commentary proper, you start to see the fruit of his socio-historical approach. The format and layout is relatively straightforward (i.e. no complicated internal structures that require skipping around to find what you need, but at the same time not much in the way of helpful textual layouts as some of the more modern commentaries are offering – such as Schnabel’s on Acts, for instance). As well as relatively straightforward, it is also long. Keener appears to have a meticulous tendency that leads to a massive project like this one. Every detail is engaged and discussed. Other scholarship is engaged and discussed. At times it feels like everything is engaged and discussed.
Craig Keener’s Acts: An Exegetical Commentary is a vast and incomplete piece of scholarship. It is vast because in print form it is over 2100 pages. It is incomplete because these two volumes only cover up to Acts 14:28. For the purpose of this review, I am looking at the digital version on my Logos software. I have not read every page, of course, so this is not a full scholarly review.
Keener is meticulous. Anyone who has used his previous commentaries on Matthew, John and Revelation will know that. This can be highly beneficial, or at times, frustrating. Almost two-thirds of the complete first volume is introductory material covering such issues as genre (zeroing in on Acts as a work of ancient historiography), historical interpretation of Acts, Acts and Paul, the speeches, the author, audience, Luke’s perspective on women and gender, etc.
Once you get into the commentary proper, you start to see the fruit of his socio-historical approach. The format and layout is relatively straightforward (i.e. no complicated internal structures that require skipping around to find what you need, but at the same time not much in the way of helpful textual layouts as some of the more modern commentaries are offering – such as Schnabel’s on Acts, for instance). As well as relatively straightforward, it is also long. Keener appears to have a meticulous tendency that leads to a massive project like this one. Every detail is engaged and discussed. Other scholarship is engaged and discussed. At times it feels like everything is engaged and discussed.
August 18, 2015
I like Craig Keener's style. He brings up interesting points for me to ponder during my studies.
This book covers only the first two chapters of Acts, and it is almost overly thorough for my casual reference for personal Bible Study. I can only imagine that it would be extraordinary for someone doing an exhaustive study. I don't know if I will buy the additional volume or volumes. My reading time is fairly limited, so I'm not sure I would benefit enough to justify the cost. This is the third of Keener's commentaries I've read, and he certainly has my attention! I am sure I will refer back to this volume during subsequent studies of Acts.
This book covers only the first two chapters of Acts, and it is almost overly thorough for my casual reference for personal Bible Study. I can only imagine that it would be extraordinary for someone doing an exhaustive study. I don't know if I will buy the additional volume or volumes. My reading time is fairly limited, so I'm not sure I would benefit enough to justify the cost. This is the third of Keener's commentaries I've read, and he certainly has my attention! I am sure I will refer back to this volume during subsequent studies of Acts.
December 16, 2012
I have read the commentary on the text and some selections from the introduction and I was disappointed that he doesn't even consider any argument in favor of Luke being a Hellenistic Jew. Plus, the first 600 pages are the introduction....
March 13, 2014
The most satisfying commentary on Acts I've found so far. I've read Bock, Barrett & Witherington too, but Keener's thoroughness and detail surpasses them.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews