N.T. Wright is a giant of New Testament studies, a scrupulous historian, and a Christian who believes in the inerrancy and the power of the Scriptures as the Word of God. In his “brief, though not shallow” (1) commentary on the book of Acts, I compare him to an itamae, or a sushi-chef plating morsel after delicious morsel. Each small plate, a short section of commentary, leads into the next and ultimately reveals the grand story from beginning to end of this substantial book sitting squarely in the middle of the New Testament. That story, the story of Acts as Wright highlights from beginning to end, is the story of what “Jesus Christ continued to do and to teach: that is, the story of the gospel” (140).  

Rather than examining each verse or even each chapter exegetically, Wright is taking a “10,000-foot view” (125) of the book of Acts as a whole. Apart from a particularly detailed examination of Paul’s speech in the Areopagus (Acts 17:16-34), Wright breaks the book of Acts down into four-chapter increments with similar themes. It is these small but rich portions that allow for both casual readers and diligent theologians to trace Luke’s overarching message from the “inauguration of the new creation” in Jerusalem (23), to the power-struggles over “Torah and Temple” in Judea (129), and ultimately to Rome, the ends of the earth, where the rule of King Messiah challenges the rule of King Caesar. “God is King, and Jesus is lord” (155). 

From the very beginning of the commentary, Wright is interested primarily in returning to a first-century, Scriptural worldview and a study of the Greek text. Every page drips with insights about the New Testament world, from the “implicit challenge” that Jesus issues to the claims of Caesar (2), to the tenuous political situation of the Jewish faith in the Roman world (73-75), to Paul’s defenseagainst multiple contemporary Greek philosophies (111-113). Wright wants us to see the book of Acts through first-century eyes—and, particularly, first-century Judean eyes. More small examples would include his use of the term “Judean” instead of “Jew” to avoid unintentional modern baggage, and his not capitalizing words like “son” and “spirit,” which is how the original Christians would have engaged with those terms.  

With this historical emphasis, Wright repeatedly addresses modern interpretations of Acts when he sees a need for it. For instance, when examining Acts 2, he takes umbrage with the Pentecostal or Charismatic assertions about the need for a “second baptism in the Spirit” apart from water baptism. “The point of Pentecost is not simply God giving his people a fresh injection of spiritual energy so that they can evangelize, teach, perform remarkable healings, and so on. The point is the homecoming of God: God is doing at last what he had long intended and promised. Having come in the person of his son to fulfil the messianic predictions, God now comes in the person of his spirit to fulfil the even more personal promise to dwell in and with his people” (19-20, emphasis original).  

Another example of this type of direct confrontation with modern theological positions comes in his examination of Paul’s speech in Acts 17. Here, Wright defends apologetics and evangelism which actually preach the gospel of Christ crucified, instead of merely trying to rely on incomplete natural knowledge. “Some have concluded that the speech represents an essay in ‘natural theology,’ in which one might begin with symbols in the culture, rather than with Scripture or with Jesus, and try to fit the gospel into the culture rather than having it address the culture with a fresh gospel-oriented word.”  

A word of caution here. Wright obviously has high respect for the Scriptures and beautifully confesses the doctrine of objective justification (148). He also believes that a thorough knowledge of the historical context is necessary to understand the full breadth of meaning in a text. However, in his efforts to unpack the context of Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles, particularly his first mission journey to the Galatians, he perhaps speculates too much about the motives and “jealousy” of the Judeans who persecuted Paul and the fledgling Christian church. “So the older view, imagining the Judean people were resenting ‘grace’ because they were proud self-help moralists, simply won’t do. We need a far more holistic analysis, this is about what we call ‘politics,’ not instead of theology, but as its incarnation” (71). Paul’s message of grace to the Gentiles, here and in his letter to the Galatians, becomes not a matter of soteriology (how sinners are made right with a holy God), but of ecclesiology (who can rightly be called “the people of God”). The distinction is subtle, but a Lutheran reader should be aware of this brush with what has come to be known as “the new perspective on Paul.”  

Since N.T. Wright adapted this book from a series of lectures given to theological students, he often includes helpful applications aimed at ministers of the gospel. I particularly appreciated his call for ministers to familiarize themselves with the apostles’ prayer at the end of Acts 4. “If you are engaged with any work for God’s kingdom, any ministry of evangelism, teaching or pastoral wisdom, you’regoing to need it. Get to know Psalm 2, standing behind this prayer as it stands behind a good deal of Scripture, and learn how to enter into its spirit and apply it to new situations….There will be moments when you find yourself confronted with one kind of challenge or another. At that point, cling on for dear life to the great conclusion: ‘So now, Master, look on their threats; and grant that we, your servants, may speak your word with all boldness’” (32-33).  

I wholeheartedly endorse and recommend The Challenge of Acts to any reader. Wright’s keen historical insights and passionate love for the gospel are both obvious throughout the book. It certainly made me fall in love with Acts in a way I have never experienced before. I learned to laugh at the ironies that Luke points out in the different accusations leveled against Paul in Philippi and Thessalonica and Ephesus. I was emboldened to stand against the forces of darkness, pictured as a sea in storm, the satan doing everything he can to prevent the spread of the gospel, and failing. My jaw dropped at Wright’s piercing insight on the value of persecution for the church, and the dangers that an un-persecuted church faces (92). All I want to do is read more! I felt like Cleopas on the road to Emmaus, never wanting the journey home to end.