Caleb Friedeman is David A. Case Chair of Theology and Ministry and Associate Professor of New Testament at Ohio Christian University. This monograph is a revision of his PhD dissertation at Wheaton.

After surveying the four ways that the Christology of Luke 1–2 has been related to the rest of Luke-Acts (p. 11), such as a nondivine Christology or divine Christology, the author’s thesis is that “Luke presents the first two chapters of his Gospel as a christological mystery” (p. 11) which is unveiled both for the reader and the human characters in the narrative as the story unfolds. In the first, introductory chapter, Friedeman discusses various methodological convictions that drive his study, including his views regarding the unity of Luke-Acts, Luke’s Christology, and, drawing from Richard B. Hays’s work, the nature of Luke’s use of Scripture.

The second chapter gives a literary glance at Luke 1–2 and, from this discussion, the author concludes that “Luke presents his first two chapters as an account of divinely inspired speech… by angels and human revelatory agents” (p. 26), with such speech entailing more than the speakers realized. The third chapter builds on the tentative conclusion of the second chapter by giving special attention to Luke’s use of OT Scriptures and an exegesis of Luke’s narratival account in Luke 1–2, arguing that Luke offers a “veiled divine Christology” (p. 91).

With chapter four, Friedeman focuses on Luke’s use of Daniel and argues that Daniel provides a framework for understanding the significance of “the inspired words and surrounding events of Luke 1–2” (p. 126) as initially partially hidden but later revealed. The aim of chapter five is to further substantiate the book’s thesis by turning to Luke 2:19 and 2:51 as key texts, exploring further Danielic allusions along the way. Chapter six applies Friedeman’s findings to the remainder of Luke-Acts. Of special note here is the author’s argument that Jesus’s divine identity is fully unveiled in Luke 24:45. Chapter seven concludes the book by summarizing Friedeman’s findings and offering possible implications of his study for New Testament studies in general and specific items such as Luke’s relationship to Matthew, Luke’s historiographical integrity, and the origins of divine Christology.

Beyond the fact that Friedeman, in our view, persuasively demonstrates his thesis, building on previous scholarship and thus contributing to our overall understanding of the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts, there are a number of hermeneutical and exegetical insights that characterize this work. Friedeman avoids the pitfalls of earlier approaches to the Christology of Luke 1–2, especially an oversimplified reading of Luke’s intentions, by paying sufficient attention to the literary and narrative features of Luke 1–2 and the authorial intent of Luke in his portrayal of the shape of Luke’s gospel and Luke’s use of the OT.

In his discussion, for instance, of Zechariah’s prophecy in Luke 1:69–79, he makes note of the interpretative tension expressed by Bock, Marshall, and Fitzmyer, who are “caught between the rock of Luke’s narrative,” which is pointing toward “the Lord” as “both divine and Jesus,” and the “hard place of historical verisimilitude” (p. 74) which deems Zechariah’s perception of Jesus’s divine lordship as historically anachronistic. Friedeman’s solution is that, from the side of God’s intention, “John … precedes the divine Lord Jesus” (p. 74), whereas from Zechariah’s perspective, John goes before the Davidic Messiah who is representative of God as his agent.

Moreover, Friedeman’s description of Mary’s role in Luke-Acts is fascinating. To begin with, upon noting the various and conflicting ways that interpreters have understood Luke 2:19 and 2:51, he argues that the plural form of ῥῆμα in these verses combined with the fact that, in 2:19, Mary preserved (συντηρέω) them—language which Friedeman takes as an allusion to Dan 7:28—points to Mary’s unique role in Luke 1–2 as preserving “the divine revelation in the preceding narrative” and, by implication, “the content of the entire preceding narrative” (p. 173). Further, he makes the intriguing case that, even though Mary’s role diminishes throughout the remainder of the Luke-Acts, initially she is portrayed as “a paradigmatic Israelite” (p. 210) and, although in light of such texts as Luke 2:48–50 and 8:19–21 she has to wrestle with the revelation of Christ like everyone else, Friedeman interprets Acts 1:14 as placing Mary “in an ideal position to communicate openly the revelation that she has for so long preserved in secret” (p. 224).

To conclude, by peeling back the various interpretive layers underlying Luke 1–2 and, by implication, Luke-Acts as a whole, Friedeman offers penetrating insight into Luke’s two-part work, which will prove exemplary for students of Luke-Acts as Friedeman navigates complex hermeneutic and exegetical issues, and will contribute to scholarly discussion and understanding as he effectively clears away ways that earlier interpreters have missed the mark.