e history of early Christianity" (107) to show that the earliest Jewish Christians ate with Gentiles.
b. The author is fair in presenting his arguments. He does not come to outlandish conclusions, and he bases the mild conclusions he does come to on the evidence and not on conjecture. He does not say that Luke and Acts settle the question of table-fellowship among Jewish Christians and Gentiles, but instead points out that there was an uneven evolution of the Jewish Christian attitude toward dining with Gentiles. The author uses literary analysis and historical review to present his argument. There is no question that Jews were forbidden from eating with Gentiles before Christianity. he author makes this clear through his historical review. The books of the New Testament are more contradictory and the author takes this into account. He concludes carefully that "we have shown that a legitimation of table-fellowship between Jews and Christians forms a vital arch in the symbolic universe which Luke creates for his community" (109). The author focuses far more on the evidence than on such cautious conclusions, which shows that he has presented a truly scholarly analysis. He does not overreach the evidence by coming to more definite conclusions about the views of Luke and the Acts on this issue than are called for by the evidence. Instead, the author keeps his focus on the evidence and the reasonable conclusions which can be drawn from that evidence. He does not let his assumptions show, if he does have any, but instead lets the evidence take him where it will. The evidence is not as free of contradiction and uncertain evolution as he might have wished, but he remains true to it nevertheless.
c. My personal view is that the article is fascinating and engaging precisely because the author honors the intelligence of the reader. The author presents a great deal of evidence related to table-fellowship, and leaves the reader to make his o...