The Gospel according to Lucius of Cyrene

Scot McKnight blogged about Justo Gonzales’ commentary, The Story Luke Tells: Luke’s Unique Witness to the Gospel. It argues that “Luke” is in fact the “Lucius of Cyrene” mentioned in Acts, and also the Lucius mentioned in Romans (in this last point following Origen). If anyone here has read the volume, or looked into other attempts to argue that case, I’d be interested to hear your thoughts about it.