OPENING STATEMENTS
A. Acts forms an indispensable link between the accounts of Jesus’ life
(Gospels) and His disciples’ interpretation, preaching, and application of His
acts and words in the Letters of the New Testament.
B. The early church developed and circulated two collections of New Testament
writings: (1) the Gospels (four Gospels) and (2) the Apostle (Paul’s letters).
However, with the early Christological heresies of the second century, the value
of the book of Acts became obvious. Acts reveals the content and purpose of
Apostolic preaching (kerygma) and the amazing results of the gospel.
C. The historical accuracy of Acts has been accentuated and confirmed by
modern archaeological discoveries, especially in relation to the title of Roman
governmental officials
1. stratēgoi, 16:20,22,35,36 (also used of temple captains, Luke
22:4,52; Acts 4:1; 5:24-26)
2. politarchas, 17:6,8; and prōtō, Acts 28:7, cf. A. N.
Sherwin-White, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament
Luke records the tensions within the early church, even the fight between
Paul and Barnabas (cf. Acts 15:39). This reflects a fair, balanced, researched
historical/theological writing.
D. The title of the book is found in slightly different forms in the ancient
Greek texts:
1. Manuscript א (Sinaiticus), Tertullian, Didymus, and Eusebius have “Acts”
(ASV, NIV)
2. Manuscripts B (Vaticanus), D (Bezae) in a subscription, Irenaeus,
Tertullian, Cyrian, and Athanasius have “Acts of the Apostles” (KJV, RSV, NEB)
3. Manuscripts A2 (first correction of Alexandrinus), E, G, and
Chrysostom have “Acts of the Holy Apostles”
It is possible that the Greek words praxeis, praxis (acts,
ways, behavior, deeds, practice) reflect an ancient Mediterranean literary genre
which denotes the lives and actions of famous or influential people (e.g., John,
Peter, Stephen, Philip, Paul). The book probably originally had no title (like
Luke’s Gospel).
E. There are two distinct textual traditions of Acts. The shorter one is the
Alexandrian (MSS P45, P74, א, A, B, C). The Western family
of manuscripts (P29, P38, P48
and D) seem to include many more details. It is uncertain whether they are from
the author or were later insertions by scribes, based on early church
traditions. Most textual scholars believe that the Western manuscripts have
later additions because they
1. smooth out or try to fix unusual or difficult texts
2. add additional details
3. add specific phrases to accentuate Jesus as the Christ
4. are not quoted by any early Christian writers any time in the first three
centuries (cf. F. F. Bruce, Acts: Greek Text, pp. 69-80)
For a more detailed discussion consult A Textual Commentary on the Greek
New Testament by Bruce M. Metzger, published by the United Bible Societies,
pp. 259-272.
Because of the vast number of later additions, this commentary will not deal with all the textual options. If a
textual variant is crucial to interpretation, then and only then will it be
dealt with in this commentary.
AUTHOR
A. The book is anonymous, but Luke’s authorship is strongly implied.
1. The unique and surprising “we” sections (16:10-17 [second missionary
journey at Philippi]; 20:5-15; 21:1-18 [end of third missionary journey] and
27:1-28:16 [Paul sent as prisoner to Rome]) strongly imply Luke as the author.
2. The connection between the third Gospel and Acts is obvious when one
compares Luke 1:1-4 with Acts 1:1-2.
3. Luke, a Gentile physician, is mentioned as a companion of Paul in Col.
4:10-14, Philemon 24, and II Timothy 4:11. Luke is the only Gentile writer in
the NT.
4. The unanimous witness of the early church was that the author was Luke.
a. the Muratorian Fragment (a.d.
180-200 from Rome says, “complied by Luke the physician”)
b. the writings of Irenaeus (a.d.
130-200)
c. the writings of Clement of Alexandria (a.d.
156-215)
d. the writings of Tertullian (a.d.
160-200)
e. the writings of Origen (a.d.
185-254)
5. The internal evidence of style and vocabulary (especially medical terms)
confirms Luke as author (Sir William Ramsay and Adolph Von Harnack.
B. We have three sources of information about Luke.
1. The three passages in the NT (Col. 4:10-4; Philemon 24; II Tim. 4:11) and
the book of Acts itself.
2. The second century Anti-Marcion prologue to Luke (a.d.
160-180)
3. The early church historian of the fourth century, Eusebius, in his
Ecclesiastical History, 3:4, says “Luke, by race, a native of Antioch, and
by profession, a physician, having associated mainly with Paul and having
companioned with the rest of the apostles less closely, has left us examples of
that healing of souls which he acquired from them in two inspired books, The
Gospel and The Acts of the Apostles.”
4. This is a composite profile of Luke.
a. a Gentile (listed in Col. 4:12-14 with Epaphras and Demas, not with the
Jewish helpers)
b. from either Antioch of Syria (Anti-Marcion prologue to Luke) or Philippi
of Macedonia (Sir William Ramsay on Acts 16:19)
c. a physician (cf. Col. 4:14), or at least a well educated man
d. became a convert in middle adulthood after the church was started at
Antioch (Anti-Marcion prologue)
e. Paul’s traveling companion (“we” sections of Acts)
f. unmarried
g. wrote the third Gospel and Acts (similar introductions and similar style
and vocabulary)
h. died at the age of 84 at Boeotia
C. Challenges to Luke’s authorship
1. Paul’s preaching on Mars Hill in Athens uses Greek philosophical
categories and terms to form a common ground (cf. Acts 17), but Paul, in Romans
1-2, seems to regard any “common ground” (nature, inner moral witness) as
futile.
2. Paul’s preaching and comments in Acts depict him as a Jewish Christian who
takes Moses seriously, but Paul’s letters depreciate the Law as problematic and
passing away.
3. Paul’s preaching in Acts does not have the eschatological focus that his
early books do (i.e., I and II Thessalonians).
4. This contrasting of terms, styles, and emphasis is interesting, but not
conclusive. When the same criteria are applied to the Gospels, the Jesus of the
Synoptics speaks very differently than the Jesus of John. Yet, very few scholars
would deny that both reflect the life of Jesus.
D. When discussing authorship of Acts it is crucial that we discuss Luke’s
sources because many scholars (e.g., C. C. Torrey, ) believe Luke used Aramaic
source documents (or oral traditions) for many of the first fifteen chapters. If
this is true, Luke is an editor of this material, not an author. Even in the
later sermons of Paul, Luke only gives us a summary of Paul’s words, not
verbatim accounts. Luke’s use of sources is as crucial a question as his
authorship of the book.
DATE
A. There is much discussion and disagreement as to the time of the writing of
Acts, but the events themselves cover from about
a.d. 30-63 (Paul was released from prison in Rome in the middle 60’s and
rearrested and executed under Nero, probably in the persecutions of a.d. 65).
B. If one assumes the apologetic nature of the book concerning the Roman
government, then a date (1) before
a.d. 64 (the beginning of Nero’s
persecution of Christians in Rome) and/or (2) related to the Jewish revolt of
a.d. 66-73.
C. If one tries to relate Acts to Luke’s Gospel in sequence, then the date
for the writing of the Gospel influences the date of the writing of Acts. Since
the fall of Jerusalem to Titus in a.d. 70 is prophesied (i.e., Luke 21), but not
described, seems to demand a date before
a.d. 70. If so, then Acts, written as a sequel, must be dated sometime
after the Gospel.
D. If one is bothered by the abrupt ending (Paul still in prison in Rome, F.
F. Bruce), then a date related to the end of Paul’s first Roman imprisonment,
a.d. 58-63, is favored.
E. Some historical dates related to the historical events recorded in Acts.
1. widespread famine under Claudius (Acts 11:28, a.d. 44-48)
2. death of Herod Agrippa I (Acts 12:20-23,
a.d. 44 [spring])
3. proconsulship of Sergius Paulus (Acts 13:7, appointed in
a.d.
53)
4. expulsion of Jews from Rome by Claudius (Acts 18:2,
a.d. 49 [?])
5. proconsulship of Gallio, Acts 18:12
(a.d. 51 or 52 [?])
6. proconsulship of Felix (Acts 23:26; 24:27,
a.d. 52-56 [?])
7. replacement of Felix by Festus (Acts 24:27,
a.d. 57-60 [?])
8. Judea’s Roman officials
a. Procurators
(1) Pontius Pilate, a.d. 26-36
(2) Marcellus, a.d. 36-37
(3) Marullus, a.d. 37-41
b. In a.d. 41 the procuratorial
method of Roman administration was changed to an empirical model. The Roman
Emperor, Claudius, appointed Herod Agrippa I in a.d. 41.
c. After the death of Herod Agrippa I,
a.d. 44, the procurator method was reestablished until
a.d. 66
(1) Antonius Felix
(2) Porcius Festus
PURPOSE AND STRUCTURE
A. One purpose of the book of Acts was to document the rapid growth of the
followers of Jesus from Jewish roots to worldwide ministry, from the locked
upper room to the palace of Caesar:
1. This geographical pattern follows Acts 1:8, which is Acts’ Great
Commission (Matt. 28:19-20).
2. This geographical expansion is expressed in several ways.
a. Using major cities and national boundaries. In Acts there are 32
countries, 54 cities and 9 Mediterranean islands mentioned. The three major
cities are Jerusalem, Antioch, and Rome (cf. Acts 9:15).
b. Using key persons. Acts can almost be divided into two halves: the
ministries of Peter and Paul. There are over 95 people mentioned in Acts, but
the major ones are: Peter,
Stephen, Philip, Barnabas, James and
Paul.
c. There are two or three literary forms which appear repeatedly in Acts
which seem to reflect the author’s conscious attempt at structure:
| (1) | summary statements | (2) | statements of growth | (3) | use of numbers |
|
|
1:1 – 6:7 (in Jerusalem) 6:8 – 9:31 (in Palestine) 9:32 – 12:24 (to Antioch) 12:25 – 15:5 (to Asia Minor) 16:6 – 19:20 (to Greece) 19:21 – 28:31 (to Rome)
|
2:47 5:14 6:7 9:31 12:24 16:5 19:20
|
2:41 4:4 5:14 6:7 9:31 11:21, 24 12:24 14:1 19:20 |
B. Acts is obviously related to the misunderstanding that surrounded the
death of Jesus for treason. Apparently, Luke is writing to Gentiles (Theophilus,
possibly a Roman official). He uses (1) the speeches of Peter, Stephen, and Paul
to show the scheming of the Jews and (2) the positiveness of Roman governmental
officials toward Christianity. The Romans had nothing to fear from the followers
of Jesus.
1. speeches of Christian leaders
a. Peter, 2:14-40; 3:12-26; 4:8-12; 10:34-43
b. Stephen, 7:1-53
c. Paul, 13:10-42; 17:22-31; 20:17-25; 21:40-22:21; 23:1-6; 24:10-21; 26:1-29
2. contacts with governmental officials
a. Pontius Pilate, Luke 23:13-25
b. Sergius Paulus, Acts 13:7,12
c. chief magistrates of Philippi, Acts 16:35-40
d. Gallio, Acts 18:12-17
e. Asiarchs of Ephesus, Acts 19:23-41 (esp. v. 31)
f. Claudius Lysias, Acts 23:29
g. Felix, Acts 24
h. Porcius Festus, Acts 24
i. Agrippa II, Acts 26 (esp. v. 32)
j. Publius, Acts 28:7-10
3. When one compares Peter’s sermons with Paul’s it is obvious that Paul is
not an innovator, but a faithful proclaimer of apostolic, gospel truths. If
anyone copies anyone, then it is Peter (cf. I Peter) who uses Paul’s phrases and
vocabulary. The kerygma is unified!
C. Luke not only defended Christianity before the Roman government, but he
also defended Paul before the Gentile church. Paul was repeatedly attacked by
Jewish groups (Judaizers of Galatians, the “super apostles” of II Corinthians
10-13); and Hellenistic groups (Gnosticism of Colossians and Ephesians). Luke
shows Paul’s normalcy by clearly revealing his heart and theology in his travels
and sermons.
D. Although Acts was not intended to be a doctrinal book, it does record for
us the elements of the early Apostles’ preaching which C. H. Dodd has called
“the Kerygma” (essential truths about Jesus). This helps us see what they
felt were the essentials of the gospel, especially as they relate to Jesus’
death and resurrection.
SPECIAL TOPIC: THE
KERYGMA OF THE EARLY CHURCH
E. Frank Stagg in his commentary, The Book of Acts, the Early Struggle for
an Unhindered Gospel, asserts the purpose is primarily the movement of the
message about Jesus (the gospel) from a strictly nationalistic Judaism to a
universal message for all humans. Stagg’s commentary focuses on Luke’s
purpose(s) in writing Acts. A good summary and analysis of the different
theories is found on pp. 1-18. Stagg chooses to focus on the term “unhindered”
in 28:31, which is an unusual way to end a book, as the key to understanding
Luke’s emphasis on the spread of Christianity overcoming all barriers.
F. Although the Holy Spirit is mentioned more than fifty times in Acts, it is
not “the Acts of the Holy Spirit.” There are eleven chapters where the Spirit is
never mentioned. He is mentioned most often in the first half of Acts, where
Luke is quoting other sources (possibly originally written in Aramaic). Acts is not to the Spirit what the Gospels are to
Jesus! This is not meant to depreciate the Spirit’s place, but to guard us from
building a theology of the Spirit primarily or exclusively from Acts.
G. Acts is not designed to teach doctrine (cf. Fee and Stuart, How to Read
the Bible For All Its Worth, pp. 94-112). An example of this would be the
attempt to base a theology of conversion from Acts which is doomed to failure.
The order and elements of conversion differ in Acts; therefore, which pattern is
normative? We must look to the Epistles for doctrinal help.
However, it is interesting that some scholars (Hans Conzelmann) have seen
Luke purposefully reorienting the imminent eschatologies of the first century
with a patient service approach to the delayed Parousia. The kingdom is
here in power now, changing lives. The church functioning now becomes the focus,
not an eschatological hope.
H. Another possible purpose of Acts is similar to Rom. 9-11: why did the Jews
reject the Jewish Messiah and the church become mostly Gentile? Several places
in Acts the worldwide nature of the gospel is clearly trumpeted. Jesus sends
them into all the world (cf. 1:8). Jews reject Him, but Gentiles respond to Him.
His message reaches Rome.
It is possible that Luke’s purpose is to show that Jewish Christianity
(Peter) and Gentile Christianity (Paul) can live together and grow together!
They are not in competition, but joined in world evangelization.
I. As far as purpose is concerned I agree with F. F. Bruce (New
International Commentary, p. 18) that since Luke and Acts were originally
one volume, the prologue for Luke (1:1-4) functions also as the prologue for
Acts. Luke, though not an eyewitness to all the events, carefully researched
them and recorded them accurately, using his own historical, literary,
theological framework.
Luke then, in both his Gospel and narrative, wants to show the historical
reality and theological trustworthiness (cf. Luke 1:4) of Jesus and the church.
It may be that the focus of Acts is the theme of fulfillment (unhindered, cf.
28:31, where it is the last word of the book). This theme is carried forward by
several different words and phrases (cf. Walter L. Liefeld, Interpreting the
Book of Acts, pp. 23-24). The Gospel is not an afterthought, a plan B, or a
new thing. It is God’s predetermined plan (cf. Acts 2:23; 3:18; 4:28; 13:29).
GENRE
A. Acts is to the NT what Joshua through II Kings is to the OT: Historical
Narrative (see Appendix Three). Biblical historical narrative is factual, but
the focus is not on chronology or exhaustive recording of event. It selects
certain events which explain who God is, who we are, how we are made right with
God, how God wants us to live.
B. The problem in interpreting biblical narrative is that the authors never
put in the text (1) what their purpose is, (2) what the main truth is, or (3)
how we should emulate the things recorded. The reader needs to think through the
following questions:
1. Why was the event recorded?
2. How does it relate to previous biblical material?
3. What is the central theological truth?
4. Is there significance to the literary context? (What event precedes or
follows? Has this subject been dealt with elsewhere?)
5. How large is the literary context? (Sometimes large amounts of narrative
form one theological theme or purpose.)
C. Historical narrative should not be the only source of doctrine. Often
things are recorded that are incidental to the purpose of the author. Historical
narrative can illustrate truths recorded elsewhere in the Bible. Just because
something happened does not mean it is God’s will for all believers in all ages
(e.g., suicide, polygamy, holy war, handling snakes, etc.).
D. The best brief discussion of how to interpret historical narrative is in
Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart’s How to Read the Bible For All Its Worth,
pp. 78-93 and 94-112.
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF HISTORICAL SETTING
New books on placing Acts in its first century setting have been produced by
classicists. This inter-disciplinary approach has truly helped the understanding
of the NT. The series is edited by Bruce M. Minter.
A. The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting
B. The Book of Acts in Its Graeco-Roman Setting
C. The Book of Acts and Paul in Roman Custody
D. The Book of the Acts in Its Palestinian Setting
E. The Book of Acts in Its Diaspora Setting
F. The Book of Acts in Its Theological Setting
Also very helpful are
1. A. N. Sherwin-White, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament
2. Paul Barnett, Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity
3. James S. Jeffers, The Greco-Roman World
READING CYCLE ONE (from “A
Guide to Good Bible Reading“)
This is a study guide commentary, which means that you are
responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in
the light we have. You, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are priority in
interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.
Read the entire biblical book at one sitting. State the central theme of the
entire book in your own words.
1. Theme of entire book
2. Type of literature (genre)
READING CYCLE TWO (from “A
Guide to Good Bible Reading“)
This is a study guide commentary, which means that you are
responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in
the light we have. You, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are priority in
interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.
Read the entire biblical book a second time at one sitting. Outline the main
subjects and express the subject in a single sentence.
1. Subject of first literary unit
2. Subject of second literary unit
3. Subject of third literary unit
4. Subject of fourth literary unit
5. Etc.
Copyright © 2012
Bible Lessons International