Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

Acts (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament)
Acts (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament)
Acts (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament)
Ebook1,793 pages25 hours

Acts (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament)

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

3.5/5

()

Read preview

About this ebook

Respected New Testament scholar Darrell L. Bock provides a substantive yet highly accessible commentary on Acts in this latest addition to the acclaimed BECNT series. With extensive research and thoughtful chapter-by-chapter exegesis, Bock leads readers through all aspects of the book of Acts--sociological, historical, and theological. His work blends academic depth with readability, making it a useful tool for students, teachers, scholars, and pastors alike. A user-friendly design with shaded text and translations of the Greek text make this commentary engaging and easy to use.

The result is a guide that clearly and meaningfully brings this important New Testament book to life for contemporary readers.
LanguageEnglish
Release dateOct 1, 2007
ISBN9781441200266
Acts (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament)
Author

Darrell L. Bock

Darrell L. Bock (PhD, University of Aberdeen) is senior research professor of New Testament studies and Executive Director for Cultural Engagement at Dallas Theological Seminary. Known for his work in Luke-Acts, Dr. Bock is a Humboldt Scholar (Tubingen University in Germany), is on the editorial board for Christianity Today, and a past president of the Evangelical Theological Society (2000-2001). A New York Times bestselling author, Bock has written over forty books, including Luke in the NIV Application Commentary series.  

Read more from Darrell L. Bock

Related to Acts (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament)

Related ebooks

Christianity For You

View More

Related articles

Reviews for Acts (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament)

Rating: 3.73999994 out of 5 stars
3.5/5

25 ratings1 review

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    A readable but forgettable commentary. Jaroslav Pelikan brings an awareness of the first few centuries of Christian theological development to the reading of Acts, which is not uninteresting. The result is a discovery of subsequent controversies and questions still in infancy and an early church just as confusing, contradictory, but in many ways laudable and courageous as the church of any era. Of special note are his sections on the uncreated light and the "gospel of the forty days."

Book preview

Acts (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament) - Darrell L. Bock

BAKER EXEGETICAL COMMENTARY
ON THE NEW TESTAMENT
ROBERT W. YARBROUGH
and JOSHUA W. JIPP, EDITORS
Volumes now available:
Matthew   David L. Turner
Mark   Robert H. Stein
Luke   Darrell L. Bock
Acts   Darrell L. Bock
Romans, 2nd ed.   Thomas R. Schreiner
1 Corinthians   David E. Garland
2 Corinthians   George H. Guthrie
Galatians   Douglas J. Moo
Ephesians   Frank Thielman
Philippians   Moisés Silva
Colossians and Philemon   G. K. Beale
1–2 Thessalonians   Jeffrey A. D. Weima
James   Dan G. McCartney
1 Peter   Karen H. Jobes
1–3 John   Robert W. Yarbrough
Jude and 2 Peter   Gene L. Green
Revelation   Grant R. Osborne

***

Darrell L. Bock (PhD, University of Aberdeen) is executive director for cultural engagement at the Hendricks Center at Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas, Texas, where he also serves as senior research professor of New Testament studies. He is the author or editor of many books, including Jesus the God-Man, Jesus according to Scripture, Studying the Historical Jesus, and major commentaries on Luke and Acts.

©2007 by Darrell L. Bock

Published by Baker Academic

a division of Baker Publishing Group

P.O. Box 6287, Grand Rapids, MI 49516-6287

www.bakeracademic.com

Ebook edition created 2012

Ebook corrections 04.06.2018, 07.25.2019, 06.09.2021, 04.05.2023

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—for example, electronic, photocopy, recording—without the prior written permission of the publisher. The only exception is brief quotations in printed reviews.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is on file at the Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

ISBN 978-1-4412-0026-6

Baker Publishing Group publications use paper produced from sustainable forestry practices and post-consumer waste whenever possible.

To my colleagues at Dallas Theological Seminary,

Talbot Theological Seminary, Tyndale House, Bengelhaus,

and the universities of Aberdeen and Tübingen for their friendship,

fellowship, encouragement, and instruction

And, most especially, to Sally Bock, whose life defines faithfulness

Contents

Cover

Half Title Page

Series Page

Title Page

Copyright Page

Dedication

Series Preface

Author’s Preface

Abbreviations

Transliteration

Map

Introduction to Acts

I. Introduction: Jesus Ascends to the Father and Gives a Mission (1:1–11)

A. Review of Book 1 to the Ascension (1:1–5)

B. The Ascension and Final Testament: A Promise for the Disciples Now and a Promise to Return (1:6–11)

II. The Early Church in Jerusalem (1:12–6:7)

A. Community Life: Replacing Judas by Depending on God and Reconstituting the Twelve (1:12–26)

B. Pentecost (2:1–41)

C. Summary: Community Life (2:42–47)

D. The Healing of the Lame Man and the Arrest of Peter and John (3:1–4:31)

E. Community Life and Problems (4:32–5:11)

F. Summary: Signs and Wonders (5:12–16)

G. More Persecution (5:17–42)

H. Community Life: The Appointment of the Seven to Help Hellenist Widows (6:1–6)

I. Summary of the Jerusalem Community (6:7)

III. Persecution in Jerusalem Moves the Message to Judea and Samaria as a New Witness Emerges (6:8–9:31)

A. The Arrest, Speech, and Martyrdom of Stephen (6:8–8:1a)

B. Saul the Persecutor and the Spread of the Word (8:1b–4)

C. Philip in Samaria and with a Eunuch from Ethiopia (8:5–40)

D. The Conversion and Early Reception of Saul (9:1–30)

E. Closing Summary (9:31)

IV. The Gospel to the Gentiles and More Persecution in Jerusalem (9:32–12:25)

A. Peter Performs Two Miracles at Lydda and Joppa (9:32–43)

B. Peter and Cornelius: The Gospel to the Gentiles (10:1–11:18)

C. The Church at Antioch: Barnabas, Saul, and Agabus (11:19–30)

D. Persecution in Jerusalem (12:1–23)

E. Summary (12:24–25)

V. The Mission from Antioch and the Full Incorporation of Gentiles (13:1–15:35)

A. The First Missionary Journey (13:1–14:28)

B. Consultation at Jerusalem (15:1–35)

VI. The Second and Third Missionary Journeys: Expansion to Greece and Consolidation amid Opposition (15:36–21:16)

A. The Second Missionary Journey (15:36–18:23)

B. The Third Missionary Journey, Ending in Jerusalem (18:24–21:16)

VII. The Arrest: The Message Is Defended and Reaches Rome (21:17–28:31)

A. In Jerusalem (21:17–23:35)

B. In Caesarea (24:1–26:32)

C. The Long Sea Journey to Rome (27:1–28:16)

D. Visitors in Rome: The Gospel Preached (28:17–31)

Works Cited

Index of Subjects

Index of Authors

Index of Greek Words

Index of Scripture and Other Ancient Writings

Notes

Back Cover

Series Preface

The chief concern of the Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (BECNT) is to provide, within the framework of informed evangelical thought, commentaries that blend scholarly depth with readability, exegetical detail with sensitivity to the whole, and attention to critical problems with theological awareness. We hope thereby to attract the interest of a fairly wide audience, from the scholar who is looking for a thoughtful and independent examination of the text to the motivated lay Christian who craves a solid but accessible exposition.

Nevertheless, a major purpose is to address the needs of pastors and others involved in the preaching and exposition of the Scriptures as the uniquely inspired word of God. This consideration affects directly the parameters of the series. For example, serious biblical expositors cannot afford to depend on a superficial treatment that avoids the difficult questions, but neither are they interested in encyclopedic commentaries that seek to cover every conceivable issue that may arise. Our aim therefore is to focus on problems that have a direct bearing on the meaning of the text (although selected technical details are treated in the additional notes).

Similarly, a special effort is made to avoid treating exegetical questions for their own sake, that is, in relative isolation from the thrust of the argument as a whole. This effort may involve (at the discretion of the individual contributors) abandoning the verse-by-verse approach in favor of an exposition that focuses on the paragraph as the main unit of thought. In all cases, however, the commentaries stress the development of the argument and explicitly relate each passage to what precedes and follows it so as to identify its function in context as clearly as possible.

We believe, moreover, that a responsible exegetical commentary must take fully into account the latest scholarly research, regardless of its source. The attempt to do this in the context of a conservative theological tradition presents certain challenges, and in the past the results have not always been commendable. In some cases, evangelicals appear to make use of critical scholarship not for the purpose of genuine interaction but only to dismiss it. In other cases, the interaction glides over into assimilation, theological distinctives are ignored or suppressed, and the end product cannot be differentiated from works that arise from a fundamentally different starting point.

The contributors to this series attempt to avoid these pitfalls. On one hand, they do not consider traditional opinions to be sacrosanct, and they are certainly committed to doing justice to the biblical text whether or not it supports such opinions. On the other hand, they will not quickly abandon a long-standing view, if there is persuasive evidence to support it, for the sake of fashionable theories. What is more important, the contributors share a belief in the trustworthiness and essential unity of Scripture. They also consider that the historic formulations of Christian doctrine, such as the ecumenical creeds and many of the documents originating in the sixteenth-century Reformation, arose from a legitimate reading of Scripture, thus providing a proper framework for its further interpretation. No doubt, the use of such a starting point sometimes results in the imposition of a foreign construct on the text, but we deny that it must necessarily do so or that the writers who claim to approach the text without prejudices are invulnerable to the same danger.

Accordingly, we do not consider theological assumptions—from which, in any case, no commentator is free—to be obstacles to biblical interpretation. On the contrary, an exegete who hopes to understand the apostle Paul in a theological vacuum might just as easily try to interpret Aristotle without regard for the philosophical framework of his whole work or without having recourse to the subsequent philosophical categories that make possible a meaningful contextualization of his thought. It must be emphasized, however, that the contributors to the present series come from a variety of theological traditions and that they do not all have identical views with regard to the proper implementation of these general principles. In the end, all that really matters is whether the series succeeds in representing the original text accurately, clearly, and meaningfully to the contemporary reader.

Shading has been used to assist the reader in locating the introductory comments for each section. Textual variants in the Greek text are signaled in the author’s translation by means of half-brackets around the relevant word or phrase (e.g., ⌜Gerasenes⌝), thereby alerting the reader to turn to the additional notes at the end of each exegetical unit for a discussion of the textual problem. The documentation uses the author-date method, in which the basic reference consists of author’s surname + year + page number(s): Fitzmyer 1992: 58. The only exceptions to this system are well-known reference works (e.g., BDAG, LSJ, TDNT). Full publication data and a complete set of indexes can be found at the end of the volume.

Robert Yarbrough

Robert H. Stein

Author’s Preface

This work represents the completion of a commitment made in the early 1980s to produce a commentary on both Luke and Acts. There were times when I wondered if I was crazy to agree to this. On the one hand, there are many excellent commentaries on both books, although there were fewer when I originally agreed to do both books. Second, the life of Jesus and the issues raised by Acts are two very distinct areas of NT studies, each representing its own specialty and having a unique literature. One could say, like the old chewing-gum commercial, Double your pleasure, double your fun, but I often sensed that I had doubled the bibliography and the issues to tackle. Nonetheless, what I have learned in this study and tried to convey has been richly rewarding. The examples of these first saints have much to teach us today.

I took on this assignment at the time because no one recently had written a major commentary on both works and because Luke-Acts is the product of one author telling one story in two volumes. That Luke-Acts was a single work had been little appreciated in the way commentaries handled both works. Luke’s innovation needed a careful treatment, especially from an evangelical perspective. So much skepticism had mounted around both Jesus and the earliest church in twentieth-century NT study that a fresh look at these two works was needed. Since the time of that commitment, two authors, Joseph Fitzmyer and Luke Timothy Johnson, have produced an excellent set of critical commentaries on Luke-Acts. Fitzmyer brings a superb understanding of the first-century context to his work, and Johnson knows the Greco-Roman context and the literary themes that enlighten the work. Still, my sense is that issues of importance about the nature of our text, what it can teach the church today, and certain historical issues still needed work. So I offer this commentary, well aware that there is much more that could be said. There comes a time, however, when a commentator must decide that his labor is sufficient to serve the reader well. That is my prayer, especially for those who preach Luke-Acts, rich as it is with history, theology, and pastoral concern for the identity of Christianity and the Christian message.

I owe special thanks to many who encouraged the development of this commentary. Professor Doctor Martin Hengel of the University of Tübingen hosted me on a 2004–5 Humboldt Stiftung scholarship, which allowed me to complete this work. It was my third opportunity to spend a year in a place that has become a second Heimat. Our numerous conversations about the early church and its history, held in his home, provided a wealth of insight and wisdom for which I am grateful. The administration and the Department of New Testament at Dallas Theological Seminary afforded me a sabbatical leave and allowed me to function as a research professor so that I was free for this work. Brittany Burnette performed an admirable task as research assistant and conversation partner, as did Stratton Ladewig and John Edwards. My editors at Baker Academic deserve praise for the thoroughness of their work: Jim Kinney, Wells Turner, and series editor Robert Yarbrough. Finally, my wife, Sally, with whom I will celebrate thirty years of marriage this year, has had to live with this project for most of our married life. Our last child went to college two years ago, but in many ways our nest has not been empty because of this work. Yet she also faithfully looked at all the material so that I could be sure I had written in such a way that someone without excessive training could benefit. For such faithfulness I dedicate this work to her, for she has borne the greatest sacrifice with the highest level of grace.

I complete this work on the sixtieth anniversary of the freeing of the prisoners of Auschwitz, effectively ending the Holocaust. As one of Jewish descent, this has special meaning for me. No act against humanity shows the searing reality of sin within us as much as this event from our own recent past. Acts is a story about God’s work of love in Jesus to liberate us from what is so destructive for all of us. If this commentary helps give but a glimpse of the great light that Jesus brought to the world, which was experienced by his followers, then my intentions will be met. I have written for both the scholar and the pastor, as well as for the student of Acts, but more than that, I have written in the hope that the gospel, which is so powerfully described and presented in this biblical book, will become more real for those who study Acts.

January 27, 2005

Tübingen, Germany

Abbreviations

Bibliographic and General
Hebrew Bible
Greek Testament
Josephus
Philo
Other Jewish and Christian Writings
Rabbinic Tractates

The abbreviations below are used for the names of the tractates in the Babylonian Talmud (indicated by a prefixed b.); Palestinian, or Jerusalem, Talmud (y.); Mishnah (m.); and Tosefta (t.).

Qumran / Dead Sea Scrolls
Classical Writers

Transliteration

Greek

Notes on the Transliteration of Greek

Accents, lenis (smooth breathing), and iota subscript are not shown in transliteration.

The transliteration of asper (rough breathing) precedes a vowel or diphthong (e.g., ἁ = ha; αἱ = hai) and follows ρ (i.e., ῥ = rh).

Gamma is transliterated n only when it precedes γ, κ, ξ, or χ.

Upsilon is transliterated u only when it is part of a diphthong (i.e., αυ, ευ, ου, υι).

Hebrew

Notes on the Transliteration of Hebrew

Accents are not shown in transliteration.

Silent šĕwāʾ is not indicated in transliteration.

The spirant forms ת פ כ ד ג ב are usually not specially indicated in transliteration.

Dāgeš forte is indicated by doubling the consonant. Euphonic dāgeš and dāgeš lene are not indicated in transliteration.

Maqqēp is represented by a hyphen.

Introduction to Acts

This introduction makes no claim to be comprehensive. It introduces the discussion of issues associated with Acts that the commentary will treat in more detail. It thus helps these general issues not to get lost in the details that will often emerge later. At the same time, it points the way to more comprehensive examination of the issues.

Genre and Overview

The Title of the Book, Relationship to Luke’s Gospel, and Genre

The title Acts of the Apostles (ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ, Praxeis Apostolōn) appears in 𝔓74 (the title here is at the end of the book, not the beginning), א, B, D (with the singular Act, likely due to itacism),1 and Ψ. These are MSS from the fourth to ninth centuries. Manuscript 1175 has only Acts as the title. Other MSS, such as 33, 189, 1891, and 2344, mention Luke the evangelist in a longer version of the title (Luke the evangelist’s Acts of the Holy Apostles). Latin versions possess similar titles. Most likely none of these titles was originally part of the book; they probably emerged in the late first or early second century.2 The fathers and lists of the second and third centuries confirm the use of such titles.3 In addition, Tertullian also called the book a commentary of Luke (On Fasting 10), and Irenaeus (Ag. Her. 3.13.3) speaks of the testimony of Luke regarding the apostles. The variations show that by the end of the second century there were many ways to identify this book of Luke.

In Hellenistic writing, the genre of acts normally recounts the deeds of a single great individual, such as Alexander the Great (Diodorus Siculus, Library of History 17.15; 18.1.6) or Augustus (Res gestae divi Augusti), but sometimes it covers a group, such as Acts of the Early Kings (Diodorus Siculus, Library of History 3.1.1; Wikenhauser 1921: 94–104; Talbert 1997: 7; Fitzmyer 1998: 47–48). Such acts often were designed to present the hero as a kind of divine man or at least a man sent from God. This genre normally details the hero’s acts, including miracles and anecdotes. It is likely that the title Acts of the Apostles was intended to highlight that the characters God uses in Acts are to be seen as sent from God. Acts, however, is less focused on individuals than it is on the selective presentation of the growth of the community and its message. The book moves from locale to locale as God directs, starting in Jerusalem and culminating in the travels of Paul to Rome. In fact, the key character in Acts is God, his activity, and his plan.

The work does follow many of the basic rules of Hellenistic histories. Van Unnik (1979: 37–60) identifies two key characteristics of such histories: political understanding and power of expression, and he lists ten rules of such writing, most of which Luke follows.4

The title highlights the role of witnesses in the book, but the apostolic band is not the central character of Acts. Rather, God’s activity stands at the core of the account. Acts narrates God’s work in establishing the church through Jesus’s activity. Both Jews and Gentiles make up the church, the new people and community of Jesus. The work of Jesus and the establishment of this community of the Spirit represent the initial fulfillment of God’s promises (Schneider 1980: 73; Roloff 1988: 2).5 Furthermore, only some of the Twelve are highlighted: Peter and John are prominent in this group, but other key players in Acts are not part of the Twelve. These include Stephen, Philip, Paul, and James. Paul is called apostle in only one scene in Acts (14:4, 14) and this is when he appears with Barnabas. Others wish to highlight the Holy Spirit as key, but the Spirit’s work is under God’s sovereign direction and that of Jesus, the one mediating the Spirit’s distribution (Acts 2:32–36; discussed in Gaebelein 1912: 8; Ehrhardt 1958: 67, gospel of the Holy Spirit; Bruce 1990: 21–22).

In sum, Acts is a sociological, historical, and theological work explaining the roots of this new community, as a sequel to Luke’s story of Jesus portrayed in his Gospel.6 It is not part of the genre of acts in the Greco-Roman sense; it is, rather, a historical monograph in the ancient sense of the term (Hengel 1979: 13–14, 36; Sterling 1992; Witherington 1998: 2–39). This classification also rejects the idea that the appropriate genre for this material is ancient epic (pace Bonz 2000). Acts lacks the poetic nature of such works, is concerned with the church’s relationship to Israel more than to Rome, and gives evidence, where we can check Luke’s work, of being in touch with historical detail rather than being as creative with such detail as the epic classification suggests (Hemer 1989; see the introduction to 16:11–40 and comments on 16:16–40 where Paul’s trials are discussed).

Our careful attention to such background will reveal that Luke is a historian in the ancient mold, whose historiography is rooted more in Jewish models than in Greco-Roman ones. Acts is, however, not a full treatment of origins but quite a selective one, highlighting themes and parallels Luke wants the reader to appreciate. That it does not fill in the gaps distinguishes it from later apocryphal Acts and speaks to its authenticity (Hengel and Schwemer 1997: 106, 385n554). Luke reveals the selective nature of his treatment as he tells his story. For example, he does not give us the origin of every community he treats, even important ones such as Antioch and Rome. As I noted in the commentary on Luke’s Gospel (Bock 1994a: 52), precedents for such a story of God’s work among his people are the various works about the Maccabean period (1–2 Maccabees). Acts, however, is a unique account of the origins of God’s new community and is best understood as a part of the two volumes Luke composed. Luke was innovative in creating this account of how God worked to bring about a new era and community (Roloff 1988: 1). Nothing indicates the sequel nature of the work more clearly than the reference to the first account in Acts 1:1, looking back to Luke’s Gospel. The linkage between the works is further reinforced by the overlapping accounts of Jesus’s ascension at the end of Luke and the beginning of Acts.

An Aside on Philosophy of History and Recent Study of Acts

It has become popular in our postmodern age to define history itself as a construct and a type of fictive act. Marguerat (2002: 5–7) says that historiography should not be regarded as descriptive, but rather (re)constructive.7 By this he means that histories are facts interpreted. Marguerat (2002: 8–13) utilizes Ricoeur’s distinctions between documentary history, which looks at facts; explicative history, which looks at events from a social, economic, and political viewpoint; and poetic history, which is rooted in founding myths and interprets the past to give a community its sense of identity. For Marguerat, the fact that God is so active in the account makes Acts poetic history in many of its sections, rather than reflecting the other two categories. He observes that although Acts includes all the types of history, God’s activity makes key sections poetic in thrust. There is a major worldview and definitional problem here. How does one treat Jesus’s appearance to Paul—as metaphorical and poetic or as a real documentary event? If it is a documentary event, then why are other similar events in Acts moved into this poetic category? What is one to do with the myriad scenes in Acts where God is the reason events take place? Does the description poetic really suffice? Such a move risks becoming a worldview, a metaphorical catchall category to rule out God’s activity as historically out of bounds in terms of explicative social history. Acts becomes secularized before a page is read or an event is narrated. A key call is being made before the game even begins.

The plurality of interpretations one can give to events affects the way history is viewed. One should be careful, however, not to go too far in making this point. The recent work of Shauf (2005: 66–84) goes in an exaggerated direction. Shauf sidesteps the historicity question by defining historiography as imaginative narration simply because the historian assembles a narrative from already limited resources, which themselves are socially constructed as well as tied to what the author himself may see (2005: 66–75). This type of philosophical reading of history is becoming popular in our postmodern world. It gives history and historiography a linguistic spin (Clark 2005).

Clark’s work, which is an excellent historical-philosophical overview of historiographic discussion, endorses this tendency and is quite skeptical about the historical accuracy of ancient works. She says of the historical critic, The critic’s task, then, is to show how ‘seemingly politically innocent objects, forms of subjectivity, actions, and events’ are the effects of power and authority, that is, the task to denaturalize and rehistoricize what ideology has produced. By an Althusserian symptomatic reading, the critic looks at gaps and absences in the text, reads what in effect is ‘illegible,’ and notes how the answers given by a writer do not answer the questions posed (Clark 2005: 176). This type of ideological deconstruction also itself needs deconstructing, since it often fails to show that the author does not, in fact, answer the question raised. Often an ancient author gives an answer that deftly moves from the initial question to a more comprehensive but appropriate response. The reading of the deconstructionist turns out to be culturally superficial and illiterate. We shall have occasion to see this move missed regularly in the skepticism with which Haenchen and others read Acts. They argue that Luke fails to address either the questions or the charges the text raises. We shall see just as often that this skeptical reading of Luke often badly misreads the text, undercutting the method’s claim to credibility. Even more, Luke does not write from a position of power and authority, since the church of the first century did not have a powerful social position in the ancient world. Luke’s appeal to God makes a claim of power but only because Luke was convinced God had really acted in history. It seems clear that Luke’s view of Paul’s experience and the autobiographical claims of Paul overlap here. Some concrete act transformed Saul into Paul, just as another concrete act provided justification for proclaiming a dead Galilean teacher, crucified for claiming to be a king, as Savior and Lord.

Such a philosophical and skeptical reading of history ignores the fact that certain events are intrinsically significant or may acquire multiple significances as they are tied to or properly associated with later events, so that this significance can be drawn in a variety of ways. That certain events are significant and transforming can be seen by the effects they generated, the expectations they created, or even the impression they initially conveyed. It is possible for ideology and historical data to be combined in a way that reflects an appropriate historical perspective. For example, was D-day merely a social construct, or was it not an inherently significant World War II event that generated initial impressions, expectations, and results? It is true that it could be viewed as a victory or as a defeat, depending on what side one was on, but no one can deny that it was a key event seen as potentially significant from its inception. One need only examine General Rommel’s initial reaction to the event to realize that events can and do have an inherent quality to them, especially when they are key events, and that aspects of those events can be read symbolically as reflecting an ultimate significance of such an event. In other words, it is a case not of poetry or history exclusively but of poetry plus history. Nor is the mere collection of events into a sequence that notes the events’ relationship and significance to other (often later) events a distortion of history if such connections exist or can be reasonably established. To see the founding of the United Nations as a product, among others, of events in World War II does not distort history.

Thus, although one should not deny that a historian can and does create relationships and can be creative (insightful?) in connecting events, this does not mean that such constructs misrepresent history. This historian’s perceptions are very much a part of what history is and how it works itself out. Historical insights can be particularly useful in showing us where history has gone or what might have driven it. One must distinguish between the idea that there is one interpretation of a given set of events (for there are surely more) and the idea that particular interpretations are very useful in pointing to what was hoped for or what resulted from a set of events. History may entail more than digging up brute facts, as recent historiography loves to point out, since these facts are interpreted, but some interpretations and points of view often do mirror what the events produced, enlightening and/or revealing the events’ later historical significance and role.

Nor should one read Acts and rule the role of its key player (God) out of bounds before Luke starts to string together the events and their circumstances in ways that point to God’s or Jesus’s presence and action. It is interesting to note that (1) classical historians respect Luke as a historian as they use him (Nobbs 2006) and that (2) a careful look at the details of Acts shows that, where we can check him, Luke is a credible historian (see the discussion of this theme in the introduction to Acts 16:11–40 as it relates to Paul’s trials). Here the work of Sherwin-White 1963; Hemer 1989; and the six-volume series launched by Winter and Clarke (1993) suggest that we should not be so skeptical about Luke. This also shows the crucial importance of doing careful work in backgrounds, especially Jewish and Greco-Roman sources. More NT scholars need to be better equipped in Second Temple Jewish study and classical literature. One must read Acts open to such a balanced view of its historical approach—in terms of its poetry, history, and cultural setting—as well as to the option of divine activity.

Overview of Acts

Acts is one of the longest books of the NT and contains 1,003 verses as compared to 1,151 in Luke and 1,071 in Matthew. It covers eighty-eight pages of the Nestle-Aland text, in comparison to Luke’s ninety-six pages and Matthew’s eighty-seven pages. Witherington (1998: 6) notes that Acts has 18,374 words as compared with Luke’s 19,404 words. Of the 5,436 hapax terms in the NT, 2,038 occur in Acts (Culy and Parsons 2003: xiii).

We have already noted that this work is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel. The Acts of the Apostles highlights God’s plan of salvation and how God established the new era that resulted from Jesus’s ministry, death, and resurrection. It explains how a seemingly new movement is actually rooted in ancient promises associated with Judaism and yet includes Gentiles.

As I noted in the Luke commentary (Bock 1994a: 1–4), four issues dominate these two volumes. (1) The issue of how salvation could claim to be related to the God of Israel and include Gentiles is a major burden of this second volume. How did this happen? What did God do to bring it about? This question is largely answered in Acts 2–11. (2) How could this movement claim to be the promise of God when the Jewish people remained so unresponsive? The Gospel is more concerned with this question than Acts is. In the sequel, this theme emerges as most Jews continue to reject the message, even as many Jews do come to faith. Another major subtheme here is how what started out as the natural extension and realization of Judaism came to develop its own structure, the church. (3) Key to all of this is Jesus’s role and function. Whereas Luke’s Gospel outlines his ministry, the book of Acts shows how the risen Lord continued to be active and how the new community preached Jesus as central to God’s plan. Whether we are looking at what Jesus realized in his ministry and resurrection (Acts 2:16–36) or what he will do when he returns (Acts 3:19–23), he is the Lord, who is seated at God’s right hand and appointed to be the judge of the living and the dead (Acts 10:40–42). (4) Finally, there is the story of various faithful witnesses who respond to Jesus in the face of opposition. Whether this theme concerns Peter and John, Stephen, Philip, Paul, or Barnabas, the book is filled with those sharing in the calling to take the message of fulfillment to the end of the earth. They serve as examples for those who carry out the mission of God.

The real center of the book, however, is God. At key junctures God enables, directs, protects, and orchestrates. Nothing shows this as much as the story of Paul, who comes to faith by Jesus’s direct intervention and is protected as he travels to Rome, despite shipwreck. It is no accident that in discussing God, we also cover the activity of Jesus and the Spirit he sends. Jesus mediates the Spirit, who in turn enables. The Spirit is sent as power from on high to lead the new community (Luke 24:49) and to empower its members as powerful witnesses to the events that eyewitnesses around Jesus saw and experienced (Acts 1:8; Bauckham 2006, esp. p. 390 with discussion of αὐτόπται [autoptai, eyewitnesses] in Luke 1:1). This sending of the Spirit is another link between the end of Luke and the beginning of Acts. The Spirit in particular is the spirit of enablement and testimony in Acts.

Most of the book is told from the perspective of certain locales and key figures. As Acts 1:8 suggests, it proceeds from Jerusalem into Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth. Peter dominates early as the new community gathers and grows in Jerusalem (Acts 1–5). The theological burden of the book is carried in this section by key speeches that dominate this unit. But others of Hellenistic Jewish background are also active, moving out from Jerusalem as the result of persecution. Stephen gives his life by testifying in Jerusalem, and Philip takes the gospel to Samaria in a prelude to the spread of the gospel to all people (Acts 7–8). Meanwhile, God is preparing another vessel to take God’s word out, as Saul is called to faith (Acts 9). A return of the focus to Peter allows him to bring the gospel to Gentiles at Caesarea (Acts 10:1–11:18). During that time, Acts also introduces more detail about an important community in Antioch (Acts 11:19–30). The pressure in Jerusalem is shown to be great when James, not the Lord’s brother, is slain and Peter is imprisoned (Acts 12). Still, God protects Peter there.

The scene then shifts to Antioch, a major community that launches the missionary travels of Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13–14). The issue of exactly how Gentiles should be included brings all the key players to Jerusalem for a council to decide the matter (Acts 15). More missionary travel for Paul follows, beginning from Antioch, with several of the famous churches being established or strengthened during this time. So we hear of communities in Philippi, Thessalonica, and Corinth as well as work in Athens (Acts 16:1–18:23). Paul’s third journey focuses on Ephesus, but then he returns to Jerusalem and is making a vow in the temple when he is arrested (Acts 18:24–21:36). Paul’s ministry in each case has a great impact, even though it also meets with stern opposition. The rest of the book is taken up with Paul’s journey to Rome (Acts 22–28). The major elements of this unit are Paul’s defense speeches, in which the position of the church relative to God’s promise again shows forth. The theme of divine protection closes the book: Paul experiences a shipwreck on the way to Rome, but he arrives safely and awaits his trial, eagerly sharing Jesus as Lord with all who will visit him.

Acts as Ancient Rhetorical History

We consider the literary genre of Acts before we turn to the question of authorship. As already suggested, Acts is a sociological, historical, and theological monograph with parallels in works such as the Maccabees. Jervell (1998: 76–79) calls it a history of God’s people. Comparisons to other ancient works must be made with qualifications, as we shall see. First, the nature of the work and its tradition base indicate that this is not an ancient novel or romance. Pervo’s claim (1987) that Acts is more like a novel represents a skeptical handling of the book at one end of the spectrum in the discussion of the work as history. In varying degrees, writers such as Dibelius, Conzelmann, Haenchen, and others treat Acts as having little historical value. The roots of this view go back to the old Tübingen school and F. C. Baur in the nineteenth century, with its portrait of Christianity in conflict and Luke as the mediator of the tension in Acts, trying to smooth over real differences between Peter and Paul.8 According to this view, Luke tries to present a more idealized picture of the church than what really existed. Even though the later date for Acts that this view implies has been abandoned, some of what this perspective argues for in terms of church tension is still retained by those who doubt the credibility of Acts. Through Dibelius (1956) this approach came to appeal also to form criticism (on the problems with form criticism, see Bauckham 2006: 241–52). In this view, Luke was more about theology than history, and the two were almost competing concerns (Marshall 1980: 34–36). Nothing exemplifies this approach more than the commentary by Haenchen (1987), who at almost every turn sees historical problems and regards Luke as more concerned to edify than to inform.

Another group of scholars, however, dating back to Ramsey and extending to Bruce, Gasque, Hemer, Hengel, Marshall, Sherwin-White, and Witherington, have high regard for Luke as an ancient historian.9 Ramsey, in particular, in a careful study of Acts found that many of its details are more trustworthy than he thought before he began his study. To argue this is not to deny that Luke writes a theology and has a perspective that he brings to the account. There is not the disjunction, however, between history and theology that the other approach to Acts often brings. Since, in many ways, a consideration of historicity in detail requires going through the data of the book unit by unit, only some general remarks are made here, noting that the conservative and more moderate approaches to Acts often speak with respect for Luke’s approach as a historian.

For some scholars, the most troubling aspect of the book is the range of miracles and the direct invoking of divine involvement. For those who question such categories, Acts is automatically suspect because of the way God functions as the central, and even most active, character. Luke’s perspective and testimony are that God has acted in such a manner, representing proof that God was at work. This is a worldview issue when it comes to Acts. If one doubts God’s activity in things such as miracles, then Acts instantly becomes suspect historically, and interpretation quickly moves in a more poetic direction.

When we move to events that have documentary or historical corroboration, then Luke fares well. Fitzmyer (1998: 126–27) notes nine elements of the account that have external attestation, either through the Pauline Epistles or through outside historical sources. These are Paul’s escape from Damascus, Paul’s trip to Rome, the earning of Paul’s livelihood, Herod Agrippa’s sudden death, Gallio as proconsul of Achaia, Felix and Festus as procurators in Judea, Drusilla as wife of Felix, Bernice as wife of Herod Agrippa II, and Ananias as high priest. He also notes minor details that are correct, such as proper descriptions of cities (Philippi as a colony) and officials (politarchs in Thessalonica). Much of what we can test shows that Acts is a credible historical source. The work of Hemer (1989) has shown how careful Luke is in Acts in numerous details. Hengel (1979: 60) affirms that Luke is no less trustworthy than other historians of antiquity, an assessment that might seem like faint praise, but in the environment of extreme skepticism, this is saying a great deal. Hengel says that comparisons to largely fictitious, romance-like writings are a disservice.

The treatment of the individual units will also show that trustworthiness is a prominent feature in Acts. We shall sort out the places where some scholars are most suspicious of Luke as a historian, namely, the Jerusalem Council and other points related to Paul, especially his effort to gather a collection for Jerusalem. For example, Barrett (1998: xxxvi–xlii) focuses on the council passage as a historical problem and argues that Baur was right about the tension between Peter and Paul, so that such an event could scarcely have occurred. Indeed, Paul’s relationship to Jerusalem and the Jews of that city is where the issue of Luke’s history versus his theology is most often questioned. We shall pay careful attention to such questions in the commentary as they arise.

In general, what kind of history is Acts? Often a writer’s Tendenz or that he or she argues an apologetic case is used to suggest that we should expect something less than general accuracy. Penner (2004) devotes an entire monograph to arguing that ancient historiography was about persuasion, plot, and characterization—even the rewriting of history to make a convincing case—and he challenges approaches to ancient history such as those of Hengel or Witherington. In Penner’s view, the line between ancient history and romance is thin. He also argues that ancient history is not about the veracity of the event but verisimilitude rooted in later personal experience (2004: 110). An appeal to experience, however, that was direct and early also fits into such ancient historical writing, a point Penner minimizes. Penner also emphasizes how all recognize Luke as the creator of the text’s wording, which makes it hard to reach the actual history (2004: 108, 111). But Tendenz merely reflects a point of view on events that themselves are open to interpretation. Good history is about more than merely what happened and when; it also treats causes and effects, also revealing motivations and rationale. One must avoid appealing to false oppositions here. Luke’s creativity is seen not in his creating an event but in his summarizing of it, an option Penner seems to exclude. Luke’s summary can have connections to the real event and need not disregard it. In addition, sometimes verisimilitude may appear to exist because there is connection to a real event and background the author or his source portrayed. There is also the real possibility that tensions between early and later times overlapped, making texts relevant for both the time of the event and the time when Luke is writing. Thus we should be careful in suggesting that the relevance of a scene to a later setting means that it could not have been relevant earlier.

What Acts seeks to do is to teach and persuade, even by the use of powerful examples, but to do so by showing, through the selective choice of events and summary, what originally took place on a grander scale. There is no doubt that Acts has a case to argue, as both the preface to the Gospel and Acts itself suggest. It seeks to give assurance, but this assurance is rooted, in part, in the essential character of the events Luke portrays. It may not be the only possible point of view on these events, but it is the one for which Luke contends.

The book of Acts is like other ancient histories in its approach. The ancients understood history as the relating of deeds for edification, as Lucian’s discussion in How to Write History 49–55, 63 shows and as do the remarks of Polybius (Hist. 2.56.11) and Quintilian (Institutio oratoria 2.4.2).10 Lucian says that a historian should get his facts right. The study of Fornara (1983) distinguishes between Roman histories and Greek history such as that of Thucydides and Polybius. Penner (2004: 110) dismisses the appeal to such experts on the classics, seeing them as too conservative about their task, but perhaps classical scholars such as Fornara recognize that efforts to move the historical task away from the events that sources attempt to portray risk abandoning history altogether. Greek historians valued personal observation and participation in events where they could find such sources. The we sections of Acts reflect this Greek tradition, as does the concern for a variety of races and cities. Such ancient writers used speeches as summaries of events and as a means of tying their history together, but they also disliked the idea of inventing speeches. Polybius (Hist. 12.25A–B) condemns inventing speeches or replacing with fictitious exposition the words spoken. Polybius also notes that such orations have the goal of ascertaining the words spoken and may be regarded as summaries of events (Witherington 1998: 33). Bruce (1990: 28) notes parallels between Luke’s writing and Thucydides, such as Luke’s preface and his synchronic use of dating. Luke seems to write with an awareness of such historical conventions. One Lukan contrast to this Greco-Roman tradition is that the key events are not political or military as in most Greek history; instead, they are social and communal, showing where the emphasis is in seeing God at work. To find God at work, look especially among God’s people.

The work also fits into the genre of Jewish historiography. Here the primary concern is to tell the story of a subgroup of people in an extended prose narrative (Sterling 1992: 17) while highlighting God’s activity. As Marguerat (2002: 25) says, "Judeao-Christian historia has no other ambition than to point to God behind the event." However, a difference between Luke and these ethnic narratives is a key feature of his book: he is trying to explain how God directed that the new faith expand from its Jewish subgroup roots to include people of all sorts of backgrounds. Finally, a key theme in Jewish historiography is to show that what people are experiencing is part of the way God has acted for ages. This explains why such histories constantly appeal to the Scriptures by quotation and allusion. The model for accounts such as the Maccabees is the historical narrative sections of the OT itself, which tells Israel’s story as God directed it in the past through Moses, Joshua, the judges, and then a succession of kings (Rosner 1993: 65–82). Schneider (1980: 122–25) even stresses that this connection to how God has always acted is the key to understanding Luke’s work. In this sense, the account is a piece of salvation history, telling how God has acted to save. We shall have occasion to return to these issues when we consider the preface of Acts. Those listening to the story of Acts (most of Luke’s ancient audience would have experienced the book by hearing it read) would have recognized it as a treatment of history with antecedents in Greek and Jewish history.

In sum, Acts is a piece of Hellenist and Jewish historiography that treats the theme of how the new community is rooted in God’s old promises, the Lord Jesus’s current activity, and the Spirit’s effective presence. Acts focuses on key human players as well, such as Peter, Stephen, Philip, Paul, and James. The book places these characters and events in the context of the world’s larger history. Its details are correct regarding provinces and governors, as well as in elements of local color and judicial practice (for the latter, see Sherwin-White 1963). Barrett (1998: cxiv–cxviii) gives Luke a mostly favorable verdict as a historian, noting that even where his sources are not corroborated, Luke must be taken seriously. But Barrett also regards Luke as getting more off the track once Paul and the Jerusalem Council are treated. We shall have occasion to assess this view of Acts 15 and Luke’s handling of Paul. Our take is not as skeptical as Barrett’s, but this is a discussion that cannot be undertaken without considering the details. So this topic awaits the commentary.

Acts seeks to inform and instruct about the outcome and aftermath of Jesus’s coming to earth as God’s unique representative. By examining the impact of Jesus, Luke was an innovator in seeing that the story of the earliest community was worth telling in connection with what Jesus had done. Luke hoped that others would come to appreciate what God had done and was doing through what became the church. In this way, those in the community could be encouraged and come to a deeper appreciation of their heritage, while others could be exhorted to be a part of what God was doing.

Language, Style, and Form

Luke’s language reflects Koine Greek written by someone in contact with Jewish tradition (de Zwann 1922; Cadbury 1958: 213–38). Fitzmyer (1998: 114–15) notes an array of Jewish Greek vocabulary as well as several Septuagintisms and Latin terms. More debated is whether there is evidence of Aramaisms, which is hard to separate from Septuagintal influence since the style of the LXX itself is full of Hebraisms or Aramaisms.11 Luke has the largest vocabulary of any NT writer, but this may reflect the wide variety of settings presented in his work. Almost 90 percent of the vocabulary is also found in the LXX (Clarke 1922: 69; Polhill 1992: 43), and 85 percent overlaps with Plutarch (Haenchen 1987: 72). Much of the vocabulary mirrors other accounts, such as Judges, Samuel, Kings, and 2 Maccabees (Schille 1984: 29). This usage shows a well educated writer (Haenchen 1987: 72). It also indicates a desire to give a biblical feel to his account. Only Paul and the author of Hebrews are comparable in their range and use of Greek.

The style shifts as Acts proceeds. In the early chapters of Acts, Luke presents a series of mostly short scenes and speeches in a variety of settings (Pesch 1986a: 34–36; Roloff 1988: 11). As the account moves to consider Paul, he becomes more of a focus, and the scenes in general have more detailed development. It is fair to say that the style of speeches early on has a more Semitic feel than later speeches, showing some sensitivity to setting.12 Important scenes are retold, such as Paul’s conversion and the arrival of the Spirit to the Gentiles when Peter speaks to Cornelius’s household.

Extensions of style are the forms that Luke uses: narrative, miracle accounts, summaries, we section travel notes, and especially the speeches where the bulk of the conceptual theology

Enjoying the preview?
Page 1 of 1