Module Thirteen

The Acts of the Apostles

13.1 Introduction

Fig. 13.1: Title page of Acts illustrating Christ blessing the apostles, 12th century. Manuscript W.522, Walters Art Museum, Baltimore. Taken from http://www.thedigitalwalters.org.

The book of Acts is different from every other writing of the New Testament. It is unique in its content, tracing the first three decades of the Christian church. It is distinct in its genre as a theologized history. When coupled with Luke, it has the distinction of being part of the longest writing in the canon. As the second volume, it is the continuation of Jesus‘ ministry, which began in Galilee and ended in Jerusalem. Acts begins with Jesus’ ascension in Jerusalem and ends with Paul preaching the gospel freely in Rome as he awaits his trial. Although Jesus has departed, his disciples continue his ministry with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Jesus’ prediction in Acts 1:8 that the disciples will receive the Holy Spirit and be his witnesses “in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” is the programmatic statement that sets the entire narrative in motion.

Fig. 13.2: Mosaic of the Apostle Paul, 11th century. St. Sophia, Kiev.

The main character in Acts is the apostle Paul, who interestingly does not fit the criterion of an apostle set out by Jesus’ closest followers in Acts 1:21-26. Nevertheless, after his epic conversion to Christianity on the road to Damascus, he is divinely chosen to be the apostle to the Gentiles. Most of Acts narrates the adventures of Paul during his missionary journeys. Often called the father of Christianity, Paul is unquestionably the most instrumental figure in Christianity’s transition from its Jewish roots to its Gentile expansion.

As explained in the previous chapter on the Gospel of Luke, the separation of Luke-Acts into two separate chapters creates some overlap and even clumsiness, especially in relation to the broader plot, authorship, purpose, and the theological themes. Both Luke and Acts are dependent on one another. The Gospel constantly looks ahead to Acts, and Acts assumes the story of Jesus in the Gospel. Foresight and hindsight affect the way that the author presents his material. Nevertheless, since Luke and Acts are separated in the canon, they are here treated as separate chapters. They are placed adjacent to one another because many professors teach Luke and Acts together, as a two-volume work. 

Since the title “Acts” (Praxeis) or “Acts of the Apostles” does not appear in the earliest extant Greek manuscripts, it probably did not appear in the original autograph. We have no way of knowing if Luke even ascribed a title to this work, especially as it was a second volume. Most likely, it attained a title when it started to circulate independently from Luke’s Gospel.

Fig. 13.3: St. Peter and St. Paul, 15th century. Frieze from a house in Fondamenta Cavour, Murano, Italy.

The earliest reference to this title is found in the late second-century writings of Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3.13.3), the bishop of Lyons. While the term “Acts” appropriately situates the writing within a recognized genre in the ancient world, which narrated great deeds of individuals, cities, or nations, its connection with “the apostles” is not entirely correct. Only Paul and a distant Peter are prominent in the writing, not “the apostles.” As a result, many scholars, past and present, have suggested that this writing should be renamed to better reflect its content, such as “Acts of the Holy Spirit,” “Acts of Paul,” or “Acts of Paul and Peter.” Some have even suggested that it should be entitled “Acts of the Ascended Jesus,” since the preface of Acts (1:1-5) implies the continuation of Jesus ministry.

Info Box 13.1: Other Christian Acts
Acts of the Apostles was influential in the writing of numerous other acts about the adventures of the apostles between the second and fourth centuries. These are usually called apocryphal or extra-canonical acts since they are not included in the New Testament. The genre of these writings is controversial, but most would agree that they are patterned after Hellenistic novels and may well be a primitive form of hagiography (literature that venerated the saints). All of them contain stories about the missionary adventures and teachings of the apostles, some of which are quite entertaining. For example, there are stories about Andrew and Mattathias among cannibals, Peter literally putting a camel through the eye of a needle, Andrew riding a cloud to meet Peter, Paul being beheaded in Rome, Thomas travelling to India, John raising people from the dead and destroying a temple in Ephesus which crushes a pagan priest, John casting out bedbugs, and Peter bringing a smoked fish in the marketplace back to life. Many of the fantastic episodes served as proofs for the truth of Christianity. Most lists of apocryphal Christian writings include Acts of Andrew and Mattathias, Acts of John, Acts of Paul, Acts of Peter, Acts of Peter and Paul, Acts of Peter and the Twelve, Acts of Philip, Acts of Pilate, Acts of Thecla, and Acts of Thomas.

Fig. 13.4: Fresco of Paul and his disciple Thecla, 5th century. Grotto of St. Paul, Ephesus. Thecla’s elevated right hand, which was a sign of authority, and her eyes were disfigured probably as a protest against female roles of leadership.

13.2 Sources

Historians who study ancient literature, like the book of Acts, are always curious to know what sources authors used. Sources help us to understand the purpose of a written work, its audience, and the biases employed by its author. In the previous chapters we have seen how important the identification of Mark as a source is for understanding Matthew and Luke. When it comes to Acts, however, we do not know where Luke obtained all of his information. The so-called “we” passages, which are discussed below, imply that Luke may have been an eyewitness to some of the accounts, but this is not without problems. We know from Luke’s prologue (1:1-4) that he was not an eyewitness to Jesus, but he was aware of prior accounts that were written about him. It is unclear, though, whether these prior accounts played any role in the composition of Acts. 

13.2.1 Oral Tradition

Since the vast majority of information in the ancient world was not transmitted through writing, Luke most likely received much of his data by word of mouth. Oral traditions about Jesus were passed on in the forms of stories and sayings. We know that oral transmission was common, but isolating and extracting oral traditions from where they are now embedded is problematic. As was discussed in Chapter 9, form criticism, which became prominent in the early part of the twentieth century, tried to tackle this problem. Focusing primarily on the Gospels, form critics wanted to know what the traditions looked like and how they functioned in the religious life of the early church, namely between the death of Jesus (c. 30 CE) and the writing of the first Gospel (c. 70 CE). Consider, for example, the Parable of the Sower (Mark 4:1-12; Matt 13:1-15; Luke 8:4-10). Long before it was incorporated into the Gospels, and thus fixed forever, form critics argued that the parable had a life of its own. Thus, they wanted to know how the parable functioned in the ministry of Jesus and particularly in the life of the early church. They wanted to answer questions, such as: “When was the parable recited?” “Did it look the same as it does in the Gospels?” “Was it used in the context of worship and/or mission?”

Fig. 13.5: A bearded teacher instructing his students by passing on tradition orally. Marble relief found on a sarcophagus in Rome, 180-185 CE. Rheinisches Landesmuseum. Trier.

One of the main insights that emerged out of form criticism was that individual narratives and sayings, called “pericopes” (Greek for “sections” or “passages”), circulated as independent units during the oral period of the early church. Christian teachers, missionaries, and prophets communicated their faith by including sayings and acts of Jesus in support of their message. This practice was probably common. In addition to the Gospels, we find, for example, a “floating” saying of Jesus without a context in Acts 20:35 (“Once Jesus said, it is more blessed to give than to receive”) and a reference to the “Lord’s’” saying in 1 Cor 7:10. The book of Acts contains similar remnants of oral traditions in the form of both speeches, such as Peter’s speech at Pentecost, and accounts of events, such as Paul’s conversion. It is impossible to know, however, the origin of the traditions. For example, Luke may have heard the story of Paul’s first missionary journey directly from Barnabas or from those who may have heard it third-hand.

Fig. 13.6: Paul’s first missionary journey. Courtesy Accordance Bible Software. Click on the image to expand.

While we have both the precedent that oral traditions played an important role in the composition of ancient writings and the specific patterns in Acts that strongly indicate the reliance on oral traditions, the reconstruction of those traditions is virtually impossible since Luke may have reworded them. If Luke’s use of Mark is an indication of how he edited and revised his sources, then the recovery of the exact wording of oral material is challenging, to say the least. 

Info Box 13.2: Was Philip the Evangelist a Source?
It is likely, according to Acts 21:8, that Philip, “one of the seven,” who lived in Caesarea could have been a source. Philip takes on an important evangelistic role already in Acts 8 before settling in Caesarea. He is credited for the Samarian mission and several conversions, such as the Ethiopian eunuch who was a court official of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians.

Fig. 13.7: Icon of the apostle Philip, 10th century. St. Catherine’s Monastery, Sinai.

While literate cultures can readily use writing to record information that they wish to recall later, oral cultures must situate that information within social (or collective) memory, which was the means by which groups, like the early Christians, retained and processed data. When Luke gathered his information, it undoubtedly included oral material that was retained through the mechanisms of social memory. That oral material would have circulated in a form that was easily recalled. It would not have included non-pragmatic material since this was often not circulated in oral cultures. Only the material that was deemed relevant in the recollection of the past would have been preserved. This material would have reflected the current cultural values, instead of an arbitrary curiosity about the past. It is also likely that as the church grew and developed its own peculiar identity, these memories were retold in ways that further strengthened the values that the church deemed as central. Both the larger narrative and the speeches strongly reflect the early theological values.

13.2.2 Written Sources

A considerable amount of interest has been generated over the last fifty years in Luke’s use of written sources for the writing of Acts. Since there are no extant sources, opinions have varied. One proposal, which has tended to dominate the discussion, is that Luke used three major sources in the composition of Acts. These are implied in the overall geographical organization of the narrative. 

Scholars have noticed that Acts is composed of three major stories that are set in three geographical locations: (1) the apostles in Jerusalem, (2) the Gentiles who fled from Jerusalem to Antioch, and (3), Paul’s journeys westward from Antioch to Rome. These stories are supposedly rooted in three sources. The first source, which is the basis of chapters 1-12, is called the “Jerusalem (or Palestine) Source.” The Semitic style in this section of Acts suggests that the original source, written in Aramaic, was a narrative about the life of the early church in Jerusalem. The problem with this proposal is that the Semitic style can be attributed to Luke himself. The second source, which is generally the basis for the material spanning chapters 6 to 15, is usually called the “Antioch (or Hellenistic) Source.” It was supposedly a collection of traditions stemming from the church at Antioch, used primarily for telling stories about Stephen and Barnabas. The third source, which accounts for select portions of the material found in chapters 9-28, is called the “Pauline Source.” It may have originally been a travel diary that was used for the composition of Paul’s missionary journeys. While debated, it is possible that this source may have been composed by Paul’s fellow traveller(s), which is implied in the “we” passages.

13.2.3 Speeches

Fig. 13.8: Bust of Marcus Tallius Cicero (106-43 BCE), who was considered one the greatest orators of his time, 1st century CE. Capitoline Museum, Rome.

Speeches consist of approximately one quarter of Acts. In many instances Luke prefers to have his characters communicate various events and their significance instead of simply having the narrator describe them. By placing more of the content onto the lips of the characters, the story takes on a more dynamic quality and conveys credibility. The author of John’s Gospel uses a similar technique, which gives his story a forensic quality whereby the characters serve as witnesses to Jesus’ messianic identity. 

The bulk of the speeches in Acts are presented by Peter, Stephen, James, and Paul. Since it is doubtful that Luke would have been present when all of these were made, scholars have wondered if Luke relied on a source (or sources) that contained these speeches. The spectrum of opinion is broad. Some argue that the speeches are much like recollections from memory with little or no authorial manipulation. Others argue that since speeches were used as a literary devise by ancient historiographers to give credibility to their works, Luke probably did not rely on any sources. Instead, he developed them himself in the style commonly used by his contemporaries, who saw no problem in constructing a speech to reflect what was probably said. The historical quality of speeches and their relation to the genre of Acts is discussed in more detail below.

Info Box 13.3: List of Speeches and Sermons (adapted from Carl R. Holladay, A Critical Introduction to the New Testament. Nashville: Abingdon, 2005, Pp. 332-33).

Peter
• Advising the 120 in Jerusalem about Judas’s replacement (1:16–17, 20–22)
• Missionary sermon before the Jerusalem crowd at Pentecost (2:14–36, 38–40)
• Sermon in the temple after healing the crippled beggar (3:12–26)
• Defense before the Sanhedrin about the healed beggar (4:8–12, 19–20)
• Defense (with the apostles) before the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem (5:29–32)
• Missionary sermon to Cornelius and his household at Caesarea (10:34–43)
• Explaining to the Jerusalem church why he preached to Cornelius (11:5–17)
• Giving advice at the Jerusalem Council (15:7–11)

Stephen
• Defense before the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem (7:2–53)

James, the brother of Jesus
• At the Jerusalem Council justifying the Gentile mission (15:13–21)
• With the elders advising Paul how to respond to charges (21:20–25)

Paul
• Missionary sermon in the synagogue at Pisidian Antioch (13:16–41)
• Missionary sermon to the crowds at Lystra (14:15–17)
• Missionary sermon before the Areopagus in Athens (17:22–31)
• Pastoral sermon bidding farewell to the Ephesian elders at Miletus (20:18–35)
• Defense before the crowds near the Temple in Jerusalem (22:1, 3–21)
• Defense before the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem (23:1, 6)
• Defense before the Roman governor Felix in Caesarea (24:10–21)
• Appeal to Caesar before the Roman governor Festus in Caesarea (25:10–11)
• Defense before King Herod Agrippa II in Caesarea (26:2–23, 25–27, 29)
• Reassuring speech on the ship en route to Rome (27:21–26)
• Addressing the Jewish leaders in Rome (28:17-20, 25–28)

Outsiders
• Gamaliel advising the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem (5:35–39)
• Demetrius’ speech before his fellow artisans at Ephesus (19:25–27)
• The town clerk’s speech in the theater at Ephesus (19:35–40)
• The letter of the Roman tribune to Felix concerning Paul (23:26–30)
• Tertullus’s summary of charges against Paul before Felix (24:2–8)
• Festus’ summary of charges against Paul before Agrippa (25:14–21, 24–27)

Others, including prayers, letters, and shorter speeches
• The disciples’ prayer for Judas’s replacement (1:24–25)
• The church’s prayer after Peter and John’s release in Jerusalem (4:24–30)
• Peter rebuking Ananias (5:3–4)
• The Twelve calling for the selection of the Seven (6:2–4)
• Peter rebuking Simon Magus (8:20–23)
• Paul rebuking Elymas (13:10–11)
• Paul and Barnabas defending the Gentile mission (13:46–47)
• The Jerusalem Council’s letter to Gentile Christians (15:23–29)
• Proposal by the forty men to kill Paul (23:14–15)
• Nephew’s report to the Roman tribune of the plot against Paul (23:20–21)
• The response of the Jewish leaders in Rome to Paul (28:21–22)

13.3 Authorship

Since there is broad agreement that the book of Act was written by the same author who wrote the Gospel of Luke, the section on authorship in the previous chapter applies here as well. Like the Gospel, the book of Acts is anonymous. Following tradition, he is commonly called Luke. Below is a list of extraordinary parallel passages that convincingly demonstrate common authorship. Since many of the parallels follow the same sequence, it is possible that portions of Luke’s Gospel could have served as a template for Acts. If this is the case, then as with the Gospels, we see a very strong literary and theological itinerary in Luke’s presentation of the events that unfolded in the first three decades of the church (Adapted from M.A. Powell, Introducing the New Testament, 201).

Fig. 13.9: Click on the image to expand

Fig. 13.10: St. Paul and St. Luke, 13th century. Apse of Saint Paul Outside the Walls, Rome.

Instead of repeating the common arguments for and against Lukan authorship, the focus here is on the so-called “we” passages, where the author identifies himself using the first person plural pronoun when narrating the travels of Paul and his companions (16:10–17; 20:5–15; 21:1–8; 27:1–28:16). Whoever it is, he enters the story abruptly in 16:10 after Paul has a vision to go to Macedonia. These passages have captivated interpreters from the second century to the present. Was Paul’s fellow traveller Luke? Was he an eyewitness? What other meaning might the pronoun “we” have? Was he by implication not present during the events described in Acts 1-14? 

Most casual readers assume that Luke included himself as a fellow traveller during Paul’s second and third missionary journeys. If so, the “we” passages are simply autobiographical accounts. This reading is certainly endorsed by some Acts scholars, despite the fact that Acts makes no mention of the author and differs in its historical and theological portrayals of Paul when compared to his letters, as we shall explain below.

Fig. 13.11: Paul’s second missionary journey. The blue line traces the journey of Mark and Barnabas. The white line traces the journey of Paul and Silas. Click on the image to expand. Courtesy of Accordance Bible Software.

Fig. 13.12: Paul’s third missionary journey. The white line traces the journey of Timothy and Erastus. The blue line traces Paul’s journey. Click on the image to expand. Courtesy of Accordance Bible Software.

13.3.1 “We” as a Literary Device

Those scholars who claim that Acts was not authored by one of Paul’s companions tend to rely on two arguments. The first is that the pronoun “we” is a literary device designed to guide readers to experience the story firsthand. Rather than referring to the author as a companion of Paul, the pronoun “we” is used to incorporate the readers, along with the author, into the adventures of the story. In so doing, the readers participate, for example, in the maritime journeys with Paul and witness first-hand the events that transpire. This idea is not far-fetched when it is compared to the use of the first person plural pronoun (“we”) in various Greco-Roman sea travel stories. Vernon K. Robbins has uncovered several examples in Greco-Roman literature, which were probably influenced by Homer’s Odyssey, where the use of “we” is featured in the narration of sea voyages (and battles), particularly those that ended in shipwrecks. Robbins points to numerous examples from epics, such as Virgil’s (70 BCE-19 CE) Aeneid (books 2-3), satires, such as Varro’s (116-27 BCE) Menippean Satires, parodies, such as Lucian’s (125-180 CE) A True Story, and histories, such as Josephus’ (37-97 CE) Life. 

Info Box 13.4: The Roman poet Virgil narrates the voyage after the destruction of Troy from centuries earlier, which results in a shipwreck off Carthage, using the first person plural. 
With Asian power and Priam’s tribe uprooted, 
though blameless, by heaven's decree; with Ilium’s pride
fallen, and Neptune’s Troy all smoke and ash, 
God’s oracles drove us on to exile, on
to distant, lonely lands. We built a fleet
down by Antander and Ida’s Phrygian peaks, 
uncertain which way Fate led or where to stop. 
We marshaled our men. When summer first came on, 
Anchises bade us trust our sails to fate (Aeneid 3.1-9).

Fig. 13.13: Odysseus’ encounter with the Sirens in Homer’s Odyssey, book 12. Roman Mosaic, 2nd-4th century, Bardo Museum, Tunis.

In addition, Robbins compares the “we” passages in Acts to copyists of eyewitness accounts in ancient Mediterranean literature. For example, Xenophon’s (430-354 BCE) Anabasis (meaning “ascent”), which recalls his own accompaniment of a large army of mercenaries sent out to capture the throne of Persia, is largely written in the third person. A later copyist, however, who was not a participant, added a concluding summary using the second person plural. According to Robbins, the practice of copyists inserting themselves into the narratives was not unusual. Could Luke have been a copyist of someone else’s autobiographical source?

Info Box 13.5: This section of Xenophon’s Anabasis was compiled by his copyist, who was not present during the events. Note the use of the first person plural.
The governors of all the king's territories that we traversed were as follows: Artimas of Lydia, Artacamas of Phrygia, Mithradates of Lycaonia and Cappadocia, Syennesis of Cilicia…. The length of the entire journey, upward and downward, was two hundred and fifteen stages, one thousand, one hundred and fifty parasangs, or thirty-four thousand, two hundred and fifty-five stadia; and the length in time, upward and downward, a year and three months (7.8.25-26).

Fig. 13.14: Marble head of Odysseus, 1st century. National Archaeological Museum, Sperlonga.

Robbins’ intriguing comparison between Acts and contemporaneous Mediterranean literature has received mixed reviews. Opponents have noted that while some similarities exist, the differences cannot be omitted. The uses of “we” in maritime stories are inconsistent and do not constitute a genre of sea travel, in contrast Robbins’ suggestion. In addition, several scholars have noted that the pronoun “we” is not used every time Luke narrates sea voyages. If Luke did use “we” as a stylist feature to include his readers, it is not at all clear why some passages would not have incorporated the readers in the same way. Nevertheless, many of Robbins’ comparisons should still be part of the overall conversation about Luke’s literary practice.

13.3.2 Conflicting Portrayals of Paul

The second, and primary, argument in support of an author who was not one of Paul’s fellow travellers is based on a comparison between Paul’s letters and Luke-Acts. Many scholars argue that since the historical and theological portrayals of Paul in Luke-Acts differ so much from Paul’s letters, Luke could not have been a fellow traveller. Therefore, the “we” passages are not autobiographical. While scholars often point out that Luke makes no mention of Paul writing letters, and that Paul makes no mention of his own conversion (which occurs three times in Acts), the contrast between Paul and Luke-Acts is usually focused on the following differences.

Six points of contention are commonly raised when Paul’s portrayal in Acts is compared to his letters. First, Paul claims that he did not go down to Jerusalem to consult with the apostles after his conversion (Gal 1:15–18). Luke, however, tells us that he did (Acts 9:10–30). The consultation most likely focused on the acceptance and verification of his experience by the apostles. Second, in Gal 2:6-10, Paul claims that the “acknowledged leaders” of the church in Jerusalem endorsed his mission to the Gentiles with no legal requirements. However, in Acts 15:22–29, Luke says that the church leadership prescribed a list of legal requirements that Paul needed to incorporate in his mission to the Gentiles. Third, Paul says that when he ministers to those “outside the law” (i.e. Gentiles), he identifies himself as “one outside the law” in order to convert Gentiles (1 Cor 9:21). In Acts, however, Paul is presented as being completely loyal to the Jewish law (Acts 25:8; 28:17). Fourth, Paul is opposed to relying on Greek philosophy in 1 Cor 1:18–31. Yet in Acts, Luke portrays Paul as being friendly to Greek philosophers and endorses their philosophical traditions as a common ground for dialogue (Acts 17:22–31). Fifth, Paul argues that idol-worshipers have no excuses since the knowledge of God has always been evident in creation (Rom 1:18–23). Whereas in Acts, Paul says that God will overlook the worship of idols as a consequence of ignorance (Acts 17:29–30). Finally, in his letters, Paul frequently identifies himself as an apostle, sometimes adamantly as the “apostle to the Gentiles.” Yet of the twenty-eight occurrences of “apostles” in Acts, only one refers to Paul, alongside Barnabas (14:14). All of the other occurrences refer to Jesus’ disciples.

Fig. 13.15: The Areopagus (or Mars’ Hill), Athens, where Paul spoke with the Greek philosophers in Acts 17. Today, all that remains is large rock.

These examples of differences are not without contention. Proponents of the view that Paul and Luke (as the author of Acts) were fellow travellers have attempted to soften or explain the differences away. Their focus, instead, has been on the similarities between Acts and Paul’s letters. Three are often proposed. First, the Eucharistic formula in Luke 22:19-20 is very similar to the one found in 1 Cor 11:23-25. Second, both Luke (Luke 24:34) and Paul (1 Cor 15:5) attest that the first appearance of the risen Christ was to Simon Peter. Third, Paul’s ability to perform miracles is attested in his letters (2 Cor 12:12; Rom 15:18-19) and by Luke (Acts 19:11).

Info Box 13.6: Comparisons and Contrasts
Many literary comparisons and contrasts often suffer from a lack of attention given to method in primarily two ways. First, comparisons and contrasts are not considered equally. The evidence tends to be skewed to one side at the expense of the other. For instance, scholars who attempt to make the case for Luke not knowing Paul, tend to provide as many differences as possible between Luke-Acts and Paul’s letters, while omitting the similarities that exist. Contrasts should incorporate a fair treatment of comparisons, and vice versa. Secondly, comparative studies often neglect the problem of the burden of proof. In most studies, the burden of proof usually lies on the one who challenges a prevailing position, which often removes the responsibility from the one holding the “common” view. A fairer approach is to have the burden of proof lie on anyone making a case, be it for a common or uncommon position.

13.4 Date of Writing

The dating of Acts correlates closely to the dating of Luke’s Gospel. In the previous chapter, it was explained that the Gospel is frequently dated between 85-90 CE. On occasion some have argued for a dating prior to 70 CE. We do not know exactly how long after the Gospel’s composition Acts was written. Nevertheless, Acts is usually dated within the same time frame as the Gospel. 

13.4.1 Prior to Paul’s Death (62-65 CE)

Fig. 13.16: Curia, 1st century BCE, Rome. In this Imperial legal assembly, the senators of Rome may have decided to execute Paul.

Scholars who argue for an earlier date of composition argue that Acts must have been written before Paul’s death. At the end of Acts, Paul is alive and well, awaiting his trial. If Paul had been dead when Acts was written, his death surely would have been recorded. It is inconceivable that he, as the main character in the narrative, would not be depicted as a martyr if Acts were written later. Omitting his death does not appear to have a benefit for the writer of Acts and its overall purpose. In addition, an intentional omission of Paul’s death would be inconsistent with the broader narrative of Acts, which does not shy away from including the deaths of other key figures such as Stephen (7:59-60) and James (12:2). Even more puzzling, if Acts was written late, is the omission of the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE. 

A few scholars date Acts even earlier. Since Luke makes no mention of Christian persecutions under the Emperor Nero, which began in 64 CE, Acts must have written between 62 and 64 CE. Had Luke been writing after the persecution, it is unlikely that the Romans would have been portrayed in the same positive way. 

13.4.2 During the Second Generation of Christians (80-95 CE)

Acts is most commonly dated well within the context of second generation Christians, approximately 80-95 CE. One of the main reasons for this is that Mark is overwhelmingly dated around 70 CE. Since Luke used Mark, and Acts is the second volume of Luke, it reasons to say that Acts was written sometime after 70 CE. Allowing for Mark’s popularity to grow and expand to Asia Minor and perhaps Greece, it is fair to assume that Luke-Acts was written about a decade or two later (see the section on the dating of Luke in the previous chapter). Adopting an early dating of Acts, sometime prior to Paul’s death, would push Mark back to the late 40s or early 50s, which does not correspond to Mark’s content as well as 70 CE. An early dating for Luke raises the problem of his detailed account of the Temple’s destruction (Luke 21). While Mark‘s account in chapter 13 could have been a prediction, Luke’s more detailed version of it suggests that it was written well after.

Fig. 13.17: Roman road near Colossae, Turkey. Paul was well familiar with these roads. The ruts from wagons are prominent.

The ending of Acts poses little problem for advocates of a late dating since they do not share the same assumptions about the nature of the writing. Unlike proponents of an early dating, Acts is not viewed as a modern history that catalogues the events over three decades. Instead, Acts is viewed as a theologized history that is more concerned with meaning than with reconstruction. Having Paul preaching the gospel in an unhindered manner at the epicenter of the Roman Empire conveys Christian victory and success. It is a fitting, even predictable, ending to a story that begins with the promise by the risen Christ that the gospel will preached from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth (1:8). This approach to Acts is rooted in the study of the genre, purpose, and the historiography of Acts, to which we now turn. 

13.5 Genre

More than any other writing in the New Testament, Acts resembles what we might today call a history or historiography (which technically refers to the way history is written). It narrates the origins and progress of a particular social group, known initially as the “Way” and later as the “Christians.” Spanning over three decades, from the death of Jesus (ca. 30 CE) to Paul’s residence in Rome (62-65 CE), Acts can be described as the first historical writing of the church. It is a narration that is very much at home in the ancient world and cannot be equated to modern historical writing. Ancient histories took on a variety of aims, focusing on important leaders, cities, or major events like battles and wars. Acts overtly celebrates the accomplishments of early missionaries, particularly of Peter and Paul, and actively promotes their beliefs.

Fig. 13.18: The temple of Hadrian, early 2nd century. Ephesus. During Paul’s day, Ephesus would have had approximately 50,000 residents.

Acts is a highly selective history. The reader is not told of any failed missionary trips, unanswered prayers, or apostate churches (e.g. the divisions in the Corinthian church). The controversies found in Paul’s letters and the underlying issues addressed by the evangelists are not found in Acts. We are told that Paul awaits his trial in Rome, but not how Christianity began there. We are told about Paul’s lengthy stays in Corinth and Ephesus, but little about his ministry there. By contrast, his short visit to Philippi receives lengthy treatment. We are not told about the fate of Peter after the Jerusalem Council, yet we are told about Stephen’s martyrdom. Finally, it is curious why, apart from Peter and Paul, Luke either minimizes or entirely omits the ministries of the other apostles. 

What we find is a homogeneous nascent Christianity that triumphs over every imaginable obstacle. Acts certainly contains history, even by modern standards, but it is best understood in comparison to the literature of its own day. While, in the end, genre identifications do not necessarily settle the question of Acts’ historicity, they do formulate expectations about how the past was conveyed.

So, what kind of literature does the book of Acts most resemble? Does Acts accurately record what happened? Or is Acts more concerned with the theological meaning of the events? Questions like these have generated considerable debate. They are ultimately questions about genre? In the quest to identify the genre of Acts, comparisons have been drawn from a wide array of early Jewish and Greco-Roman literature, even the Septuagint. Three proposals contend for the closest genre.

13.5.1 Biography

Fig. 13.19: Bust of Plutarch (46-120 CE), whose Parallel Lives was one of the most well know biographies in the Roman period. Chaeronia, Greece.

Some scholars view Luke-Acts as a single genre. One of the best representatives of this position is Charles Talbert who compares Luke’s two volumes with “succession lists/narratives” within Jewish, Greco-Roman, and Christian contexts. Talbert argues that Luke-Acts is a composite biographical work, closely resembling the form and purpose of ancient biographies of philosophers and their followers. Both Luke-Acts and ancient biographies of philosophers exhibit the same pattern, which includes (a) a narrative of the life of the founder and (b) a succession narrative about the followers. Correspondingly, Luke’s Gospel tells the story of Jesus’ mission and Acts serves as the succession narrative, which tells the story of the apostolic mission (particularly Peter and Paul) throughout the Roman Empire. This pattern is found in no other contemporaneous literature. As such the narration of the past contains all the characteristics and biases of ancient biography. Despite all of the obstacles faced by the apostles, the “history” of their mission is a great success because it is empowered by the Holy Spirit. Like Jesus in the first volume, the apostles remain unwavering and committed. For Talbert, the purpose of the pattern was to convey the truth of the tradition, which has been adopted by Luke’s audience. This was understood as a very old tradition, which extends back to the divine promises given to ancient Israel. 

Talbert’s position is not without criticism. Many have questioned his choice of ancient sources as valid comparisons since most of them are succession lists and not the same kind of extensive narrative that we see in Acts. Talbert has also been criticized for viewing Luke-Acts as a single genre. In addition, while biographies concentrate on a single person, Acts is more concerned with several individuals and their missionary activity, which resembles ancient history rather than biography.

13.5.2 Ancient Novel

Some scholars, like Richard Pervo, object to classifying Acts as a historical writing of any kind. He notices that most attempts to demonstrate the historical accuracy of the narrative have been apologetically motivated. While recognizing the contributions made by scholars attempting to align Acts with ancient history, Pervo identifies several points of divergence that more closely resemble ancient novels, especially the prefaces of Luke and Acts, the use of speeches as a literary device that enhances the narrative, and the omniscience of the narrator. Of main importance for Pervo is the high concentration of direct speech. In Acts, fifty-one percent of the verses contain direct speech, a proportion unparalleled in any form of ancient historiography. 

Pervo’s statistical analysis of direct speech in Acts leads him to conclude that Acts is more closely aligned with ancient fictional novels than with ancient histories or biographies. In addition to direct speech, Acts contains other similar features, such as the narrator’s techniques of fantastical characterization and the use of adventurous episodes to generate plot and reinforce the narrator’s point of view. As such, Acts should be categorized as popular literature that sought to entertain its readers or hearers.

Fig. 13.20: Papyrus Köln 23r, Daniel 7:11-14. This an early example of a Jewish scripture text translated into Greek, c. 200 CE.

Pervo also notices that there are numerous literary parallels between Acts and the Septuagint. Unlike the historian Josephus who intentionally writes to differentiate himself from the writing style of the Septuagint, Luke writes in a style that seeks to imitate it. For Pervo, and others, the Septuagint was a formative influence in the writing of Acts. 
While most scholars today agree that Acts contains the story-telling techniques and sub-plots that were customary in Greco-Roman novels, they do not regard Acts as an ancient novel. Greco-Roman novels, like Achilles Tatius’ Leucippe and Cleitophon or Chariton’s Chaereas and Callirhoe, were romantic tales about the misfortunes and restorations of love. Acts contains no romantic content and does not focus on a single character or lovers. 

13.5.3 Apologetic Historiography

Gregory Sterling identifies Luke-Acts as “apologetic historiography,” which was a literary form that emerged in reaction to Greek ethnography (i.e. writings about ethnic groups). People groups who previously had been the subjects of Greek ethnic historical portrayals responded to what they must have regarded as inaccurate histories by writing their own accounts. The new ethnic histories utilized the literary frameworks of the Greeks, but were written from the perspectives of the local ethnic groups. For Sterling, the greatest Jewish example of apologetic historiography is Josephus’ Antiquities, which retells the Jewish story (from a Jewish perspective) in a way that establishes his nation’s antiquity and respectability for his Roman readers.

Fig. 13.21: Apostle Peter Preaching, Lorenzo Veneziano, c. 1370. Berlin State Museum.

Sterling argues that the entire narrative of Luke-Acts is an extension, even fulfillment, of the Jewish scriptures, written from the perspective of the inside group. Both the prologue and the conclusion of Luke’s Gospel provide hints. The prologue clearly contains a reference to the present time of fulfillment. Luke writes, “Since many have undertaken to set down an orderly account of the events that have been fulfilled among us…” (Luke 1:1). The conclusion of his Gospel sets the stage for the continuation of that fulfillment among the disciples, as they preach Christ to all the nations (Luke 24:46-47), which is realized in Acts. Luke, who sees himself as a member of the group in which the fulfillments are realized, writes a “history” of the first three decades that concentrates on the success of that realization. In essence, as an apologetic historiography, it is a story of the inside group’s triumph over Jewish and Roman opposition. 

Sterling also observes that Luke, like ancient historiographers, utilized local or ethnic sources in order to tell the story of his own people group. This is most evident in his use of Mark and the Septuagint. Sterling goes further by arguing that Luke not only relies on, but also imitates the Septuagint as is evident in his use of Semitic expressions and his portrayal of God’s role in human history.

The functional necessity of an apologetic historiography was rooted in the distinctiveness and diversity of Christianity, as it was becoming a movement and more known to the Romans. Although the Romans (and pagans in general) were inclusive, they were highly suspicious of religions that were not rooted in the past. To compound the suspicion, earliest Christianity was diverse. In response, Luke tries to show that both Jesus and the emerging churches were unified and rooted in the promises of God given to ancient Israel. Though Sterling does not support the view that Luke-Acts was written to Roman officials as a defense of Christianity, he affirms that these texts acted as an indirect apology that would have eased Roman suspicions. 

In his attempt to root Christianity in the distant past, Luke retells the story of Israel twice in Acts: in the speech of Stephen (chapter 7) and in the speech of Paul (13:16-41). Sterling argues that Luke’s understanding of Israel’s story is shaped by earlier Jewish retellings. Luke uses these retellings to develop speeches, which lend credibility to his retelling. For example, Paul’s speech in Acts 13 provides an occasion to locate his missionary activity well within the history of Israel, beginning with the Egyptian exile. Luke divides the speech into three parts: the story of Israel, the gospel, and the offer of salvation. Luke’s aim is to show that the promises given to Israel are fulfilled in Jesus.

Fig. 13.22: Bust of the historian Thucydides, 3rd century BCE. Louvre Museum, Paris.

Info Box 13.7: Were speeches used as a literary device?
Many scholars view the speeches in Acts as a literary device. Among ancient historiographers it was common practice to place speeches on the lips of famous men. Since the aim of the historian was not to reconstruct past events, but to infuse them with meaning, the crafting of a speech was a carefully targeted exercise that was much appreciated by readers. Speeches were used to contribute to the broader ideas in the narrative. For example, the 2nd century rhetorician, Lucian of Samosata, wrote in his How to Write History 58, “When it comes in your way to introduce a speech, the first requirement is that it should suit the character both of the speaker and of the occasion.” The touchstone for understanding the role of speeches in ancient historiography is Thucydides (c. 460-395 BCE), who in his History of the Peloponnesian War constructed speeches and placed them on the lips of the characters in the narrative, believing that they represented the speakers accurately. Speeches functioned rhetorically and provided dynamism to the narrative. Acts does not appear to deviate from the standard ancient role of speeches in histories. For instance, Peter’s opening speech contributes to the missionary plot by rooting the nascent Christian movement within Judaism—as a fulfillment of the scriptures (1:15-22). In response to Jews who could not fathom a crucified messiah, Peter preaches to the Jewish pilgrims that it was foretold in scripture (Psalm 69, 109) and confirmed by phenomena that they just experienced. The speech ends with a crescendo. In Acts 2:36 Peter tells his fellow Jews, “Therefore let the entire house of Israel know with certainty that God has made him both Lord and Messiah, this Jesus whom you crucified.” The speech contributes to the apologetic and evangelistic force of the narrative.

While there are numerous differences between Acts and Paul’s letters, it is in the similarities where Luke’s historiography is most visible. When parallel events are compared with one another, the divergent intentions come into sharp focus. An interesting example is Paul’s dramatic departure from Damascus.

Fig. 13.23: Click on the image to expand.

Fig. 13.24: Coin with image of Nabatean King Aretas IV and Queen Shuqailat, c. 40 CE.

The remarkable similarities in the accounts indicate that Luke knew about this incident. He may have even read 2 Corinthians. Nevertheless, the details of his account are different. In Paul‘s version, the dangerous situation is attributed to the Nabatean ruler Aretas IV who controlled the city in 37-39 CE. In Luke’s version, the troubles are attributed to the “Jews.” At this point many historians are skeptical about the historical accuracy of Acts. Why does Luke change the enemy? The broader context of Acts gives us the answer. Since Luke tends to portray the Jewish leadership in a negative tone, calling them “jealous” on several occasions (7:9; 13:45; 17:5), their hostility toward Paul in this episode fits Luke’s bias. Historians are also skeptical about two other details. First, it is difficult to imagine that the Jews would have had such control in a city that was controlled by Arabs. Second, it is also difficult to imagine why the Jews would have cared about Christian missionary activity in a pagan context like Damascus.

Info Box 13.8: History and Objectivity
Whether ancient or modern, the writing of history can never be completely objective because it is impossible for the historian to access every single detail from the past. History and the past are not the same. There are simply millions of events that occur, even on a minute scale, which can never be included in a written work. The historian has to be selective. He or she needs to choose events and persons that are significant to his aim. In recalling those past events, the historian imposes, sometimes unconsciously, his own values and beliefs. This is especially evident among ancient writers like Luke and Josephus.

13.6 Purpose

The book of Acts is a narrative about the first three decades of the Christian church, focusing primarily on the missionary activities of Peter and Paul. Alternatively, it can also be said that it is about the missionary activities of the Holy Spirit. On this there is agreement. However, once we pose a deeper question about Luke’s motive or reason for writing the narrative, opinions begin to diverge. Since Luke does not include an explicit purpose statement, reconstructing the original reason for writing has led to a variety of proposals.

13.6.1 Unity of the Early Church

Fig. 13.25: Apostles Peter and Paul by El Greco (1541-1614), Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg.

Some scholars have argued that Luke wrote Acts to demonstrate that the early Christians lived in harmony with one another and were theologically unified. Why would Luke need to stress this? The most probable reason is that existing divisions and disagreements among Christians or Christian leaders had a negative impact on the audience that Luke was addressing. While there were numerous divisions in the first century among groups that called themselves “Christian” (see Chapter 5), most historians point to the divisions we find in Paul’s letters. For example, in Gal 2:11-14 Paul says that he “opposed Cephas to his face” because he would no longer eat with the Gentiles in the presence of “certain men from James,” who were probably Jewish Christians wanting to maintain ethnic purity laws. In 1 Cor 1:10-17, Paul admonishes the Corinthian Christians for their formation of factions that were identified by their allegiances. Some claimed to “belong to Cephas” and others “to Paul.” In 2 Corinthians, Paul’s adversaries are Jewish Christians who undermine his apostolic authority. Historians have identified some of these Jewish Christians as Judaizers. They were fellow believers in Christ, but vehemently advocated that all Gentile converts to Christianity should keep the Jewish laws and rituals. Paul, of course, saw otherwise.

13.6.2 Apologetic for the Church

Unlike any other writings of the New Testament, Acts devotes approximately one quarter of its content to the trials and defenses of Paul in the face of Roman opposition (especially chapters 22-28). This unprecedented emphasis has led several scholars to argue that Acts is an apology (or a reasoned defense) of Christianity to the Romans. While an apology in the ancient world was a genre classification, like the Apology of Socrates, which served as a legal defense for the Athenian officials, it can also be used to refer to a writer’s motive, aim, or purpose. Several genres can contain apologetic purposes. Within the genre confines of ancient historiography, Luke defends the legitimacy and expansion of Christianity most effectively by showing how one Roman official after another endorses Paul’s mission by refusing to stand in the way of the new movement. For example, in 16:35-40 the magistrates of Philippi admit to their wrongful imprisonment of Paul. In 18:12-17, Gallio, the Roman Proconsul of Achaia, allows Paul to publically spread Christianity in the face of Jewish opposition. In 26:31-32, King Agrippa II and the Roman Governor Festus agree that Paul’s spreading of Christianity is not deserving of death or imprisonment, contrary to the insistence of Paul’s Jewish opponents.

Fig. 13.26: Corinthian Bema (platform of judgment) where Paul was taken by his Jewish accusers (Acts 18:12-17).

Why would Luke need to defend Christianity to the Romans? The traditional response is that the Romans viewed Oriental religions with skepticism, even fearing that they may be harmful. As a result, Luke attempted to alleviate those fears and suspicions. A more nuanced response is that the Romans were very suspicious of new religions, especially if they originated in the East. As pagans, the Romans were inclusive of religions as long as they did not interfere with or undermine cherished or political rituals and beliefs, such as emperor worship. Generally, the Romans were tolerant of Judaism because it was a very old religion, but they were skeptical about Christianity. Not only was it very new, but it also revered and worshipped a messiah who was crucified, advocated practices that were repugnant, such as the Eucharist (which was mistakenly understood as cannibalism), and in some places opposed paying homage to the emperor’s image. It is likely that some influential Jews played a role in the formation of Roman sentiments, which may explain why Jewish leaders take on an antagonistic role in Acts. Luke counteracts Roman sentiment by showing that Christianity is not only the fulfillment of Judaism through the numerous quotations and allusions to scripture, but is consistent with ideas about God in Greco-Roman literature (Acts 17:22-31). In short, Luke wants to show that since Christianity is rooted in Judaism, and is the completion of Judaism, it should be regarded as an ancient religion and not feared by the Romans.

Fig. 13.27: Alexamenos Graffito. Anti-Christian graffiti depicting a man with the head of an ass on the cross, 2nd century. The man on the left may be a Christian worshiper. The inscription reads “Alexamenos worships his god.” Palatine Hill, Rome.

That Luke is writing an apology has received considerable support, but not everyone sees the aim in the same way. For example, some scholars have speculated that Luke is not writing for a wider Roman audience, but only to Theophilus (1:1) who may have been the Roman magistrate overseeing Paul’s trial in Rome. If this is the case, then Luke-Acts serves as a legal document in defense of Paul. A few have even argued that Luke is not trying to legitimize Christianity to the Romans. Rather, he is trying to legitimize the Romans to Christians. These ideas, however, have not gained much traction.

13.6.3 Confirmation to New Christians

In the previous chapter on Luke’s Gospel, one of the identified purposes was the need to assure Gentile Christians that God is faithful. This was especially problematic for former pagans who were accustomed to the fickleness of the gods. The broad Jewish rejection of Jesus as the messiah created a profound problem for thoughtful Gentile Christians. Since the Jews who rejected Jesus were no longer the people of God, Gentile Christians would have wondered if God had abandoned his promise given to Israel through Abraham (Gen 12:1-3). Did God betray his people? Was this God as fickle as their former pagan deities? If God turned away from the Jews, could he not all the more turn away from the Gentiles?

Fig. 13.28: Roman pantheon in Hadrian’s Temple, 2nd century CE, Ephesus.

Luke’s two-volume narrative is a response to this anxiety. His posture is resolute. He is intent from the start to “confirm the truth of those things that have been taught” (Luke 1:1-4). What is “the truth” to which he refers? Luke tries to justify the faithfulness of God by showing how events from Jesus to the expansion of the church unfolded consecutively and intentionally. He begins by showing how the revelation of God came to Israel through Jesus, who was destined to be the agent of salvation for the world. Acts continues the story of salvation with the resurrected Christ commissioning his followers to spread the message of Jesus from Jerusalem to the “ends of the earth” (1:8). It is not surprising that this narrative about the progressive expansion of the gospel ends with Paul preaching “unhindered” in the center of the Roman Empire.

Fig. 13.29: Fortuna (Greek Tyche), the Roman goddess of hope, prosperity and luck, holding a cornucopia (which represents abundance) and a rudder (which represents guidance). Replica of a 4th century CE statue. Chiaramonti Museum, Vatican.

Luke attempts to appease the anxiety of the Gentiles by showing that God’s faithfulness extends to both Jews and Gentiles. The problem is not the fickleness of God, but the rejection of his messiah. In both of his volumes, Luke does not shy away from portraying the Jews, especially the Jewish leadership, as rejecting both Jesus (in the Gospel) and his followers (in Acts). In Acts Jewish leaders often play the role of antagonists in Paul’s missionary adventures. This rejection effectively cuts them off from God’s promise of saving the world, originally made to Abraham. Luke sees the acceptance of Jesus among the Gentiles as the fulfillment of God’s promise. As such, Luke has often been regarded as an apologetic historian who saw his writing as the continuation of the biblical story, not so much to defend the Christian movement, but rather to defend God’s consistency throughout history.

13.7 Theological Themes

13.7.1 Sovereign Guidance

While God’s sovereignty over his world is a core theme in early Jewish and Christian literature, the book of Acts stands apart in its emphasis on the active role of God in Christian mission. From the beginning of the narrative, the apostles are led and empowered by God who is determined to accomplish his objectives. While there is usually synergy between God and the apostles, God’s role is preeminent. The success of the missionary activity is directly credited to his powerful presence operating through his missionaries. In fact, it is so pervasive, that it raises the question whether Luke has in mind a soft form of determinism, which would still allow freedom of choice. For example, God fulfills the scriptures (Luke 1:20; 4:21; 21:24; 22:16; 24:44; Acts 1:16; 3:18; 13:27; 14:26). God determines peoples’ fates (Acts 2:23; 10:42; 13:47; 17:31; 22:10) and has a temporal agenda (Acts 13:47; 17:26). Events happen because they are necessarily determined, such as the replacement of Judas (Acts 1:21-22), initial proclamation to the Jews (Acts 13:46), the persecution of Christians (Acts 14:22), and the suffering, death, and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 17:3). 

One of the main aims of this theme is to comfort Gentile converts who surely would have been perplexed by the events that were unfolding around them, especially trials and suffering. As we discussed in the previous chapter, the evangelization of God-fearers would have required a considerable level of assurance that God is faithful to his promises, unlike the fickle pagan deities. The response that Luke surely wants to instill in his audience is complete trust in God and his plan to save the world.

Although there is no developed idea of the Trinity in Acts, the Holy Spirit takes a prominent role. Acts mentions the Holy Spirit some seventy times, more than any other writing in the Bible. After Jesus ascends, his promise to the disciples that they will be baptized in the Holy Spirit (1:5) is realized days later at Pentecost (2:1-4). From that moment on, the Holy Spirit powerfully guides the missionary activities. The Spirit takes an active role in miracles and the conversion of thousands, including Paul in chapter 9. When new Christian communities are established, such as the Samaritans (8:14-25), Cornelius and his fellow Gentiles (10:44-48), and the disciples of the Baptist in Ephesus (19:1-7), the Spirit legitimizes them through outward demonstrations. The Spirit even condemns sinful actions, as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira (5:1-11).

Fig. 13.30: Pentecost by Duccio di Buoninsegna, 1311 Museo dell’ Opera del Duomo, Siena.

The nature of the Holy Spirit is not identified or explained. He is a nameless divine entity manifested in the work of the apostles for the purpose of Christian expansion. It is difficult to know exactly how Luke and his audience understood the Holy Spirit. Since they were primarily influenced by Jewish concepts of God, they probably did not think of him in the same way that Christians did centuries later. Jewish literature from the Second Temple period contains occasional references to the Holy Spirit, not as a deity apart from God or a person alongside the person of the Father, but as the action of Israel’s God who comes in power to initiate restoration and judgment. Questions about Luke’s conception of the Holy Spirit remain. Was he viewed as a manifestation of the one God, an agent of God, a force, or a metaphor? Since Luke was an educated Gentile who formerly converted to Judaism, it is possible that his influence extended beyond Hellenistic Judaism.

13.7.2 God’s Faithfulness to Israel

In light of our reconstructions of the purpose of Acts, the expansion of Christianity among the Gentiles surely would have raised questions about God’s faithfulness to the Jews. With the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, the broad Jewish rejection of Jesus as the Messiah, the oppressive conduct by Jewish leaders against Christians, and the successful mission to the Gentiles, it is foreseeable that new Gentile converts would have asked, “had God abandoned his former people and turned to the Gentiles?” Luke seems to addresses this kind of question by arguing that God has always been faithful to Israel, his covenant people. Luke declares from the start of the Gospel narrative that God has visited his people with salvation and peace (Luke 1:68), but unfortunately many did not accept it and chose to live in blindness (Luke 19:41-44). He compares them to those who rejected the prophets of old. Luke repeatedly claims that God has been faithful in sending and raising Jesus for the sake of Israel first (Acts 3:20, 26). The consequence of not accepting the coming of God in Christ is exclusion from the people of God. Luke claims that Israel needs to repent for killing yet another prophet, otherwise they cannot share in the promises of God enjoyed by the faithful (Acts 3:11-26). In short, Luke argues that Israel, not God, has been unfaithful.

The opposition to Christian mission by the Jewish leadership, in particular, is constant and at times fierce. Some Jewish leaders go so far as to orchestrate violent persecutions against Christians. The most well known, which leads to the first Christian martyrdom, is the stoning of Stephen after he delivers his lengthy message (Acts 7-8). Like the Christian mission, Jewish opposition correspondingly spreads outward from Jerusalem to the “ends of the earth” (1:8). Paul’s conversion in Acts 9 does little to ease the tensions. If anything, the intensity and frequency increases, especially by synagogue leaders. The last quarter of Acts is almost exclusively taken up with Paul defending himself against the accusations of local Jewish leaders. There is a resounding theme in Paul’s responses. He claims to have complied with Jewish prescriptions and places all of the blame on the Jews.

Fig. 13.31: Stoning of St. Stephen by Annibale Carracci, 1604. Musée de Louvre, Paris.

Yet not all of the Jews in Acts reject Jesus as the Christ. In fact, a considerable number convert to Christianity. In Acts 2:41, three thousand Jews, many of whom are pilgrims who have come to Jerusalem for Passover, are baptized. In Acts 4:4 the total number of converts reaches five thousand, and in 6:7 we are told, “the number of the disciples continued to increase greatly in Jerusalem.” When Paul returns to Jerusalem much later in the story, the “brethren” report that thousands of Jews who were “zealous for the law” came to faith in Christ (21:20). 

The repeated castigations against Jews who do not accept Jesus as the Christ, has drawn criticism among modern scholars that Luke presents an anti-Jewish sentiment that has contributed to later anti-Semitism woven throughout the history of Christianity. Anti-Jewishness or anti-Judaism is a theological position concerning religious teachings and practices. For many early Christians, who were themselves Jewish, they saw these practices as obsolete because they were fulfilled in Christ. Anti-Semitism, on the other hand, is ideologically rooted racism. While none of the New Testament writers can be identified as anti-Semitic, since they are not promoting an agenda of ethnic or religious hatred, it is easy to see how Luke’s Jewish antagonists were appropriated centuries later in the stereotyping of Jewish identity that was clearly hateful. 

Info Box 13.9: Who Decides what is Anti-Jewish in the New Testament?
The designation “anti-Jewish” is a slippery category because it assumes a strict identification of what is meant by “Jewish,” which is not forthcoming any time soon. It depends on who is making the allegation and in what context. If Paul identifies himself as a Jew and yet instructs Gentile converts that they need not be circumcised, is he anti-Jewish? If Luke, who was presumably a Gentile, conveys the same teachings, is he anti-Jewish? In the modern context, if a Jewish person living in Europe advocates for an independent Palestinian nation, is he or she necessarily anti-Jewish? What if the same political view is proposed by a European Muslim? Who decides and what basis? Amy-Jill Levine presents the problem of anti-Jewishness in the New Testament succinctly, writing, “For the church, the New Testament is a book of compassion, of the perfect love called agape, of inclusivity. But many Jews who pick up a copy of the New Testament—in a hotel room, in a hospital, from a missionary on the street corner—find instead a teaching of exclusivity, intolerance, and hate. Still other Jews find the Gospels a message of truth and so accept Jesus as Lord and Savior, while some Christian readers, especially those sensitized to the atrocities carried out in the name of Jesus, will find themselves rejecting some of the New Testament claims. The same book, the same words, can take on profoundly different meanings and make profoundly different impressions.” (The Misunderstood Jew, 88-89).

13.7.3 The Mission to the Gentiles

The mission to the Gentiles has been sometimes perceived to be a consequence of Israel’s unfaithfulness. Since the Jews heard the gospel first and did not heed it, the Gentiles were offered it instead (Acts 13:46; 18:6; 28:25-28). This is not the best way to think about the Gentile mission. Luke was not intending to ostracize the Jews. He was explaining how and why the Christian movement, which was initially Jewish, was becoming increasingly Gentile. There is no indication in Luke’s volumes that God had a change in plans.

Also, it should be noted that all of the missionaries who bring the message of salvation to the Gentiles in the book of Acts were Jewish believers. Consequently, the successful mission to the Gentiles was not a replacement of the mission to Israel, but rather an outgrowth or continuation of that mission. The Jewish believers fulfill God’s promise in Isa 49:6 in that they become a light to the Gentiles. In this way then, the Gentiles were offered salvation not because God’s plan for Israel failed, but because it succeeded. Thus, the restoration of Israel was accomplished through the repentance of a faithful remnant.

Fig. 13.32: Old Jewish Cemetery, Prague, established 1439. By the first century CE, it is conceivable that many Jews believed in the resurrection of the dead. The Pharisees were probably the most influential political/religious body that advocated beliefs about the afterlife. Postmortem resurrection became an important topic of dialogue in later rabbinic literature.

Paul argues that since the hope of the resurrection from the dead is foundational to Judaism, Christian faith, which is rooted in Jesus’ resurrection, should be viewed as the fulfillment of the Jewish hope. The denial of Jesus’ resurrection is tantamount to denying that God can raise the dead and that the “first fruits” of the anticipated final resurrection has begun. Moreover, Paul argues that the acceptance of Jesus’ resurrection does not mean that a Jew cannot remain as a Jew. He points to himself as an example of a believer in Jesus who has not compromised his Judaism. For Gentile converts, however, it does mean that they need not become Jewish in order to gain entrance into the community of the people of God. At the end of Acts, Paul concludes his response to the Jews by associating those who do not believe with the blind and deaf Israelites in Isa 6:9-10 (28:23-28). After the quotation, he summarizes his indictment, saying, “Let it be known to you then that the salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles; they will listen.”

Fig. 13.33: Mamertine Prison cell. Capitoline Hill, Rome. As the only prison in the Roman Forum, it is believed to have been reserved for important prisoners, usually prior to their execution. According to legend, both Paul and Peter were imprisoned here.

As we look at all the trials, persecutions, and conflicts with his fellow Jews, Paul emerges as an innocent representative of the Christian movement who is vindicated by both Empire and Torah. Christianity emerges on the right side of history and the Jews who do not accept Christ are not only blamed for the conflicts, but are condemned by their own scriptures. As in other apologetic histories, the protagonists and antagonists are clearly delineated. As Jesus faces his death nobly in the Gospel, so the Christians face their trials, even martyrdom, with boldness. While all of the evangelists warn that followers of Jesus should expect suffering and even death, Luke alone is able to show how this was the case. In addition to Paul’s sufferings, Silas is flogged (16:22), Peter and John are thrown in prison (5:17-18; 12:3-5; 16:23), Stephen is stoned to death (chapter 7), and James is beheaded (12:2). Acts would have undoubtedly provided courage and confidence to Christians who experienced similar trials.

13.7.4 Centrality of Jerusalem: The New Beginning

Jerusalem plays a central role in Luke-Acts. It is the location of transition from tragedy to a new beginning. In Luke’s Gospel the entire narrative moves deliberately and slowly toward Jerusalem. Unlike Mark and Matthew, who describe Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem abruptly, Luke takes ten chapters to narrate the journey. Jesus “sets his face to go to Jerusalem” in 9:51 and finally arrives in chapter 19. While this extended journey contributes to Luke’s broad emphasis on Jerusalem, the purpose is elusive. There is a hint, however, in Luke 13:33-35 where Jesus sorrowfully identifies with Israel’s prophets who were killed in Jerusalem. Like them he brings the message of condemnation and restoration, but knows full well that the precedent associated with the city is his fate. From this vantage point, the extensive journey may be intended to draw attention to an old story of God bringing salvation to the center of Israel.

Acts reverses the direction. Jerusalem is no longer the destination, but it is the point of departure. Although salvation came to Jerusalem, it was once more rejected. The place of death and despair now becomes the place of resurrection, ascension, and hope. Why should the salvation pattern reverse? The disciples are told to go out from Jerusalem because it rejects the salvation that has come to its people. As Jesus was rejected, so are his followers. This comes as no surprise to the careful reader of both volumes, since Jesus’ rejection is anticipated in Luke 4 when in Nazareth Jesus announced that the “promised year of the Lord’s favor” has arrived in his coming. The movement from Jerusalem to the “ends of the earth” in Acts 1:8—which is essentially an evangelistic transition from a Jewish mission to a Gentile one—is arguably programmatic for the plot of Acts.

Fig. 13.34: The Western Wall, Old Jerusalem. This is a remnant of the western supporting wall that was built during the widening of the Temple Mount by Herod the Great. It is today arguably the most significant site in the Jewish faith.

Acts begins in Jerusalem with the appearances of Jesus to his disciples over a forty-day period. Jesus instructs the disciples to remain in Jerusalem until they are “baptized in the Holy Spirit,” which dramatically differs from Matthew (26:32; 28:7, 10, 16-17) and Mark (14:28) where the disciples are told to go to Galilee. The apostles in Acts have different expectations than the risen Jesus. They are hopeful that finally Jesus will “restore the kingdom to Israel” (1:6), probably through an apocalyptic event. Jerusalem for them is the ideal place from which God will initiate a new age. Jesus, however, thwarts their hopes of a restored nationalism by telling them that it is not their responsibility to calculate the time. Instead, they are told that they must continue in the ministry, but on a wider scale, namely to the “ends of the earth.” Theirs is not to be a political mission, but something far greater, namely the salvation of the world.

Fig. 13.35: Model of pre-70 CE Jerusalem.

Jerusalem is also the place where the church begins. The election of Matthias as the twelfth apostle plays an important role in the establishment of the church. Although Peter and Paul are the primary characters—with Matthias playing no role in the rest of the story—the “twelve” not only constitute a new people of God patterned after the twelve tribes of Israel, but also maintain continuity with Jesus’ original election of the twelve. After the election of Matthias in Jerusalem, the Holy Spirit that comes upon the believers is later declared by Peter to have been sent by Jesus. The continuity is verified by supernatural phenomena and the foundation of the church is established. From that moment on, the group is unified and empowered to be the new people of God. Jerusalem never loses its importance in Acts. Despite the success of the Gentile mission and much of the narrative unfolding outside of Judea, the missionaries (i.e. Philip, Peter, and Paul) report back to Jerusalem, which serves as the central location for the nascent movement.

13.7.5 Absence and Presence of Jesus

With the ascension of Jesus at the beginning of the story, the disciples find themselves as no longer followers, but leaders of a new movement. Their situation becomes drastically different. They are alone. Yet, Jesus is not totally absent. He appears to people in visions (Acts 9:3-5), even though he is located in heaven at the right hand of the Father (3:20-21; 7:55-56). In the three-tiered cosmological structure of antiquity, Jesus is above the earth, but can travel back and forth at will. Moreover, his absence is only temporary. Luke, like other early Christian writers, is convinced that Jesus will return to restore (Acts 3:19-21) and judge all humanity (Acts 10:42; 17:30-31). In the interim, Jesus’ ongoing presence is experienced in several ways, which highlight the interconnection between the physical and heavenly realms. 

First, Jesus is present through the logos (“word”) of God. The logos in Acts is different from that of John’s prologue where it is the personification of wisdom that becomes incarnate. In Acts, it is the proclaimed gospel that God has sent his messiah into the world and vindicated him through resurrection and ascension. Through Jesus, God has established a restored people of God as promised through the prophets of old. The logos is sent to people for their salvation (Acts 13:26). The acceptance of the logos (which calls for faithfulness, repentance, and baptism) is the acceptance of Christ and the incorporation into the new people of God (Acts 8:14; 11:1).

Second, Jesus continues to be present in the world through his followers. The activities of the apostles are the activities of Jesus. When they teach, preach, or heal people, the reader is made aware that it is Christ ministering through them (Acts 9:34). Similarly, when his followers are persecuted, Jesus is also persecuted (Acts 9:5). The connection is deeper than a mere representation. It has a kind of equivocation. Unfortunately, Luke does not develop this in detail. A helpful entry into this mysterious relationship is found in those passages where certain apostolic actions have heavenly results, such as John 20:23; Matt 6:14-15 and Acts 3:19.

Fig. 13.36: “The Conversion of St. Paul,” Caravaggio, 1601. Santa Maria del Popolo, Rome. In Acts 9:4, the risen Jesus identifies with the persecution of his followers by saying “Saul, Saul, why do persecute me?”

Third, Jesus remains present in the world through his name. People call on the name of Jesus (Acts 22:16), have faith in his name (Acts 3:16), and receive salvation (Acts 4:12) and forgiveness of sins in his name (Acts 10:43). Like today, the name in antiquity functioned in a representative capacity. It served as the symbol that pointed to a person who was not physically present. In the Greco-Roman context, the name of a governor or emperor conveyed his power and authority even when he was absent. In the Jewish scripture the name “God” (e.g. “Yahweh”) conveyed his presence in the temple, while he resided in heaven (e.g. 1 Kings 5:5).

Finally, Jesus remains present through the Holy Spirit. In addition to what has already been said above and in the previous chapter, the Holy Spirit functions as a link between Jesus who is in heaven and the apostles. Through the empowering of the Spirit, the apostles bear witness to the glorified Christ and continue the ministry he began in Galilee. At one point the Holy Spirit is equated with the spirit Jesus (16:6-7). The Spirit also guides the life of the church (8:29; 10:19; 11:28; 13:2; 15:28; 16:6; 20:23; 21:11), which takes on the visible presence of Jesus in the world (Acts 1:8; 4:8; 7:55).

 Try The Quiz

Bibliography

Borgman, P. The Way According to Luke: Hearing the Whole Story of Luke-Acts. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006.

Conzelmann, Hans. Acts of the Apostles. Hermeneia. Translated by J. Limburg, A. T. Kraabel, and D. H. Juel.. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987.

Crossan, J. D. and J. L. Reed. In Search of Paul: How Jesus’ Apostle Opposed Rome’s Empire with God’s Kingdom. A New Vision of Paul’s Words and World. New York: HarperCollins, 2004.

Dunn, J. D. G. The Acts of the Apostles. Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1996.

Fitzmyer, J. The Acts of the Apostles. Anchor Bible 31. New York: Doubleday, 1998.

Gill, D. W. J. and C. Gempf, eds. The Book of Acts in its First Century Setting. Volume 2: Graeco-Roman Setting. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.

Hengel, M. Acts and the History of the Earliest Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980.

Keck, L. E. and J. L. Martyn, eds. Studies in Luke-Acts. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1966.

Levine, A. –J. The Misunderstood Jew: The Church and the Scandal of the Jewish Jesus. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2006.

Levinskaya, I. The Book of Acts in its First Century Setting. Volume 5: Diaspora Setting. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.

Marguerat, D. The First Christian Historian: Writing the 'Acts of the Apostles'. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 121. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Ong, W. J. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. 30th Anniversary Edition. London and New York: Routledge, 2002.

Pervo, R. I. Acts: A Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2009.

Powell, M. A. What Are They Saying About Acts? New York: Paulist Press, 1991.

Robbins, V. K. “The We Passages in Acts and Ancient Sea Voyages.” Biblical Research 20 (1975) 5-18.

Shillington, V. G. An Introduction to the Study of Luke-Acts. Harrisburg, PA:Trinity Press International, 2007.

Soards, M. L. The Speeches in Acts: Their Content, Context, and Concerns. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994.

Sterling, G. E. Historiography and Self-Definition: Josephos, Luke-Acts, and Apologetic Historiography. Leiden: Brill, 1992.

Talbert, C. H. Literary Patterns, Theological Themes and the Genre of Luke-Acts. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1974.

Winter, B. W. and A. D. Clark, eds. The Book of Acts in its First Century Setting. Volume 1: Ancient Literary Setting. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.