Chapter 357 of 957

Acts

INTRODUCTION

ACTS

RALPH P. MARTIN

Name

Early Christian writers speak of the books of the New Testament as the “Gospel and Apostle.” By this description they mean our Gospels and the epistles which form the bulk of the New Testament literature. These are understandable groupings, but one further term is needed to explain how the church came into being, and how the facts of the gospel history are to be connected to their inspired interpretation in the apostolic letters. This “bridge” book which links the two chief parts together is the Acts of the Apostles.

Purpose

The main purposes of the book of Acts, apart from the obvious provision of a history of the Christian church in its formative years of growth and development, are as follows:

The first aim of the book is to provide a chronicle of the mighty and triumphant progress of the gospel through the then known world. This theme is clearly spelled out in Acts 1:8 and pursued in each chapter of the book. It does not pretend to be a history of all the apostles, nor of the early church in all its parts up to the author’s time, nor is it a series of biographical sketches. History and biography are included to serve a larger purpose—namely, to show the universal spread of the Christian faith which was begun and maintained by the Holy Spirit.

Certain emphases are given to spotlight the chief features of the gospel’s advance: the work of Stephen, who first made articulate (in his speech, chapter 7) the worldwide scope of the message; the actual Gentile message (in chapter 13), with its antecedents in the conversion of the Ethiopian (chapter 8); the conversion of Saul (chapter 9), and the conversion of Cornelius (chapter 10); and the work of Paul, whose missionary task is implicit in his conversion-call (9:15).

Another purpose is that which is stated by the author at the frontispiece of his book (1:1-4). In both his Gospel and Acts, Luke proposed to supply for Theophilus an accurate and progressive summary of the origins of the church and its faith, about which he had already received as an interested inquirer some information. Theophilus is evidently neither a proper name nor a fictitious title (meaning “a man dear to God”), but a roundabout way of addressing a representative member of the intelligent middle-class public at Rome whom Luke wished to win over to a less prejudiced and more favorable opinion of Christianity (so F.F. Bruce).

There is an apologetic intention in this writing which aimed at defending the Christian cause against charges which were popularly brought against it in the latter half of the first century. Luke wants, in this historical narration, to demonstrate that a variety of officials, mainly Roman, bore goodwill to Paul and his friends, and that where they were appealed to and had to settle a dispute between Christians and Jews, there was no substance in the charges levelled at the followers of Jesus. Moreover, Roman military officials show a consistent attitude of interest and sympathy to the Christian message whenever it is presented to them. These factors prove—so Acts demonstrates—that Christianity is politically free from suspicion by the Roman authorities, and this political “innocence” would mean much to a man such as “Theophilus.”

Dating

No certainty is possible in arriving at a precise date for the book of Acts, but certain historical factors make it likely that it was first published in the middle of the 60s of the first century. Two events of history in that period are decisively important for the understanding of the church’s life in the world: the persecution of Christians at Rome by Nero (AD 64), and the outbreak of the Jewish war in AD 66, which led to the Fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. The first fact shows that Rome was beginning to be fearful of the church’s influence—a fear enhanced by the overt rebellion of the Jews in Palestine. This would be the opportune time for some statement from a Christian writer that showed that believers in Jesus, unlike the Jews, were not disloyal to the empire. The Acts provides just such a clear statement.

The omission of Paul’s martyrdom in AD 66–68 may be taken to indicate that Luke did not know of it when he wrote; and this may fix the date of the book as after AD 64 and before AD 66–68.

Writer

Early church tradition associates the author of both Gospel and Acts with Luke, the doctor of Colossians 4:14, and the “companion of Paul” (Irenaeus). The attestation which couples Luke’s name with the book of Acts is both early (the first mention is given in the anti-Marcionite prologue to the third Gospel, c. AD 160–180) and widespread (including the Church Fathers from Irenaeus to Jerome).

The evidence from Acts itself amply endorses this tradition, and there are clear indications that the author was the same as the man who composed the third Gospel and was an associate of Paul.

Historical Accuracy

Provided we do not ask from the book what it was never intended to give—viz. a comprehensive and detailed account of the social origins of Christianity—we may have every confidence in the author’s painstaking interest in securing a reliable record. Indeed, this is exactly the claim he makes for himself (Luke 1:3, RSV margin); and scholars like E. Meyer, Sir William Ramsay, F.F. Bruce and E.M. Blaiklock have pointed to Luke’s competence and accuracy in correctly reporting the proper official terms by which Roman governmental personnel were known in the first-century world. Thus proconsul and procurator are carefully distinguished, and this accurate usage suggests that Luke had first-hand knowledge and was concerned to make a careful investigation of his facts.

Helps

There are books on Acts to suit every need and taste. Historical allusions and much background material are given in E.M. Blaiklock’s Tyndale Commentary (IVF/Eerdmans) and (with more devotional emphasis) William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible. Larger works are those by F.F. Bruce (New London/International Commentary), and C.S.C. Williams (Black’s New Testament Commentaries). An older commentary by J.A. Findlay has been used in our notes, to much profit.

Note An occasional reference to the “Western text” of Acts in the pages which follow draws attention to this interesting fifth-century Greek manuscript (Codex Bezae) which represents the Western tradition. It has a number of unusual additions, some of them highly imaginative and colorful and possibly authentic.

↑ Back to top